PDA

View Full Version : Indigenous Fishing Rights ? ? ?



Derek Bullock
29-12-2004, 08:20 AM
From the Courier Mail.

INDIGENOUS ANGLER TO FIGHT RULING ON NET USE
Michael McKenna
28dec04
IT was not an exceptional catch for Riccardo Yasso, but his 25kg haul of mullet one morning last year has hooked him into a landmark legal case over traditional fishermen's use of commercial nets.

In a District Court ruling last week, Mr Yasso was found to be in unlawful possession of a "commercial apparatus" in March 2003 when he was caught on the Fitzroy River in central Queensland with a 50m-long net and buckets of fish.

Mr Yasso, who is part Aborigine and part South Sea Islander, claimed he was exercising his traditional rights to fish and that the catch would be distributed, as it was every week, among his extended family of aunts, uncles and cousins in the area.

"I have never sold any of my catch," he said. "It is given to the rest of the family and I never have any leftovers.

"Our people have been using nets forever, some of them up to 100m long, and it is my right."

But District Court Judge G. Britton disagreed, ruling there was no evidence nets had ever been used in the region before European settlement.

"The fact remains that there was no evidence by the respondent (Mr Yasso) or his witnesses or anyone else of Aboriginal tradition which would authorise the possession or use by him of the net which was found in his possession," he said.

Queensland Aboriginal and Islander Legal Services Secretariat (QAILSS) executive Geoff Atkinson said Mr Yasso's case was part of a State Government move to crack down on traditional hunting and fishing rights.

"There is certainly a movement to restrict and minimise the extent Aboriginal people can exercise their rights," Mr Atkinson said.

A spokesman for the Department of Primary Industries denied there was a policy to wind back indigenous rights to hunt and fish, saying the original complaint against Mr Yasso had been made by the local Durambal Aboriginal Council which banned net fishing among its own people.

"We were asked to intervene by some of the local elders and that is why we acted," the spokesman said.

The District Court was told that Mr Yasso's uncle Louis Mann, a Durambal elder, had personally given him permission to use the net and to fish in their traditional lands.

Mr Yasso, who plans to appeal the District Court decision, and QAILSS believe the case is in response to complaints from the wider community about Aborigines using nets to fish.

"A lot of people might not like it, but it is my right to fish this way," Mr Yasso said.

The Rockhampton Magistrate's Court last year accepted Mr Yasso's defence and dismissed the charge on the basis of his traditional fishing rights.

But the DPI appealed, and won in the District Court, on the basis that Mr Yasso's Aboriginality did not exempt him from complying with sustainable fishing regulations, such as requiring a licence to use a commercial net, or that nets were ever used by the original inhabitants of the area.

Judge G. Britton said the recognition of traditional rights included a clause that allowed for a management plan.

"The clause is intended to preserve the traditional and customary rights within the framework of proper resource management."

Mr Yasso will be sentenced in mid-January when he is expected to launch his appeal.

webby
29-12-2004, 08:39 AM
Some think because they have a good tan, they can claim all the rites awarded to the true.
Yes it about time some limitations were put on these people, as im sick of the land rites issues.
Some of them also think they have the rite to walk into your backyard and stake a claim saying my ancestors had a Pee here so i want this land, just like dogs does when marking there territory.
regards

NeilD
29-12-2004, 08:42 AM
I don't have a problem with indigenous fishing rights. As long as they use traditional methods of transport to get to the area, use totally traditional vessels, equipment, clothing and methods and they do not abuse the resource.
Driving your Landcruiser to the ramp to drop in your outboard powered tinny to chase some poor Turtle or Dugong before killing to top up the freezer does not count in my opinion.
Nets and such are out of the question unless woven from jungle vines.

Neil

PinHead
29-12-2004, 09:06 AM
25kg of mullet and we have already spent money on a trial in the Magistrates Court and then the District Court...what a complete and utter waste of taxpayers money over a few bloody mullet. But, of course..none of us have ever done anything wrong have we?

bugman
29-12-2004, 09:31 AM
Ahh but Greg it's the priciple at stake. ;D

I think the issue here may be his use of apparatus. He was using a commercial fishing net. The only people by Queensland legislation allowed to use a commercial fishing net is someone with a commercial license.

If Mr Yasso does not have a commercial license then he is breaking the law regardless of what purpose he was doing it for. Simple

Bugman

webby
29-12-2004, 10:46 AM
Greg, So in your opinion any illegal activity preformed on the water wether its by indiginous , pro or rec and wether its 1 mullet or 100 shouldnt cost the tax payers money.
Tell me how else or what else are they supposed to do with these culprits.
Yes we've all broken rules at one time or another, and yes most of us have got away with it, but this bloke just happened to be caught, and wether your black/white or blue or it was just a plain old mullet shouldnt have any bearing, rules are rules.
So what do you reckonmend smack him and everyone else on the back of the hand and say dont do it again.
Lets get realistic mate.
regards

megafish71
29-12-2004, 10:56 AM
I don't have a problem with indigenous fishing rights. As long as they use traditional methods of transport to get to the area, use totally traditional vessels, equipment, clothing and methods and they do not abuse the resource.
Driving your Landcruiser to the ramp to drop in your outboard powered tinny to chase some poor Turtle or Dugong before killing to top up the freezer does not count in my opinion.
Nets and such are out of the question unless woven from jungle vines.

Neil

Couldn't have said it better myself. I totally agree Neil

PinHead
29-12-2004, 12:21 PM
My point is that he was found not guilty by the Magistrates Court then the DPI appealed...surely they could utilise funds in a far better way. So...one court has found him not guilty and the next guilty and now he will appeal that decision and round and round we go. I do not condone anyone breaking the law but surely appealing the original decision of not guilty is not proactive for the DPI in stamping out illegal activities. I could give them a hundred places where they could go and get convictions..just start at the Jumpinpin on any weekend and check ALL boats..the fines tota lwould be gigantic.

tail-light
29-12-2004, 12:38 PM
hey bugman, you make the most sence to me, the law is what we/all are goven by and has been since year dot, that what all have to understand,trusting this to work for all.
tight lines
tail light.

