new bag limits

[mackmauler]

does anyone know of a complete list of "coral reef fin fish" as i have looked through the new rules and came to the... NB:FOR ALL OTHER CORAL REEF SPECIES, A TAKE AND POSSESSION LIMIT OF 5 APPLIES. does this mean bream at peel island living in the coral ???

[Lucky_Phill]

NO

[Lucky_Phill]

here is a direct link for the info

http://www.dpi.qld.gov.au/fishweb/11379.html

[Lucky_Phill]

Attachment A: Size and take and possession limits
No-take species
The following species are protected and are not included in any size or take and possession limits:

Maori wrasse
Barramundi cod
Potato cod
Queensland groper
Red bass
Chinaman fish
Paddletail
Size Limits
All coral reef fin fish species have a minimum size limit of 25cm unless otherwise specified (see below):

All tuskfish 30cm
All jobfishes, red throat emperor, long nose emperor 38cm
All cods, gropers and coral trout 38cm
Exceptions
Greasy rockcod 38cm to 100cm
Flowery cod 50cm to 100cm
Camouflage rockcod 50cm to 100cm
Maori cod 45cm
Blue spot trout 50cm to 80cm
Nannygai (small and large mouth) 40cm
Spangled emperor 45cm
Red emperor 55cm
Fusilier No limit


Note: Jobfishes = crimson jobfish (rosy jobfish), flame snapper, goldband snapper, green jobfish, lavender jobfish, ruby snapper, small- toothed jobfish.

Take and possession limits
All coral reef fin fish species have possession limits of five unless otherwise specified (below):

Combined limits:
Cods and gropers 5 in total of all species
Tuskfish 6 in total of all species
Coral trout 7 in total of all species
Nannygai 9 in total of all species
Species specific limits:
Crimson jobfish (rosy jobfish), Red throat emperor 8 per species
Hussar 10 per species
Fusilier No limit
Total combined limit 20 coral reef fish in total

[Lucky_Phill]

Recreational :- Fish must be kept whole or gutted and gilled. However a fish may be filleted if the fillet is >40cm. The entire skin unscaled must remain on the fillet.

[mackmauler]

thanks Phill, so that list is all coral reef fish that are covered by limits? i think yes... they did say for *all* other coral reef species 5 fish limits, still dont know if that means everything in grants guide :-/ maybe reading to much into it ???

[Lucky_Phill]

(4) If a coral reef fin fish taken from a boat is filleted ashore, the fisher
must not return a fillet from the fish to a boat unless—
(a) the length of the fillet is at least 40 cm; and
(b) skin and scales are attached to the fillet.
Maximum penalty—100 penalty units.
(5) The fisher must not put a coral reef fin fish, that is whole or gilled and
gutted, into cool storage unless a pectoral fin has been removed from the
fish.Maximum penalty—100 penalty units.
Example of cool storage—
a cooler or refrigerator
(6) For subsection (5), the pectoral fin must be removed from the fish
after it has died and before it is put into cool storage.

Now here's and interesting part of the legislation.

cheers #Phill

[Lucky_Phill]

Coral Reef fin species are the species found in offshore waters, mainly.

Bream, Flathead, Whiting, Grunter, Snapper, Pearlies. etc are NOT Coral fin fish. If it's not listed in the regs, it ain't Coral Fin Fish.

I know the regs are going to confuse the %$#K #outta people.

The info leaflet is out in tackle shops now, apparently.

My Advice........get one # # !

Phill

[Lucky_Phill]

Yes people, you read it right above.

As of 13th December, you basically have to cut off the Pectoral fin of any reef fish you want to put in your esky.

I believe this is designed to halt a process in the black market.

Cheers Phill

[gif]

Good Posts Phil - thanks.


Actually - there is some fine print beyond the brochures and press releases that Phil has kindly explained above.

Schedule 2 of the new Act has all the defined species. There are more in the Act than the brochures. The new brochures are at all tackles shops now - so pay a rainy day visit and pick one up

I will dig it out tonight for all to see - plus the location of the Act for those interested.

Bottom line - there are too many species to remember - SO just cut the side fin - pectoral fin on any possible reef type fish

Gary.

