PDA

View Full Version : News Release - Heavy fine for husband and wife



QLD_Fisheries
11-12-2004, 06:01 AM
http://www.dpi.qld.gov.au/news/NewsReleases/16624.html

The information contained in this document is distributed by the Queensland Government for information purposes only. All reasonable steps have been made to ensure the information is accurate at the time of publication. For more information visit the DPI&F Fishweb site at http://www.dpi.qld.gov.au/fishweb

mackmauler
11-12-2004, 06:06 AM
9 December 2004

Heavy fisheries fines for husband and wife
A husband and wife have been fined more than $10,000 in the Caboolture Magistrates Court for a range of mud crab offences.

Tony Le and Chung Thi Hua of Deception Bay pleaded guilty in writing and were each fined $5000 plus $64.30 court costs for being in possession of 10 female mud crabs, two undersized mud crabs and four crabs more than the take and possession limit.

The Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries (DPI&F) said the heavy fines sent a strong message about breaking fishing regulations.

DPI&F field officer Alistair Spicer said rules were in place to protect and conserve mud crab stocks and to ensure the sustainability of these valuable fisheries resources.

“Female mud crabs are totally protected and it is also an offence to be in possession of female mud crab claws,” he said.

“This is an important win in the fight against fisheries crimes and shows how seriously the courts consider these offences.”

Mr Spicer encouraged people to become familiar with fisheries regulations to avoid heavy penalties this summer.

The minimum size limit for mud crabs is 15cm and the take and possession limit is 10.

For more information about fisheries rules and regulations, contact the DPI&F Call Centre of 13 25 23 or visit the DPI&F Fishweb site at www.dpi.qld.gov.au/fishweb.

notts_so
11-12-2004, 06:39 AM
Good job not to be racist but alot (not all) of those boat peaple take anything that moves in the water and if it doesnt they ply it of with a knife im glad they got caught and im glad they got a very hefty fine .
Any person white black or blue should get great fines for taking jennies of any size
....notts so

PinHead
11-12-2004, 07:19 AM
"Good job not to be racist but alot (not all) of those boat peaple"

That would have to be one of the most racist sentences I have seen for a long time.

You have made assumptions based on their names and labelled them..that is racist. For all anyone knows they could have been born here and be as Aussie as me or you (if you are one)

Race has nothing to do with the offence...it is an offence and they were rightly punished by the courts.

notts_so
11-12-2004, 07:37 AM
Harsh but fair pinhead

devocean
11-12-2004, 08:26 AM
Im with notts so

Mad_Barry
11-12-2004, 09:25 AM
The trouble is, the rare time a decent conviction go's through the system (like this one), news of it gets buried in the botttom of page 26 in the local paper.

DPI should have it printed out and plastered at every boat ramp and fishing spot in the land #;D

isaac
11-12-2004, 11:32 AM
Still reckon the fines are tame, they should double or triple them at least. >:(

deb
11-12-2004, 12:09 PM
Agree with dicko , should be on front page or at least the fishing info spots on the tele

bungie
11-12-2004, 04:25 PM
With the size of the fine, it would appear that this is NOT their first offence

Dug
11-12-2004, 06:12 PM
I wonder if they own a restaurant?

Maria
11-12-2004, 07:30 PM
Time to sell the rust bucket boat and resort to using AA batteries for sinkers - won't have much money lying around for much else now. Pity the fine wasn't something more to the tune of 5 or 6 times that amount. Good nevertheless.

MTpockets
12-12-2004, 03:30 AM
People who commit these crimes often plead innocent (because they didnt know the law) and think they will get off.
The fact is they ALL know the law.
One person gets a $5000 fine and that is meant to be an example to anyone else who thinks they can break the law. Instead these ignorant fools just get smarter. They just keep doing it over and over again in an act of denyal. I have seen it way too many times myself where they boat in front of you catches 10 - 20 undersized bream or whiting and never get thrown back. You all know what I mean. You yell out to them "hey mate, legal size of whiting is 23cm", and they reply with no english or just move away.
This needs to be made an issue on TV and the likes all summer. Like one of those awareness campaigns the road saftey and police have about drink driving.
Something has to be done.
cheers
Les

Black_Rat
12-12-2004, 03:51 AM
The trouble is, the rare time a decent conviction go's through the system (like this one), news of it gets buried in the botttom of page 26 in the local paper.

I believe it made page 3 or 5 of todays Courier Mail which is a good thing #;)

Derek Bullock
12-12-2004, 12:01 PM
Hmmmmmmmm.

I would have thought that a $10,064.30 fine was a reasonable fine under the circumstances.


Derek

Gazza
13-12-2004, 07:22 AM
Hmmmmmmmm.

I would have thought that a $10,064.30 fine was a reasonable fine under the circumstances.


Derek

IF a 1st. offence , that is excessive IMO ........compared toooooo....

"The Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries has scored an important win against shark finning after the Cooktown Magistrates Court heavily fined a north Queensland commercial fishing operator for the offence.

On Tuesday, November 30, Mervyn Lavell, 58, of Gordonvale was convicted and fined $5000 for being in possession of 141 shark fins and nine undersized mud crabs."

http://www.dpi.qld.gov.au/news/NewsReleases/16539.html

---------------------------------------------------
Husband AND wife ??????....seperately fined ??????