Thunderbird
29-12-2004, 12:52 PM
i wonder where old mate yasso got the net from?
I'm sure he'd have a recipt ::)
Maybee his elders left it there for him to use. That's how they use to do it all them years ago i bet.
A land cruiser and tinny. i bet he keeps his tinny in the esky :-X :-X

vp3
29-12-2004, 04:33 PM
My thoughts are plain and simple it is against the law. It doesn't matter what culture we come from we must all obey the law or face the penalty. I believe aboriginal rights have gone too far it's about time we all got closer to being equal.
regards Ian

nonibbles
29-12-2004, 05:54 PM
First there was "all we want is equality" then they found that there were problems with being treated equally under law so they wanted reconciliation where we recognise our differences and get on with it and now they want lets just try and get away with whatever we can cos the system doesn't know how to effectively deal with them and the bleeding hearts crowd will protect them and make their contrasting brothers look bad. #It works like kids and parents, if the parents show the kids that they don't know how to deal with 'em they'll run all over 'em. #The law has to be the same for everybody and enforced the same for everybody.
Didn't think I'd ever do it but a pat on the back for the DPI in this instance!

adriancorrea
29-12-2004, 05:56 PM
Ive got a good tan, might try that.
Whats your address Webby LOL

And I too agree with bugman
The law is the law, why should it matter what colour you are or what your great great grandfather was.

Tight Lines
Adrian

Fitzy
29-12-2004, 07:51 PM
Being part spear chucker myself, I totally agree with Bugman & others posts.
If I get the urge to go explore some more of that part of my heritage, I recon I'll want to do it like they did for generations before the Poms showed up.
Webby, do you have a shed in that yard? ;D Dont worry mate they cant claim your backyard, but it dont work that way unfortunately. Doh!

I read somewhere of a ruling in Darwin a few years back where it was argued by prosecution that the use of monofilament lines was not "traditional" fishing.
The judge ruled that the indigenous individual was simply "keeping up with modern technology" (or something similar to that).
The ramifications are scary indeed.
Does that mean I can walk thru the botanic gardens with a 243 to hunt possums? :-X

Fitz

Hobes
29-12-2004, 07:53 PM
Two things:I wonder if because my English ancestors used nets when fishing I can go andi use one..?
and I wonder who is paying for the defendents appeals?

DNO40
30-12-2004, 02:11 AM
I agree with the Bugman !!

Mick
30-12-2004, 03:53 AM
Well said Hobes.
Times have changed, do indiginous people still get circumcised the traditional way.., that is, with a 2 large sharp rocks at the age of 13 or 14?
I don't think the indiginous people of Oz had Victoria Bitter before the 1800's either.
Seems to me that the indiginous people would like to keep some traditional methods for some things but not others, or change what they want to suit.
Yes, I am 1/4 goanna eater as well.

NQCairns
30-12-2004, 06:03 AM
Thunderbird get with the program :-X Yep a Landcruiser :o


A land cruiser and tinny. i bet he keeps his tinny in the esky

I too would like a Gov guaranteed new car loan, 2.5% interest and make 5 repayments to show good faith then default and have the car paid for in full, no worrys.

Now where can I apply for one of these ;D ;D

kevy
30-12-2004, 08:31 AM
yo, fine the guy, take his net & landcruiser if necessary & lets get on with life within the law. that,s my opinion. all the best, kevy. :-/ :'(

nonibbles
30-12-2004, 11:25 AM
Yeh, but we're just dumb redneck fisherman, ay... :-X

devocean
30-12-2004, 12:30 PM
I agree with Neil on this issue. There are three aboriginal clans in my area and we often see them capturing turtles for food. Rules are for everyone and should apply to everyone no matter what colour or race you are. Its just reverse racism

Fitzy
30-12-2004, 02:47 PM
I too would like a Gov guaranteed new car loan, 2.5% interest and make 5 repayments to show good faith then default and have the car paid for in full, no worrys.

Now where can I apply for one of these ;D ;D


Not quite so good nowadays. Think they get interest rates at 1% below whatever the commonwealth bank is at for the first year & then its the same.

SeaHunt
30-12-2004, 06:09 PM
Does that mean I can walk thru the botanic gardens with a 243 to hunt possums? #:-X

Fitz
As long as you eat em Fitzy ::)

Actually I have it on very good authority they taste pretty good, possum stew. yummmmm.. ;)

Gazza
31-12-2004, 05:05 AM
Up the 'top-end' i can see more of a 'tribal' way of life :-/ , but closer to areas like pumicestone ,etc. i.e. major populations, should be some sort of sanctuary for dugongs,turtles,etc.

and only for 1/2 or 1/4 blood 'traditional origin', not diluted whiteman :-X 'rights'

JMHO

Daintreeboy
31-12-2004, 08:26 AM
25kg of mullet and we have already spent money on a trial in the Magistrates Court and then the District Court...what a complete and utter waste of taxpayers money over a few bloody mullet. But, of course..none of us have ever done anything wrong have we?

Let's not forget he said he was doing this every week.
The law was broken, pay the penalty, and include all the other occasions the netting was done as the guy has admitted to.
Cheers, Mark.