[gif]

Hi - as promised .....the full definintion of Coral Reef Fish

Under the FISHERIES (CORAL REEF FIN FISH) MANAGEMENT PLAN 2003



SCHEDULE 2
CORAL REEF FIN FISH
sections 6(1) and 156(4), definition “group of species” and schedule 8,
definitions “coral reef fin fish”, “species of cod or groper”, “species of
emperor”, “species of parrotfish, surgeonfish or sweetlips”, “species of
tropical snapper or seaperch” and “species of wrasse”

Common name Scientific name
cods and gropers
areolate rockcod Epinephelus areolatus
barramundi cod Cromileptes altivelis
bar rockcod Epinephelus ergastularius
blacksaddle rockcod Epinephelus howlandi
black-tipped rockcod Epinephelus fasciatus
blue-lined rockcod Cephalopholis formosa
blue Maori Epinephelus cyanopodus
blue-spotted rockcod Cephalopholis cyanostigma
brown-barred rockcod Cephalopholis boenak
camouflage rockcod Epinephelus polyphekadion
chinaman rockcod Epinephelus rivulatus
comet grouper Epinephelus morrhua
coral cod Cephalopholis miniata
coral rockcod Epinephelus corallicola
dothead rockcod Cephalopholis microprion
dwarf spotted rockcod (wire netting
rockcod) Epinephelus merra
eight bar grouper Epinephelus octofasciatus
flagtail rockcod Cephalopholis urodeta
flowery cod Epinephelus fuscoguttatus
four-saddle rockcod Epinephelus spilotoceps
greasy rockcod Epinephelus tauvina
hapuku Polyprion americanus and Polyprion
oxygeneios
hexagon rockcod Epinephelus hexagonatus
leopard rockcod Cephalopholis leopardus
longfin rockcod (honeycomb
rockcod) Epinephelus quoyanus
Maori cod Epinephelus undulatostriatus
oblique-banded grouper Epinephelus radiatus
peacock rockcod Cephalopholis argus
potato cod Epinephelus tukula
Queensland grouper Epinephelus lanceolatus
redmouth rockcod Aethaloperca rogaa
six bar rockcod Epinephelus sexfasciatus
six spot rockcod Cephalopholis sexmaculata
snubnose rockcod Epinephelus macrospilos
speckled-fin rockcod Epinephelus ongus
speckled grouper Epinephelus magniscuttis
strawberry rockcod Cephalopholis spiloparaea
thinspine rockcod Gracila albomarginata
tomato rockcod Cephalopholis sonnerati
trout cod Epinephelus maculatus
white-lined rockcod Anyperodon leucogrammicus
white-spotted rockcod Epinephelus caeruleopunctatus

coral trout
barred-cheek coral trout Plectropomus maculatus
chinese footballer (blue spot trout) Plectropomus laevis
coral trout (leopard trout) Plectropomus leopardus
coronation trout Variola louti
highfin coral trout Plectropomus oligacanthus
lyretail trout Variola albimarginata
squaretail coral trout (passionfruit
trout)
Plectropomus areolatus

emperors
big-eye bream Monotaxis grandoculis
collared sea bream Gymnocranius audleyi
gold-lined sea bream Gnathodentex aureolineatus
Japanese sea bream Gymnocranius euanus
lancer Lethrinus genivittatuslong-nosed emperor Lethrinus olivaceus
Mozambique large-eye bream Wattsia mosambica
orange-striped emperor Lethrinus obsoletus
pink-eared emperor Lethrinus lentjan
red-eared emperor Lethrinus rubrioperculatus
Robinson’s sea bream Gymnocranius grandoculis
spangled emperor Lethrinus nebulosus
spotted sea bream Gymnocranius sp.
sweetlip emperor (red-throat
emperor)
Lethrinus miniatus
thumbprint emperor Lethrinus harak
variegated emperor Lethrinus variegatus
yellowlip emperor Lethrinus xanthochilus
yellow-spotted emperor Lethrinus erythracanthus
yellow-striped emperor Lethrinus ornatus
yellow-tailed emperor Lethrinus atkinsoni

fusiliers
fusiliers Caesio spp. or Pterocaesio spp.

parrotfishes
bicolour parrotfish Cetoscarus bicolor
bumphead parrotfish Bolbometapon muricatum
miscellaneous parrotfish Scarus spp. surgeonfishes
surgeonfishes Acanthurus spp.
unicornfish Naso spp.

sweetlips
miscellaneous sweetlips Plectorhinchus spp.
painted sweetlips (slaty bream) Diagramma spp.