Bring-on the Commercial and ALL deckie .....seperate fines!!!!

JMHO, as I read it ;)
p.s. 141 fins = 47sharks x 3fins ???
Regards
Gazza

fishsmith
13-12-2004, 07:51 AM
I beleive the fine was appropriate castigation and about time too. There has been some small fines handed out this year for similar or worse offensives committed.
I also agree with that there needs to be me publisity of these offenses/convictions, as its a great way to educate the public and fellow anglers of the laws and ethics, on which we need to maintain for the future sustainability of our sport.

I don't nessecarily agree with the offenders having there names, gender or racial background publicised as i beleive this can lead to racial/personal vindication and draw focus away from the issue altogether.

Maybe its time to bring back the shame file,on a site like this,fishing mags etc.etc.What do you all think...Smithy...
8)

Gazza
13-12-2004, 07:57 AM
No shame files on here mate (barring present info ;)) ....too much info for AAM and PETA wankers

coyote3
13-12-2004, 08:17 AM
that fine is ok for joe blow. but if joe has comercial interests,e.g. restaurant, triple it, because with a good lawyer it can be used as a legitimate tax deduction..

FOOCKCHUCKER
13-12-2004, 12:06 PM
i don:t care what about race colour or creeds but after being thretend with a knife by an asian for informing him he had to throw a undersize groper back and whan he didn"t i did all i can say is i picked the origen of the people in question staight away. i have caught 5 or more people with eyes smaller than mine trying to take female crabs from where i go and after informing me they could not speak english very fluentlly told me to get ## i ask you who is the one with a racist attitude as i am aware that every creature on earth deserves some protection. throw the book at them

MTpockets
14-12-2004, 06:52 AM
My wife and I were fishing at the pin on Saturday and all we caught were small whiting and flathead. All the whiting were 22-23 cm and were all thrown back. The flathead were all too small to even bother checking size and were all thrown back as well. I lost the only legal fish of the day close to the boat and it was a flatty of about 40 odd cms. We could have easily kept all the 23 cm whiting but with my belief that 23 is still too small to keep I had no hesitation at releasing them. My opinion is whiting and bream should have a min size of 25cm and I will only keep those of 25 or more. So we missed out on a feed of fish that night...... no worries, we went and bought fish n chips from the local takeaway at Jacobs Well and sat by the water and enjoyed ourselves. It was still a great day out, and cost very little for the privlage. Had I kept those fish it may have been a much more costly night. I wish these people who do the wrong thing had the same disapline as we have, but like I said before..... they live in denyal of the laws.
cheers
Les

Gazza
14-12-2004, 11:28 AM
Maaaate.... #:D
"it was a flatty of about 40 odd cms."
---------------------------
Shouldn't you also only keep flatties over 48~50cms by your "ideals" with whiting/bream sizes

p.s. i'm allowed to keep a 109cm Murray Cod ,wouldn't even contemplate , eating one over 80cms #;)

Different people, different choices ,BOTH legal #:-X

fishsmith
14-12-2004, 11:50 AM
I've often wondered if we have fish size limit legislation right any.Maybe we should be keeping the smaller "undersized" fish that have a naturally higher attrition rate with a bag limit enforced and let the sexually mature breeders go as they are the breeding stock.

vortfu
14-12-2004, 11:52 AM
When hunting for a feed, I throw all but the bigguns back. Who can be bothered cleaning a whole boat load of just legal fish for the same amount of meat as a few decent sized ones?

vort-fu

Gazza
14-12-2004, 12:11 PM
I throw all but the bigguns back
Called up-sizing or upgrading ???....don't remember ??? ,because i don't do it....once dead! :'( :-X

(t.i.c. mate ,but could happen ;))

devocean
14-12-2004, 03:20 PM
I reckon if you are caught with illegal fish you should be disqulaified from fishing or being in a boat. It works fior the road why not the water.

Derek Bullock
14-12-2004, 04:28 PM
Big difference between keeping an undersized fish and putting someones life at risk on the road. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D


Derek

casey
14-12-2004, 11:31 PM
I think they would of been better killing the fisheries officer and then plead insanity, They would of got no fine, and got off on a technicality...

Gezz 5k plus each, So much for a family day out, fair enough they took some under size crabs and a handfull of females.. yea give em a fine, but for something like that is a bit of a joke...

You get a less of a fine speeding while drunk and under the influence of drugs while hitting a perdestrian..

Casey

MTpockets
14-12-2004, 11:48 PM
Maaaate.... #:D
"it was a flatty of about 40 odd cms."
---------------------------
Shouldn't you also only keep flatties over 48~50cms by your "ideals" with whiting/bream sizes

p.s. i'm allowed to keep a 109cm Murray Cod ,wouldn't even contemplate , eating one over 80cms #;)

Different people, different choices ,BOTH legal #:-X


MY ideal is based on when fish die they seem to shrink a bit so keeping one that is just 23 cm could possibly end up undersized when dead. This has been discussed on this forum before and I prefer to take the slightly larger bream and whiting. As far as flathead is concerned I keep ones that are at least 2cm over size for the same reason. You are making me out to be standing on a pedstal and that is not the reason for my post. I am merely stating that I have a standard unlike some people who dont. I hope that people who do the wrong thing read posts like mine and they get the message. Or am I just wasting my time?