NEWBY
31-12-2004, 08:26 AM
Pin Head!!! Settle boy. Are ya touched with the tar brush or something? This is a POSITIVE move towards ONE LAND, ONE LAW. If ya break the law and get caught. Stiff shit. You are gone. Black, white or otherwise. Old Paulene Hansen does have some good poilicies and the 1 land 1 law is the best thing that can happen to Australia. He got caught. He got found guilty even if it was on appeal. AND if they need a few more pennies to go towards a court case I will throw a few in myself if it means equality for ALL Australians.
My 3 bobs woth anyway. [smiley=2thumbsup.gif] >:(

Fitzy
31-12-2004, 04:36 PM
and only for 1/2 or 1/4 blood 'traditional origin', not diluted whiteman #:-X 'rights'

JMHO
I dont know if I agree with that. I'm a "diluted white man" and proud of it I suppose, but why should there be a barrier to exploring my (partial) black heritage when I'm free to explore part of my heritage that came from Ireland? A grandparent is still a 100% grandparent no matter what color.
However I fully agree with 100% equality. If I want to go fishing indigenous style, I got no probs doing it naked with a stick in me hand. But I bets them whayte phellas & dem cops would nails me for it tho. hehehe ;) And the mossie/sandy bites could be annoying. :-X

fitz

fishsmith
31-12-2004, 04:37 PM
As long as they use Traditional methods and weapons to catch there traditional foods and store and cook them in the traditional way good on em...No ice,petrol motors,matches,firearms,nets,fishing rods,modern tackle,walkmans,mobilephone,clothes,sunnies,alcaho l,eskies.etc..etc..

Fitzy
31-12-2004, 04:40 PM
As long as they use Traditional methods and weapons to catch there traditional foods and store and cook them in the traditional way good on em...No ice,petrol motors,matches,firearms,nets,fishing rods,modern tackle,walkmans,mobilephone,clothes,sunnies,alcaho l,eskies.etc..etc..
I recon using a fridge/freezer is ok to store the fish at home. Will only get wasted otherwise.

fishsmith
31-12-2004, 05:30 PM
I recon using a fridge/freezer is ok to store the fish at home. Will only get wasted otherwise.

Fitzy, if we are talking about indigenous traditional hunting methods in area's where us "non-indigenous" folks are not allowed to fish..eg..Green zones etc.etc...Then i believe traditional hunting methods should be followed up with traditional food prep and eating..Fish/shellfish/turtle etc that is caught in these areas should be should be traditionaly prepared and consumed on location..Foods caught from these otherwise prohibited areas should not be removed to there homes to be stored and stockpiled into there fridge or freezers..
I have no problem with traditional hunting methods being practised in this way as it would allow aboriginal elders etc to pass down some of there ways and culture onto there younger people..Which is important within any society whether your white,yellow or black..
It all starts to go a little pair-shaped however when we allow our natural resources from these areas to be hunted /gathered taken home and distributed amongst others and divided into many "Kelvenators"..

:)

adriancorrea
31-12-2004, 05:43 PM
Well said smithy

Tight Lines
Adrian

Fitzy
31-12-2004, 06:01 PM
So a dugong gets killed today, half gets eaten, the other half goes off so another one gets killed tomorrow?
Fair enough as long as Murrandoo is using a stick to kill it with.
OK then, that sounds perfectly logical, not.
Are we saying that its all or nothing? So if I want go to a 'lations place to learn some "traditional fishing" I can't drive my car the 1000km it takes to get there or ring them the week before to say I'm coming & I cant wear any clothes on the way or wear my joggers to walk. Not that I really give a rats if I do or dont, but that concept is really quite rediculous IMHO. My purple valiant probably wont make it that far anyway.

Cheers,

fitzy..

Gazza
31-12-2004, 06:15 PM
What "did they do" in traditional times fitzy..... ???
I thought? it was a special ceremonial feast or something? ,not an everyday meal, as such?

Wouldn't they have dried it ,or more likely let the dogs have some?


Mate ,another poser......
Is it legal to 'hook' muddies ,walking thru the mangroves?

p.s. i reckon you could do a 2-page spread :P in the next mag...you know the fitzy-nude-dugong-story!!
Pictures of tackle nominal :P ;D ;D ;D

cooky
31-12-2004, 06:22 PM
Whether we agree or not with aboriginal hunting / fishing rights - I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

At around 2% of the population (or whatever it is) and a small % of those who actually hunt / fish - let em go for it.

I agree with the "same rules for everyone argument", however I think that the rules would have to be VERY clear and simple. There needs to be VERY CLEAR TRIBAL fishing grounds and everyone should be aware of where these are.

The argument on tools for the job sounds reasonable, but where do you 'draw the line' in time? THe aboriginals have been here for a very long time (over 50000yrs i believe) - so is it "only allowed to fish here using tools from before 28456 years ago" - the aboriginals are still alive and are still aboriginals adapting to their environment, so in reality tools are sort of irrelevant (now I'm confusing myself).

I guess the argument is "are aboriginals different?" or are "WE ONE PEOPLE?" if we're 'one people' then same rules, but if the aboriginals and do-goods are happy to accept that THEY ARE DIFFERENT then....

(what a load of dribble - hope it makes sense)

fishsmith
01-01-2005, 09:14 AM
mmmmmmm,has it got fluffy dice hanging from the rv mirror? ;D ;)

Tony_N
01-01-2005, 10:01 AM
I guess I'm just one of those "bleeding hearts"

It seems to me there is much in indigenous culture that is valuable and worth preserving. So I'd be supportive of anything that encouraged people to explore that heritage. Anybody with any aboriginal blood should be able to claim aboriginality by my reckoning.

The Hansen "one people one law" catchcry is bigotry dressed as equality. #

I reckon that if this generation doesn't get it right, then its stuffed. #So I'd support anything that facilitated the continuation of as much traditional cultural activity as possible. though I'm not suggesting the redistribution of all land on demand or anything really that would radically upset the status quo. #War and conquest are part of the human condition (regrettably) and has determined land rights from
The Beginning.

I have no problem with the use of nets rifles or kelvinators. #As someone said, awareness of technology is just part of the natural order of things.

Aboriginals have been robbed of their land, their culture, and in many cases their family and their heritage. #Many have not coped well with these losses. #I'm sure that I wouldn't be too mellow or sober or conformist if the outcome of the 2nd world war had been different, and my country had been overrun by foreign invaders who insisted that I fit in with a radically different way of living.