tropical snappers and sea perches
bigeye seaperch Lutjanus lutjanus
black and white seaperch Macolor niger
black-spot snapper Lutjanus fulviflamma
bluestripe seaperch Lutjanus kasmira
brownstripe seaperch (brown
hussar) Lutjanus vitta
chinamanfish Symphorus nematophorus
crimson jobfish (rosy jobfish) Pristipomoides filamentosus
crimson seaperch (small mouth
nannygai) Lutjanus erythropterus
dark-tailed seaperch Lutjanus lemniscatus
five-lined seaperch Lutjanus quinquelineatus
flame snapper Etelis coruscans
goldband snapper Pristipomoides multidens and
Pristipomoides typusgreen jobfish Aprion virescens
hussar (pink hussar) Lutjanus adetii
lavender jobfish Pristipomoides sieboldii
Maori seaperch Lutjanus rivulatus
midnight seaperch Macolor macularis
moses perch Lutjanus russelli
onespot seaperch Lutjanus monostigma
paddletail Lutjanus gibbus
red bass Lutjanus bohar
red emperor Lutjanus sebae
ruby snapper Etelis carbunculus
saddletail seaperch (large mouth
nannygai) Lutjanus malabaricus
sailfin snapper Symphorichthys spilurus
small-toothed jobfish Aphareus furca
spanish flag (stripey) Lutjanus carponotatus
yellow-margined seaperch Lutjanus fulvus

wrasses
anchor tuskfish Choerodon anchorago
blackspot tuskfish Choerodon schoenleinii
blue tuskfish Choerodon cyanodus
grass tuskfish (purple tuskfish) Choerodon cephaloteshogfish Bodianus spp.
humphead Maori wrasse Cheilinus undulatus
redbreasted Maori wrasse Cheilinus fasciatus
tripletail Maori wrasse Cheilinus trilobatus
venus tuskfish Choerodon venustus




I glad there is not a test to get your fishing licence!

[mackmauler]

thanks Gary. looked through the list and came to Bodianus spp after the grass tusfish, dunno where they pulled that from grass tuskies dont have#4 scientific names, at least in grants??? bodianus perdito and bodianus vulpinus are 2 common catches at times not on the list, i can see print outs of this being needed to keep the inspectors informed ::)

[Nugget]

The big problem with the new regulations is identifying what is defined as "Coral Reef Fin Fish" under the ACT.
Gary has kindly (and correctly) listed the lot.

Basically for Brisbane anglers it excludes all estuary species plus snapper, pearl perch, trag, Spanish mackerel, in fact all pelagics, grassies but not redthoat...
Parrot are included.

As Gary has suggested, the safest option is to cut the pectoral (side or 'arm' fin) off all fish you catch offshore.

BUT - you will need to carry a copy of the size and big limits - I doubt most anglers will be able to memorize them all.

Mackmauler - I've already had that discussion with Fisheries - their reply was that older versions of Grants are not recognised as an authority on species identification.
They said only the current version is correct, although not comprehensive.
I haven't looked into it in depth - but that was their explanation.

Dave ><>

[Lucky_Phill]

Now all we need is full colour plates of juvenile and adult species of each and every fish. Along with the regs in full, and we'll all have to buy a bigger boat to carry all this crap around.
Especially to tell the difference between a ' six bar rockcod' and a ' six spot rockcod '.

FFS.

Interesting times ahead folks.

cheers Phill [smiley=help.gif] [smiley=laola.gif] [smiley=laola.gif] [smiley=laola.gif] [smiley=laola.gif]

[sav]

20 years younger and I may have been able to handle all this. And you guys wonder why we like fresh water fishing.
Regards
Sav

[Kerry]

Starting to see a lot of boats up for sale and one could presume the reasons for this.

Many will obviously be happy with this "side ways" removal of pleasure fishing craft but then many of these sales will simply put pressure on more local waters as really nobody will seriously want to burn the fuel or spent the time and travel some of the distances involved based on any of these regulations.

Some will think this is a win (for somebody) but really the flow "off" will have an adverse affect on many downstream and associated enties. Some will call this progress, others wouldn't have a clue what progress even is.

Cheers, Kerry.

[NQCairns]

I know what I see in the future of salt water fishing in QLD, a lot of dead wasted fish, single pectoral only of coarse! floating around and under the water as the smallest of any full bag is replaced by another just a bit bigger within any species slot etc, with the personal cost to fishing now under near martial law with GBRMPA lockout zones and fisheries over regulation not to mention the financial cost of the onec peacefull exercise who would not make every effort and increased effort!!, count....I tell ya with the size of the rocks in our fisheries management collective heads they had better make sure that their individual once in 5 years offshore boating trip is on a fully surveyed vessel, cause no standard pfd rateing is going to keep them bum down.
I used to pride myself for what it was worth, that I wasted no part of a fish I brought home, anything that didn't get eaten got used for bait one way or another, what do we do about our own bits and pieces of legal caught fish, can we use them for bait offshore or inshore? or do I stink up a few council bins in the am. Between the GBRMPAsses and fisheries why did i bother moving to QLD!!!! Whats the name of that Pauline Hansen party again!! I might have to start taking notice.
My FNQ neck just keeps getting more and more sunburnt of late.nq