If I put myself in the picture in this way I'm encouraged to say that anything that can be done to facilitate the old ways of doing things can't be all bad. #One sure way of screwing a person (community, race) is to rob it of its identity. #Identity is kept intact only by repeating the rituals and practices that comprise it.

I guess that will #fling some faeces in the fan

Tony

fishsmith
01-01-2005, 10:29 AM
Posted by: Tony_N Posted on: 2:00pm Today
I guess I'm just one of those "bleeding hearts"

It seems to me there is much in indigenous culture that is valuable and worth preserving. So I'd be supportive of anything that encouraged people to explore that heritage. Anybody with any aboriginal blood should be able to claim aboriginality by my reckoning. I have no problem with the use of nets rifles or kelvinators. As someone said, awareness of technology is just part of the natural order of things.

Tony i agree with what your saying except for the use of modern technology...Its got me stuffed how using a rifle /net or a motorised boat etc.. Preserves indigineous culture and enchourages people to explore their heritage.....

kc
01-01-2005, 11:30 AM
The Hansen "one people one law" catchcry is bigotry dressed as equality.............interesting observation Tony! Please explain!!

This is always going to be a tough issue but it must be said...and this is my own opinion, (TFPQ does not have a policy on this).

If we allow a culture, and lets call it an ancient culture, to move with technology but retain its rights to traditional hunting then surely, we can not be so "racist" as to protest the Japanese "cultural rights" to hunt whales by every and any means available to them.

Somewhere in all this debate we need to be able to say...regardless of past history, our society no longer condones this (or any other) practice...surely this is a mark of a society which is moving forward, not constantly looking backwards.

For those who support the rights of one "race" to traditional hunting of protected species, then surely you must support the right of every other "race" with a long standing cultural link to thier traditional hunting. (AKA Whaling by Norway & Japan)Not to do so would be descriminating on the basis of race.

A tough one hey!!

Happy New Year all

KC

PinHead
01-01-2005, 11:44 AM
"Pin Head!!! Settle boy. Are ya touched with the tar brush or something?"

What if I am "touched with a tar brush or something"...does that make any difference? Nowhere in my posts did I make ANY reference to anyones ethnicity...as most others have. I have not made any points based on race...and I never will. Any reference to Ms Hanson immediately loses any credibility. My point is that the funds used by the DPI could have been used in many other areas to gain successful prosections against other perpetrators. This guy was found not guilty once and guilty once...you can bet that a lot more funds will be spent on the next appeal level.

Let's leave any racist comments out of the debate...that achieves absolutely nothing...I judge people on how they treat me and not by the colour of their skin.

Tony_N
01-01-2005, 11:44 AM
Tony i agree with what your saying except for the use of modern technology...Its got me stuffed how using a rifle /net or a motorised boat etc.. Preserves #indigineous culture and enchourages people to explore their heritage.....



Mate

I don't think for a moment that I have the TRUTH here. Just an opinion.

I reckon that the overriding traditional component being discussed is the basic right to hunt and fish and to provide food for the family unimpeded by contemporary laws. Now, obviously the cultural aspect is going to be strenghthened if the weapons and techniques are also traditional and the rituals in their manufacture are also used. Problem is that much of the how is now lost and anyway the Land has been so buggered up by the "invader" that for most of the country, traditional methods are unproductive. So I reckon we could cut them a bit of slack on the weapons bit. I mean, we can't reasonably be expected to hand them their land back to nurture into producing food in the abundance that would allow traditional hunting methods to work - seems OK to me then that they are permitted to use some of the facilities of the 21st century to allow them to get a result.

Tony

ANYFISH
01-01-2005, 11:56 AM
Gee. I wonder if the aborigional people had this same trouble with the people who were here before them.
I bet they didn't have the internet to voice all their opinions however many thousands of years ago. ;D

Tony_N
01-01-2005, 12:16 PM
The Hansen "one people one law" catchcry is bigotry dressed as equality.............interesting observation Tony! #Please explain!!

This is always going to be a tough issue

For those who support the rights of one "race" to traditional hunting of protected species, then surely you must support the right of every other "race" with a long standing cultural link to thier traditional hunting. (AKA Whaling by Norway & Japan)Not to do so would be descriminating on the basis of race.

A tough one hey!!

KC

Yeh KC the whaling one has got me stuffed. I'm basing my thoughts on the remaining few indiginous people who may be able to gain some pride in their heritage by being allowed to hunt for their family. I believe that the benefits to the broader community are greater than the cost in this instance.

It is impossible for me to be consistent on the basis of race and heritage when it comes to the Japanese and Norwegian whaling - or for that matter the white seal pup hunting. As a not too convincing rationale - i suggest that IMO facilitating these practices (the whaling etc) is not in the best interests of the broader (world) community . It is more a question of scale than being consistent in principle.

The Hansen thing : I said originally that I was a bleeding heart - - I believe in social welfare, I believe that we owe the indiginous people of this country special consideration for all the reasons of discrimination and harm that has befallen them as outlined in my original post. I believe that the notion of equality is based on the principle of giving the disadvantaged support to bring them somewhere near the quality of life experienced by the majority. Ms Hansen has turned that around to suggest that giving special consideration to the disadvantaged puts the advantaged majority at a disadvantage. This may well be the case if we are operating on a level playing field - but any fair minded person knows that this is not the case. Anyway the Hansen issue is not the major one here and is best left out of the debate (IMO)

Tony

PinHead
01-01-2005, 12:21 PM
Equality is a marvellous thing in a Utopian society..but to have equality you must all start equal and we all know that is not true nor possible.

Fitzy
01-01-2005, 02:47 PM
What "did they do" in traditional times fitzy..... #???
I thought? it was a special ceremonial feast or something? ,not an everyday meal, as such?

Wouldn't they have dried it ,or more likely let the dogs have some?

Hi Gazza,
To be totally honest I havent got the foggiest. I used a dugong as a hypothetical example. Be buggered if I could kill one unless I was staving.


Mate ,another poser......
Is it legal to 'hook' muddies ,walking thru the mangroves?

uuummmm I dont know any more. The practice used to be legal for indigenous folks, but then again it was once legal for anyone. Watched a classic old Mal Florence video & cringed when they did some crab hooking. (was legal at the time of filming).


p.s. i reckon you could do a 2-page spread :P in the next mag...you know the fitzy-nude-dugong-story!!
Pictures of tackle nominal :P ;D ;D ;D
Turn it up! There's enough pics of me getting getting around from cricket/football days doing nude runs across fields (boys will be boys). Dont want to make fishos sick as well. However it seems accepatable practice to be wearing your underwear in mag pics these days. See recent Bass & Barra mag.

Cheers,

Fitzy.

PS- The pen is coming back out soon.

nonibbles
01-01-2005, 03:38 PM
Would it be to hard for a goverment to say "you have 30 years to adjust to these laws as being equal for all" That would give the judicial system and other people affected a whole generation to change their own attitudes and approaches to life and teach the next generation as they adjust 'cos at the moment it just seems to be in the too hard basket and its just too easy (for whatever opposition power) to call somebody racist for making a go of it so I guess unless somebody has the guts to make a long term mandate and stick to it, then the too hard basket is where it will stay.

Would it be too hard? No.
Would whoever did stay in power? No.
Therefore, would they do it? No.

fishsmith
02-01-2005, 08:03 AM
Its not about change or adjusting to new laws its about presevation of culture and heritage....

Daintreeboy
02-01-2005, 08:44 AM
Mate

I don't think for a moment that I have the TRUTH here. Just an opinion.

I reckon that the overriding traditional component being discussed is the basic right to hunt and fish and to provide food for the family unimpeded by contemporary laws. Now, obviously the cultural aspect is going to be strenghthened if the weapons and techniques are also traditional and the rituals in their manufacture are also used. #Problem is that much of the how is now lost and anyway the Land has been so buggered up by the "invader" that for #most of the country, traditional methods are unproductive. #So I reckon we could cut them a bit of slack on the weapons bit. I mean, we can't reasonably be expected to hand them their land back to nurture into producing food in the abundance that would allow traditional hunting methods to work #- seems OK to me then that they are permitted to use some of the facilities of the 21st century to allow them to get a result. #

Tony




Just a comment on the inaders buggering up the land bit. Yes we have and it's terrible.
However, it is my understanding that a major reason why the Australian outback is like it is today is because of constant deliberate burning over thousands of years that changed the face of Australia in the interests of food gathering.
The 'invaders' are not the only ones guilty of environmental damage.
Cheers, Mark.

Tony_N
02-01-2005, 08:58 AM
The 'invaders' are not the only ones guilty of environmental damage.
Cheers, Mark.

Yeah Mark I am aware of that one - eucalypts are so resistant to permanent damage by fire that it is argued that they are so dominant in Australia because (at least in part) of the burning technique used by some tribes to flush out animals from the bush.

I'm not trying to set up a scenario where europeans are baddies and indiginous are goodies. . All I am arguing for is that a bloke with a cultural heritage of doing so is allowed to go catch a feed for his family (so long as its not whales or seal pups)


;D

Tony

Daintreeboy
02-01-2005, 09:02 AM
That reminds me of a joke I once heard.

This seal walks into a club....

;D ::) ::)

Bent
02-01-2005, 12:48 PM
I lived on Thursday Island for about 9 months a couple of years back and got along really well with a number of Torres Straight Islanders and had the opportunity to see some of the "traditional hunting practices" in person.

I also believe that in order to have traditional rights they should have to use traditional methods, but this also presents a dilemna as one of the most disturbing things I saw on an extended hunting trip was how they keep turtle fresh the old fashioned way.

They simply tie the poor bugger to a tree after they catch it (alive by jumping on its back from the moving tinny), then cut off the meat they need for that day; cauturise the exposed flesh to stop the bleeding and leave the turtle for the next meal bell.

The turtle I saw lasted about 4 days of this believe it or not and I am pretty sure the "bleeding hearts" and the rest of us would agree this is cruel and unacceptable treatment of this animal but according to a number of people I spoke to this is exactly the way they used to do it traditionally.

Adds a bit of a different spin to the "traditional rights/traditional methods " argument I think.

P.S. For anyone who is curious I had the opportunity to taste both turtle and dugong meat (before the above mentioned incident) and I thought the Dugong was terrible while the turtle was delicious (a cross between chicken, tender steak with a hint of fishiness) but only one time out of curiousity.

Tony_N
02-01-2005, 03:20 PM
Jeez this is fun - Tony (Mexican) against the whole of Queensland - Fitzy, Mike where are you?

Bent - your story about keeping the turtle fresh is a beaut. Under traditional circumstances you've gotta give it to them - its a good technique. However as a bleeding heart it adds more fuel to my argument for the use of the Kelvinator.

Recognise that this is potentially a volatile debate and appreciate how people on this forum are keeping their shirts on.

Tony

Fitzy
02-01-2005, 03:54 PM
Recognise #that this is potentially a volatile debate and appreciate how people on this forum are keeping their shirts on.

Tony
Agree with you Tony. Good discussion peoples.

fitz

lordy
04-01-2005, 04:48 PM
I guess I'm just one of those "bleeding hearts"

It seems to me there is much in indigenous culture that is valuable and worth preserving. So I'd be supportive of anything that encouraged people to explore that heritage. Anybody with any aboriginal blood should be able to claim aboriginality by my reckoning.

The Hansen "one people one law" catchcry is bigotry dressed as equality.

I reckon that if this generation doesn't get it right, then its stuffed. So I'd support anything that facilitated the continuation of as much traditional cultural activity as possible. though I'm not suggesting the redistribution of all land on demand or anything really that would radically upset the status quo. War and conquest are part of the human condition (regrettably) and has determined land rights from
The Beginning.