[agnes_jack]

Phil
Heres a question ive been asked over the last few days. On the new regs brochure, it lists grass sweetlip as no limit. Does this mean that when counting your 20 fish limit, do you not include grass sweetlip as part of that total? Example You have 18 listed fish and 4 grassies. OR do they still become part of your overall bag limit? To me I would assume that they are still part of the overall bag limit but if thats the case, shouldnt they have a maximum bag limit of 20? Ive been asked that question about 5 times in the last 3 days so it is obviously going to cause some major confusion.

Agnes_jack

[Nugget]

Your total "per person, in posession" limit of "Coral Reef Fin Fish" is 20 fish.
If an individual species is regulated by a bag limit - you must not exceed that.
IE: Your total catch allowable bag limit of 20 fish can include no more than 5 cod. (Cod have a bag limit of 5)

All "coral reef fin fish" species have possession limits of five unless otherwise specified, (and there are very few exceptions - fusilier are one).
If a species is not regulated by a possesion limit, then it is included in your total allowable catch of 20.
IE: Your total catch allowable bag limit of 20 fish can be made up of 20 fusilier. (Fusilier do not have a bag limit)

The reason they didn't put a bag limit of 20 on those species that currently don't have a bag limit is that some people would missunderstand and assume they could have 20 of that species regardless of their total catch limit.

Dave ><>

[agnes_jack]

Dave
Im getting the opposite type of confusion on that one, Quite a few people seem to assume no bag limit means no bag limit and not included in any overall bag limit. Im sure there will be problems with that definition judging by the amount of people asking that question only a few days after the regs have become available.
Tony

[Nugget]

Confusion reigns supreme.

I'm working on a simplistic summary at the moment, although it will apply primarily to SE Qld anglers.

Dave ><>

[mackmauler]

Agnes_jack,

to this reader grass sweetlip are not coral fin fish, no bag limit either, so you can catch as many as you like and they dont get included in the 20 fish limit for (coral fin fish).

[agnes_jack]

Mack mauler
One would have to assume that when something reads"no bag limit" That means no bag limit,Not "see other bag limits" I personaly think that fisheries need to re-release thier pamphlets in clear unmistakable format not just put the onus on everybody to decipher what they mean. Not everybody is a marine biologist and for the vast majority of once or twice a year fishos identifing species and making heads or tails of breifly written regulations, just dont cut it. Most fishermen are for the new bag limits and it is unfair that they should have to pay hefty fines because of not clearly written regulations, when their intentions are to do the right thing. I personally am glad to see the new bag limits and regulations in place but clearer regulations please!

Tony

[Lucky_Phill]

The pollie speak here is "

"Bag limit" # #and " Possession Limit ".

These are two very distinct restrictions.

Bag Limit refers to the fish and possession limit refers to the angler.

This is my understanding and I'm sure Nugget will come up with the simpler version soon.

well, #here's hoping, anyway # # # ::)

Phill

[Lucky_Phill]

Yes Rob, Grassies have no bag limit, and no possession limit. As far as I read the regs.

Having said that, in the Brouchure / Leaflet, it is not specified what is a Grassie, ie:- scientific name.

Is Grassie a local name ?

well, further reading is required.

Phill

[Lucky_Phill]

Reading done, and confirmation given now.

Grass Sweetlip ( Lethrinus Laticaudis ) are NOT a part of a possession limit or bag limit as stated in the " Tidal Waters, a brief guide to rules and regulations from December 13, 2003 ".

Grass Sweetlip have a size limit minimum of 30cms with ' no take and Possession limit ".

I have read and re-read the leaflet and now I believe I have a good working knowledge of the regs ( not all the friggin species ).

Hope this helps guys.

And if for some reason, I'm wrong.......... [smiley=behead.gif] [smiley=hanged.gif] [smiley=oops.gif] [smiley=stupid.gif]

[mackmauler]

Phill, the scientific name of grassies is not on the lists above(Lethrinus fletus. however the lancer(Lethrinus nematacanthus) is :o

looking at the list make sure you know the difference between a butterfly bream (not on the list) and a rosy job fish, seen plenty get confused between the 2.

Rob

ps, Phill, we have to nail down the best source for scientific names ???

[Lucky_Phill]

The source is the DPI. they are NOT accepting Ron Grants Guide to Fishers as the finite source.

[Lucky_Phill]

Department of Primary Industries. (1997). Fish Guide. Saltwater, Freshwater and Noxious Species. The Great Outdoors Publications, Brisbane.

Apparently this is the guide that they are using. or at least using in some way. This is from Fishweb.

???????????????????????????????

[Lucky_Phill]

OH SHIT.............

this is friggin rediculus...... >:( >:( >:(

DPI Fishweb describes Grass Sweetlip as " Lethrinus Laticaudis " and their bloody guide describes them as " Lethrinus fletus "

F F S...................what the ? >:( >:( >:( >:(

If they can't get it right, what friggin hope do we have.

[smiley=wut.gif] [smiley=angryfire.gif] [smiley=furious.gif] [smiley=furious2.gif] [smiley=veryangry.gif] [smiley=angryfire.gif] [smiley=angryfire.gif] [smiley=angryfire.gif] [smiley=angryfire.gif]

[agnes_jack]

Phill
To me a possesion limit refers to all fish you have in your possesion. This includes what you have in the freezer at home. A bag limit refers to what you can catch on any particular day, taking into account what you have at home in the freezer and deducting those from your days catch. Therefore if you caught 5 hussar yesterday and they are at home in the freezer, then today you cannot keep any hussar. This therefore means that today you can only keep only 15 coral reef fin fish but no hussar.
I am still unsure about grass sweetlip, basically if they are a coral reef fish then they should be included in the in possesion limit of 20 reef fish, and therefore Should have a bag and possesion limit of 20.

Hope that confuses the issue even more

Tony

[mackmauler]

Tony, grass sweetlip are not on the lists ;) where is your doubt coming from ;D although i can understand some doubt, yes Phill it is the joke of the day ???

Rob

[Lucky_Phill]

Well, Tony, let me say this.

You will never read in the papers that a rec angler has had his freezer raided by authorities and was found to have 3 fish too many as per the possession limit.

A raid on your freezer at home will take the resources of QFS, DPI, Qld police and Courts to issue search warrants. This will not happen.

Possession will be in your boat, in your esky and while at the boat ramp, the day anyone gets pulled up going home, at home etc, I'll give up fishing and take up knitting.

NO, Tony, a Bag limit does not mean what you catch on a particular day, a bag limit is on Fish. Possession is what the angler has in his possession. The definition of ' in possession ' is really up to interpretation.

Once the fish is in my freezer, it is no longer in my possession. That's my interpretation. Shoot, if I have 6 kids at home, I can say those 20 Hussar are 5 each for 4 of me kids. Get the picture.

The best bet is to have the regs in ya boat, say that you don't quite understand them and can the officer please explain them FULLY, including scientific names, possession interpretations and bag limits.

Put the emphasis back onto the people who are there to inforce the law. These people will eventually ask their bosses for change.

These regs are confusing enough, and Yes Tony, you're adding to it ;) ;) ;D ???

Mateeee, I think we'll just take it as it comes.

Cheers Phill

[NQCairns]

Hi Agnes, you could well be right? if taken to the letter of the law but fisheries regulations are not real laws to the common man (like common law is) so they can do more or less as they like without fear of justice being done in most cases. Yes you did confuse me more but thats an easy task,nq

[jaybee]

Phil from what I read into it, you have some right and some wrong. So I guess none of us will get it right. Just wonder when they are going to start closing off some of moreton bay next eh.
1.5 Regulated fish (i.e. fish taken in excess of a bag limit)
Some confusion exists regarding interpretation of the provisions within the Regulation (and some management
plans) regarding regulated fish with respect to limits on taking and/or possession of certain numbers of fish
(often referred to as ‘bag limits’).
Specifically, relevant concerns relate to the use of the terms ‘take’ and ‘possession’ and the meanings of those
terms as they are used for prohibitions about regulated fish. Ordinarily, with fish that are regulated by size,
gender or other physical characteristics it is possible to determine that a person has either taken or possesses
such a regulated fish and the relevant offence can be proven. However, when fish are regulated by limits on
numbers confusion arises, primarily with regard to the time periods during which the prohibitions on taking and
possession apply. Some people, for example, believe (incorrectly) that bag limits apply on a daily basis and
that if a number limit for a species of fish appears in the Regulation then that is the number a person may take
each day.
Under the Regulation as it is currently drafted, it is only an offence to possess fish regulated by number if they
were taken in excess of that number. In other words, this is not a straight out limit on the number of fish that a
person may possess, regardless of the circumstances. This causes difficulties for fishers and enforcement
officers, as it is often impossible to determine whether fish were taken in one fishing ‘episode’ or not. For
example, if a person takes less than the permitted number of fish on one day and takes a similar number for
the next three days, that person could potentially possess a large number of fish, none of which are regulated.
The intention of the regulated fish provisions is to allow fishers to take a certain number of fish and be
prohibited from taking more than that number unless and until those fish are no longer in their possession, for
example, until they have been consumed, given away, or otherwise disposed of. This is intended in order to
achieve an ongoing and enforceable limit on the number of fish that a person can take and retain at any given
time, while ensuring that a person is only committing an offence by being in possession of a number of fish if
they took those fish themselves.
For these reasons, it is proposed to amend the Regulation (and some management plans) to provide that all
fish subject to a limit on numbers are also subject to a restriction on the number of fish of that species that a
person can possess, irrespective of when the fish were taken. However, it is recognised that people will
sometimes be in possession (or appear to be in possession) of fish regulated by number that they did not take
themselves. It is, therefore, proposed that such people will not be subject to the relevant offence provisions if
they can substantiate the fact that they did not take the fish in question.