I have no problem with the use of nets rifles or kelvinators. As someone said, awareness of technology is just part of the natural order of things.

Aboriginals have been robbed of their land, their culture, and in many cases their family and their heritage. Many have not coped well with these losses. I'm sure that I wouldn't be too mellow or sober or conformist if the outcome of the 2nd world war had been different, and my country had been overrun by foreign invaders who insisted that I fit in with a radically different way of living.

Tony


1/2 with you and 1/2 against you.

1/2 for: things change. Its one thing to say let them walk and chuck spears but eat the fish on the spot, but it doesn't reflect reality.
They don't live in bark huts by rivers, going walkabout, whitemen put an end to that. The idea they should travel by foot makes no sense in that context.

Building canoes? As Joe Bloggs would be happy with aboriginals wandering into his yard and chopping down likely looking trees and the camping out in his yard for 2 weeks so they are close enough to use a wooden canoe.

They should have the same rights to use modern fishing equipment that other citizen fishos do. Its not a unreasonable thing.


1/2 against: the problem with your argument is where does it end? Should Aboriginals be able to use that supertrawler & refrigerator ship from Ireland to harvest fish under their rights of preserving culture? I don't think so. Prawn trawlers dredging Hinchinbrook River? I don't think so.

Using commerical fishing nets comes under this. I'd limit their to
a) traditional methods
and/or
b)legal recreational methods.

Where they can fish is another debate.

lordy
04-01-2005, 04:51 PM
My point is that he was found not guilty by the Magistrates Court then the DPI appealed...surely they could utilise funds in a far better way. So...one court has found him not guilty and the next guilty and now he will appeal that decision and round and round we go. I do not condone anyone breaking the law but surely appealing the original decision of not guilty is not proactive for the DPI in stamping out illegal activities. I could give them a hundred places where they could go and get convictions..just start at the Jumpinpin on any weekend and check ALL boats..the fines tota lwould be gigantic.


Its called precedent. The DPI don't want to establish a bad precedent. They likely aren't after strong penalties but rather affirmation of their rights to intervene in the use of nets. If they let it stand as loss future court cases will refer back to this one to get the person off. Fight the fight once, win or lose, but then you know where you stand.

Wild_Side
04-01-2005, 06:53 PM
Hinchinbrook river ???Wheres that

Derek Bullock
04-01-2005, 07:23 PM
When I put this post up I never thought it would create the bigotry and racism as it has. #Some of the statements made on here could clearly land quite a few of you in court with the written evidence to convict you here on these pages.

The original article in the Courier Mail which I posted just as a matter fo interest as it related to illegal fishing was in my opinion nothing short of sensationalist journalism. #Well put though I must admit.

Lordy has nailed this one on the head. It really has nothing to do with Indigenous Fishing Rights but all about a precedent in law. #Any law can be challenged in court and that is what this is all about. #Simply a male person caught illegally fishing and then using his culture as mitigating circumstances. If he wins the case it means that all similar following cases could be dismissed.

Interesting defence though.

Might I remind every member here of the Chat Board Rules that can be found at http://www.ausfish.com.au/cgi-ausfish/board/YaBB.cgi?board=Chathelp;action=display;num=1075278 500

It states there: "You remain solely responsible for the content of your messages, and you agree to indemnify and hold harmless this forum, and any related websites to this forum. We at this Chat Board also reserve the right to reveal your identity (or any information we have about you) in the event of a complaint or legal action arising from any information posted by you.

Some people may think it is funny or even harmless to make racist comments but all I can say folks is please be careful what you write. One complaint can land you in court.

Cheers


Derek

UPDATE 4/1/2005 - Before I get crucified for my latest comments on this post might I suggest that Ausfish Members read the Queensland Anti-Discrimination Act. It can be found at http://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/LEGISLTN/CURRENT/A/AntiDiscrimA91.pdf
Derek

lordy
05-01-2005, 04:04 AM
Hinchinbrook river ???Wheres that

OK OK Hinchinbrook Channel and the rivers that run into it.

banshee
05-01-2005, 04:18 AM
Derek you must be incredibly naive or totaly out of touch to think you could start this thread and not get what you have detirmened to be bigoted and racist coments.

cooky
05-01-2005, 06:24 AM
create the bigotry and racism as it has. Some of the statements made on here could clearly land quite a few of you in court
hmmm?? I've been following this post and I disagree. I must admit though I haven't the time to go back through the posts to check, but I was quite impressed with the overall understanding and agreement of the importance of indigenous culture in Australia. This post taken in it's entire context seems overwhelmingly supportive of Aboriginal culture, however some questions of where to 'draw-the-line' in relation to fishing.
There a quite a few 'posts' that are very supportive of aboriginal issues and I can't remember evidence of anyone having major issue with these.
The title (Indigenous Fishing Rights) alone on the most popular thread (General Chat) would have / could have / should have bought out racist elements / comments from members. Personally I thought they were reasonably diplomatic (in a social context).

fishsmith
05-01-2005, 10:20 AM
Well said cooky,with you 100%......

Daintreeboy
05-01-2005, 03:59 PM
Derek.
Would you be able to pm me and let me know what part, if any of my comments were racist?
Not being a smart*ss, I'm genuinely interested as I make my fair share of comments on this board and don't want to get on the bad side of anyone when doing so.
Anybody else feel free too.
Thanks, Mark

adriancorrea
05-01-2005, 04:29 PM
::) ::) ::)
:o :o :o
;) ;) ;)

adriancorrea
05-01-2005, 04:35 PM
So can I go to these place and catch turtles?
I do agree with keeping traditional methods but also agree with them not being traditional using modern equipment.
Well done Derek great post.
There you go Baldy fixed LOL :-X :-X

Tight Lines
Adrian

baldyhead
05-01-2005, 06:24 PM
Hey M8 its spelt DEREK and Derek takes exception to spelling his name incorrectly! lol [smiley=anxious.gif] [smiley=anxious.gif] [smiley=anxious.gif] [smiley=anxious.gif] [smiley=anxious.gif] [smiley=anxious.gif] [smiley=anxious.gif]
baldy