[Lucky_Phill]

What did you just say ?

I think you said " bag limits ' are on fish and ' possession limits' are on anglers.

I do believe that's what I said a couple of pages ago.

NOW, what parts did I have wrong ? I need to know as to set meself straight and not confuse others ?

Phill

[jaybee]

I read (Interpreted) what you wrote about in possession as being wrong, boils down to interpretation i guess, however, after talking to fisheries last year they were quite adamant in possession even means in your freezer at home, now did the fisheries officer i spoke to, have the correct interpretation of "in possession", as State law says possession is 9/10 s of the law. But then he went onto say that if i was fishing at Fraser and caught more then the limit of tailor, if i filletted them, breaded and half cooked them, then froze the fillets they are then classed as food, and I can catch more fresh tailor. Now tailor also come under the "in possession" rule i beleive. So I guess if this interpretation is right, as long as well know when a fish becomes food, we will no longer be in possession, I guess.
cheers.

[blaze]

Hi all
go fishing catch a couple for a feed and let the rest go
no problems
cheers
blaze

[Lachie1]

Just to add a bit more confusion to everything :o ::) What happens if for example i got to a fish shop n buy 6 hussar when there is only a bag limit of 5 on this species (dunno if thats right - but for arguments sake). Am i breaking the law? ???

Cheers, Lachie

[NQCairns]

Lachie no you would not be breaking the law, if you kept the reciept to protect yourself because as whole fish they would have both pectral fins therefore commecial caught, but without a reciept it would be your word against theirs and that means a loss in court. With comercial caught fillets go by the grace of god with or without a reciept.
Thanks for that I now understand why the fin cutting thing. It is solely to catch the rec if he makes a mistake. nq

[agnes_jack]

Some clarity to some of the confusion. (I think)
Where my confusion over grassies is in that Grass sweetlip are an emperor and as such are a coral reef fish. On the new reg brochure it states that all coral reef fin fish have a combined take and possesion limit of 20. Grassies are the only coral reef fin fish that have been listed under Other tidal species. The only other one listed with no limit is fusilier which still remains in the coral reef fin fish section. My confusion was if it had wrongly been placed in the other tidal species section or not, I did not realize that phils list was a fully comprehensive list of what comes under the clasification of coral reef fin fish. I rang fisheries and they confirmed that although it is a c r f f it will not be counted as part of the 20 fish per day limit. I stand corrected.

Mack mauler
The Bodianus after grass tuskfish is simply a typing error and should have been on the next line down. It refers to the Hogfishes.

The fisheries confirmed to me this morning that in possesion means that technicaly all fish in your possesion including any you have in your freezer or anywhere else for that matter. You can give fish to your friends or family And they are no longer in your possesion. But if for example you are staying on frazer and you take a freezer with you and you have more than the take and possesion limit in your freezer you will be charged. Possesion means all fish in your possesion wherever you happen to have them stored. They are not going to raid your home unless they have reason to believe you are excesively exceeding the limits, or selling fish .But they can if the need arises. Same goes on offshore charters, you must be on a trip of 3 or more days duration before you can keep up to twice the daily take and possesion limit. This aparently changes again after 8 days duration. Hope this corrects some of the confusion from yesterday.

Agnes jack- with brain strain ??? ??? ??? ???

[Lucky_Phill]

Well JB< my interpretation of ' in possession " is right.

example. I have 30 Coral reef fin fish in my freezer, I have 7 snapper, and 2,175 Grass sweetlip. I am not breaking the law. Why, well the onus is on the Law Enforcement agency, firstly to get into my house to see this, secondly prove they are my fish alone. OK, so wife bought freezer, she owns freezer, maybe the freezer is in my house, say I rent, is the freezer the landlords ? The house is under mortagage, does the Bank then become responsible for having this many fish in it's freezer ?

All this crap about ' In possession ' like in ya house etc is just crap.

Now to serious business.

I can have 20 Coral Reef fin fish in my esky with ( fins of ), 5 snapper, 10 Grassies and 5 Pearlies and still be within the law, as it stands of the 13th Dec. ( and If I had that, it's be in my dreams anyway ).

I think maybe we are all looking toooooooo hard into this .

Take ya leaflet out with ya's and there'll be no probs.
[smiley=laola.gif] [smiley=laola.gif] [smiley=laola.gif]cheers Phill

[jaybee]

Umm phil agnes jack has and interesting paragraph above yours, but as he also says they are not going to raid your home. So at a guess i would say you also spoke to fisheries and if so, maybe a different officer with a different interpretation. What i posted from the regs also says the same thing. Plus henry is saying ignorance is no excuse, so who is going to be right and or wrong when quizzed by fisheries. ???

The fisheries confirmed to me this morning that in possesion means that technicaly all fish in your possesion including any you have in your freezer or anywhere else for that matter. You can give fish to your friends or family And they are no longer in your possesion. But if for example you are staying on frazer and you take a freezer with you and you have more than the take and possesion limit in your freezer you will be charged. Possesion means all fish in your possesion wherever you happen to have them stored.

[Gazza]

Lucky ,blame the wife for the freezer ,good one! ;D

Mate ,
divide your catch between the family ,
whole fish with one fin only relates to catching and back to ramp,
40cms fillets w-i-t-h skin on ,only applies to catching and back to ramp.

Skin your fish ,cut into 10~20 cm chunks, chuck em in ya fridge/freezer and relax ,you've disposed of your catch ,to fish another day ,if you really need to ???

[Lucky_Phill]

I like ya way of thinking Gazza ;)

[NQCairns]

Hey Gazza I thought that too, but if they wanted ya, the lack off skin is not going to slow them down, with elecroporeses at sciences disposal, even I have done it years ago, it is a basic test these days but they would have to want you bad. I would like to know the legalities of food V fish fillets, now there is a loophole - it doesn'nt work with those special cookies some cook though ::). nq

[agnes_jack]

Phil
Im not trying to say that fisheries officers are going to start raiding homes and checking freezers, but I dont think it would be a good idea to tell the fisheries officer at the boat ramp that youve been bagging out all week. All im trying to do is point out what the actual laws are so we all know where we stand ;)
Sorry Phil but I cant resist:
Phil wrote: possesion will be in your boat,in your esky,and while at the boat ramp. The day anyone gets pulled up going home, at home etc, Ill give up fishing and take up knitting.
SEE:
police enforcement of fishing rules. in general chat re getting pulled over on the way home.

Phil Wouldnt hold you to the giving up fishing bit, but I would love a nice woolen balaclava like mack maulers! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Kindest regards tony

[agnes_jack]

But wait- Theres more!
Fisheries have also told me that they will soon be releasing the new regulations on Rocky Reef species. This will include: Snapper Pearlies, etc So I assume everything other than pelagic species thats not a coral reef species are about to come under simmilar restrictions. Then apparently thier efforts will be focused on netting. Didnt get too many details but Im sure well get them soon!
[smiley=wut.gif] Regards Tony

[smerl]

Hi All,

I contacted the Queensland DPI regarding the regulations for grassies yesterday via email. Below is the reply that I recieved:

YES, grass sweetlip are not covered by the coral reef management plan and do not form part of the 20 fish possession limit.
There has been no changes to there size limit and there is no limit on the number that can be possessed.

Liz Smith from the DPI also invited me to post the call centre number for the DPI which is 13 25 23. The responses that I recieved to my questions were very prompt and clear and I would encourage others to raise their questions with the DPI. Maybe if enough of us call, the powers that be will realise that the new regulations are confusing and require some degree of clarification.

Cheers,

Smerl

[Lucky_Phill]

Still reading info and trying to digest it.

here's a bugga !

Black-tipped cod ( Footballer Cod ) Ephinephelus fasciatus, are now regulated. There is size minimum of 38 cms ( before nil ) and big limit of 5 ( before nil ).

These fish only grow to 'about40cm', according to DPI info.

So looks like these tasty little suckers will be OFF the menu from now on.