Derek Bullock
05-01-2005, 06:35 PM
Hey Baldy

I think you must love me. Evereytime you post something you have a little statement about me under your avatar. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

baldyhead
05-01-2005, 06:49 PM
ARRRRRRWWW crikey Derek... thats right too you are one of those... well if the cap fits M8 ! But really I'm havin a bit of a giggle typin this as you picked me in one. A lover not a fighter
hahahaha
cheers baldy [smiley=2thumbsup.gif] [smiley=2thumbsup.gif] [smiley=2thumbsup.gif] [smiley=2thumbsup.gif]

fishy_phil
06-01-2005, 08:21 AM
gday all
in my opinion use traditional methods if you are claiming traditional rights...no more no less. if its traditional rights you are claiming as this aboriginal person was in this case, then he should have been using traditional methods.
if you let the aboriginal people us the same methods as the licensed pro/rec fishos and let them be unlicensed its just descrimination against the wider community...if everyone was equal as in the proposal by pauline hanson there would have been no arguement and no court case appeals. because he would have been convicted and sentenced! 1 land 1 law...i believe that it is this special treatment that is causing the rift between the aboriginal people and the rest of the community. if everyone in the country had the same rights, responsibilities and acountability there would be much less problems, with racial contentions/disputes.
if it was an asian person or a white person what would your reaction be??
also with a statement earlier in the topic about reconcilliation.... reconciliation goes both ways...if we say sorry are they goin to say we forgive you and get on with it and not bring it up again ??? ??? think about it!!!
i also have numerous aboriginal friends and they are some of the best people ive ever met. but i also know a few that i wouldnt want to be near because they believe that the government owes them a living and that they are better than the rest of the community. black white green or purple if ur a decent person and dont act like you are superior ill listen to what you have to say but if you are someone that will speak on level terms that will work...no one race is superior to any other...
also with the part about how long the aboriginal people have been here...what ones would that be??? ??? ??? also if you look at scientific evidence with what australia used to be before aboriginal settlement and compare it to now...you might be surprised to find out that australia should be covered in lush tropical or subtropical rainforests and the red centre should be covered with inland sea's and forests.that is why lake eyre for example is salt...the damage caused by the burning of the forests changed the entire weatherpatterns in central australia n mad it dry. it has also been proposed that the aboriginal people have caused the extinction of more species in australia than any other people in world history. because australia was once like the amazon...imagine the number of species that would have been here then and arnt here now. and they are also most likely to have hunted out numerous species of the ancient australian mega fauna. so the effectiveness of their hunting echniques of old is not under question as they were proberbly the best hunters to have ever lived.
there have been numerous differant people that have inhabited australia!!! in the past 50000 years there have been numerous genetically/racially differant people in australia as evidenced by the remains found and reconstructed....it was in one of these new waves of people that the dingo came to australia...its a decendant of the asian wolf....this was about 30000 years ago...so to me it just seems that the aboriginal people of today have had the same thing happen to them that their ancestors did to the previous inhabitants... and so on...ill bet they didnt give them land rights!! misteriously when a new wave of inhabitants comes the other seems to just disappear...funny that :-X
a few things to think about
phil

notts_so
06-01-2005, 10:02 AM
Is it true they just gave aboriginals the wright to hunt in our national parks

Derek Bullock
06-01-2005, 10:13 AM
Fron the Sydney Morning Herald and appears to be specific to New South Wales.

However it is my understanding that Aboriginal people do have the right to hunt and gather in Queensland National Parks although not 100% sure.

Cheers


Derek

Aborigines may get right to hunt in parks
By James Woodford
January 4, 2005

Aborigines may be permitted to hunt and gather in national parks using weapons and vehicles but will not be allowed to use firearms.

A draft discussion paper, Wild Resource Use by Aboriginal People on National Parks and Reserves in NSW, says flora, fauna and other material, such as stones and ochre, could be harvested from the state's reserves. The list of what could be sought by Aborigines includes meat, bone, feathers, teeth, skins, eggs, shellfish, trunks, branches, fruit and flowers. Hunting in national parks is now banned to the general public, and Aboriginal harvesting occurs in only a few jointly managed parks.

The new policy will cover protected areas throughout the state.

The document, a copy of which the Herald has seen, is to be released for public comment this year, says issues raised by the plan include public safety, animal welfare and protection of native wildlife from over-harvesting. The paper, prepared by the Department of Environment and Conservation's Parks and Wildlife Division, lists the range of implements that may be used for harvesting: knives, clippers, axes, saws, wedges, shovels, chainsaws, traps, fishing gear, spears, spear guns, sieves and poisons. Dogs and fire may also be required for cultural activities.

"In recognising the cultural practice of wild resource use, activities should be defined according to their purpose and not their methods. This recognises that Aboriginal culture is dynamic and has adapted to modern technology. The use of modern implements as well as the taking of introduced species does not remove the cultural significance or validity of wild resource use," the paper says. "Uncontrolled use of wildlife for commercial purposes may lead to serious wildlife conservation problems."

Commercial activities would thus need to be small scale with minimum impact, primarily interpretive or educational and not specifically to make money.

"Where hunting is concerned, animal welfare issues will also need to be addressed," the paper says. "This includes the humane killing of animals."

It is suggested that hunters could follow RSPCA guidelines.

Hunters would have to adhere to threatened species recovery plans, and the use of any endangered species would "require rigorous assessment".

Another major hurdle for Aboriginal people is that the Parks Service currently has a requirement for $10 million public liability insurance for activities occurring in reserves.

The head of the Department of Environment and Conservation's Parks and Wildlife Division, Tony Fleming, said the paper canvassed the issues that needed to be considered as part of a wild resource use policy.

"It is a difficult issue to reconcile the cultural issues associated with the use of resources and the conservation of those resources within a national park system. We are taking it one step at a time. We think there's an obligation for us to accommodate that cultural aspect of the park system."

A spokesman for the National Parks Association, Roger Lembit, said his organisation would want independent assessment to ensure the resource use was sustainable.

It would be unacceptable for vehicles to be used in wilderness areas, he said.

"We are happy with the use of wild products by local Aboriginal people along traditional use lines."

Bozo
07-01-2005, 01:17 PM
My father in law is from Papua New Guinea, a traditional hunter, where he comes from is on the Vanapa River area 60 k's north west of Port Moresby,was great Black Bass country. My point is non traditional hunting methods use of: eg guns, nets, dingys and outboard motors have basically destroyed traditional hunting methods to the point that few crocs are left, cassowary are all gone, bird of paradise locally extinct, sea turtles non existant, dugong locally extinct, black bass and barramundi harder to catch.
A good point reference traditional aboriginal huntng methods here in Oz.

Cheers
Bozo

baldyhead
07-01-2005, 03:19 PM
I was in Kakadu last year and the Whities are not allowed to have any animals at all, not even allowed to drive through in the day with a dog on board but our Coloured Cousins had their dogs in their 4x4s and anywhere they went they had them with them....I'm not racist but I believe that IF there is a Law / Regulation then IT SHOULD APPLY TO US ALL BLACK, 1/2 BLACK, WHITE OR ANY COLOUR OR RACE every time.
Baldy

krtazy
08-01-2005, 04:39 PM
i believe that indigenous people should have to use traditional practices if they do not have restrictions and you do not see many hand made nets these days .nylon should not count and it would take a while to make a canoe.

Gazza
08-01-2005, 06:53 PM
:-X I spose at the end of the day ,is whiteman being discriminated against #:-X
i.e. IF i use trad methods ,can 'i' do "it".......or why not #???
:-X

Brett_Hoskin
10-01-2005, 12:47 PM
uuummmm I dont know any more. The practice used to be legal for indigenous folks, but then again it was once legal for anyone. Watched a classic old Mal Florence video & cringed when they did some crab hooking. (was legal at the time of filming).

Fitzy.

PS- The pen is coming back out soon.


There is at least one place in WA where crab hooking is the only legal way to get muddies. Traps, nets, dillys are not allowed.

DICER
10-01-2005, 07:04 PM
If it was not a commercial operation, does the charge of him using a commericial apparatus apply, when considering he in his traditional hunting area and catching 25 kg of mullet a week (which has no bag limit)?

Yes, it would be great if he were using traditional methods, but sadlly I'm afraid that we have forever changed the face of indigenous people here in Australia. The argument of whether the traditional inhabitants of this area used nets is flawed. You may never know that. Furthermore that's beside the point, a net is a net (appartus).

Perhaps send him away with a license and operational guideline. I'm sure other indigenous communities are looking at this case, because they to have to support their own communities.

Hopefully this will end in a good outcome for both parties. (and environment)

DICER

Derek Bullock
11-01-2005, 04:54 AM
From todays Courier Mail.

Cheers


Derek

Hunters want to target collectors
Jason Gregory
10jan05
ENDANGERED Australian species could be sold overseas to animal parks and private collectors under a proposal to commercialise traditional indigenous hunting.

North Queensland Lands Council chairman Terry O'Shane said licences allowing select members of tribal groups to harvest the flora and fauna in native title areas, National Parks and unprotected areas within traditional boundaries throughout the state would lead to improved living conditions for Aboriginal communities.

The creatures sold would be those normally targeted by smugglers cashing in on the underground demand for illegal species.

For example, the eggs of black cockatoos would be taken from nests after an order had been made, registered with a checking authority and incubated in universities or zoos.

When the birds were hatched they would then be sent to the overseas client.

Anything from cockatoos to numbats, frilled-neck lizards and rare snakes would be fair game under the proposal.

Stones, ochre, meat, bone, feathers, teeth, skins, trunks, branches, fruit and flowers would also be allowable under the plan.

"Care for country is paramount and it will only happen when it is rigorously proven the removal will not affect sustainability," Mr O'Shane said yesterday.

Mr O'Shane, who is also Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission regional council chairman, said allowing the harvesting would help indigenous communities struggling below the poverty line.

"Some of these birds, in particular, and other species are worth thousands and thousands of dollars," he said.

"The money gained will be used for infrastructure and other worthy projects."

Mr O'Shane also said he did not believe the system would legitimise smuggling operations and, if all orders and removals were registered, it would be difficult for unauthorised people to get the items through Customs.

Traditional owners have enterprise agreements under most Native Title and land-use agreements to hunt native species, including some endangered species.

For the plan to proceed, clauses forbidding the use of endangered species for commercial profit would need to be amended.

A Native Title Tribunal spokesman said that, in theory, any change in land-use agreements would be negotiated between local indigenous groups and state governments.

A Queensland government spokesman said no specific comment could be made on the proposal until after interested parties had met. Traditional hunting of dugongs and turtles was limited late last year to four months of the year in some parts of the state after a report found the cultural icons were being hunted into extinction.

cooky
11-01-2005, 06:05 AM
"The money gained will be used for infrastructure and other worthy projects."

;)

Jeremy87
11-01-2005, 06:48 AM
Ok simple solution to this 'dilema'. Indiginous australians should be allowed the same fishing rights as non indiginous Australians. ie they are allowed to take there tiny out to the pin wearing clothes and catch keep up to 5 flathead per person between the lengths of 40 and 70cms and store it in the refrigerator when they get home. They can catch these fish however they deem fit (With a fishing rod or with a traditional hand spear). In addition they should be able to hunt and take using traditional methods only from a selected list of non endagered and non threatened group of animals again with size and bag limits applying. So not to waist any of the resource it can be stored using modern technology. Oh and wearing clothes should be allowed because its stupid to make someone choose between practicing there culture and being humiliated.