Phill

[BS]

Was having a chat to a mate who's in the Water Police today. 8)... they're trying to simplify things a whole lot more than everyone here.

His thinking - If you've got more than 20 reefy's in the esky or 40 fillets, or both, they'll start asking questions, if less they'll move on to the next bloke. If the whole fish don't have one pectoral fin missing when they arrive, they'll have one off by the time the've left you alone. ;)

He didn't say that there's going to be a whole lot more Police or Fisheries Officers to check the new regs so I think dawn raids is a bit over the top - how often has it happened in the past for checking bag limits of any other fish????? ;) :-/

[Cloud_9]

when you think about it how often do ya bring home more than 20 fish just for your self. i know i dont, thats a lot of fish. i think people are worrying too much.
i think SNAPPA ( peter ) has the right idea, he now goes looking for MR Big, not 224 keepers.

[jaybee]

bfa
If the whole fish don't have one pectoral fin missing when they arrive, they'll have one off by the time the've left you alone yep I was under the impression we had to remove a pectoral fin, but then i just recieved this press release, or part off.


who are fishing recreationally at the time must mark their fish as not for sale by removing a section of the pectoral fin. more confusion, so i guess to be safe its off to the nursery to buy a pair off secateurs
cheers

[Gazza]

JB ,us MEATOS/fish-eaters ;D ;D are so bloody tough ,we will just BITE it off!! :o :o

BUT because the fish "has to be dead" before this simple BITE-it-off procedure ,suppose we'll need to get a stethoscope for the heartbeat ,and a brainscanner EEG?/ECG? for any signs of life ???

As wouldn't it be funny ;D ;D ;D ,IF you got pinched for a fish still twitching/gill movement with it's P'fin BITTEN off :-X :-X

[jaybee]

Gazza the way the greenies are going lately you may be more closer to the truth then you think eh. roflmao
cheers
joe.

[dazza]

hi,
i agree with cloud nine,
20 fish is ample, i don't really see the problem, i guess it is those that sail close to the wind or flout the laws that might be a bit nervous.
this is a big step towards a sustainanble fishery.
i am fortunate enough to get out on the water once or twice a week. i have never been pulled up by fisheries yet. i wish i was pulled up every time i went fishing, least i would know the laws are being enforced.
i can't really see a fisheries officer persue someone on a technicality (??spelling). if someone is making a genuine effort to fish within the law i recon they are pretty safe.
as someone said previously keep a copy of regs pamphlet and if pulled up ask for clarification, i think they would only be to happy to help.
cheers
dazza
cheers
dazza

[Gazza]

Dazza,Dazza,Dazza
OF COURSE to you 20 is plenty ,you fish 100 times a year
(say very conservatively 2kg.each ,times 20 ,times 100) EQUALS 4 Tonne of fish. #:o :o :o

Dazza,
I would be totally pissed off , IF everywhere I went I was "checked" car/boat ,show us your Drivers Licence ,do machinery check ,etc.
Geez , be real , is/are we both living in Australia or living in Checkpoint CharlieLand #::)

But it is NOT a perfect world mate of "baglimits" or "checkpoints" ,and I certainly aren't going to have us ALL wearing the same dress #;D ,so we're all EQUAL

p.s. 2 times a week #>:( , i'm just jealous envious mate ,but realistic ,not IDEALISTIC #;)

[Cloud_9]

I do about 60 or 70 trips a year/ maybe abit more but as much as i loovve fishing. on the average trip i'd usualy get maybe a maximum of 10 or 12 fish per trip but my trip are short! out at sunup back before lunch and most of the fish are still where i caught them in the water . because it's a sport/hobbie to me, i still keep the odd 1 or 2 for a feed but im sellective about what i keep, i like the slot limit idea for flathead and barra because it get me a shot at catching that all elusive trophy fish to photo and let go so to try to catch the bastard again.

they change the rules of the game. you just learn how to play again and so no.

just like in business with the tax laws.

cheers Cloud 9

[Lucky_Phill]

I have to partly agree with Dazza, I would like to ' see ' the Law on the water a lot more, maybe not get checked everytime, but certainly like a presence there.

And Gazza, mate, you sound a little jealous of people like Dazza and Cloud_9, and come to think of it, about a 100 other fishoes on this site, that fish twice a week or more. ;)

I used to do the same theory about 1 bloke going fishing twice a week every week of the year and say, hey you caughta thousand fish this year, and I only go on a charter and am allowed 20, or I get out once a month and get 10 times less than you. Well, so what. Fishing is a lifestyle that sits in different positions in ones list of priorities.

This ' Life " is NOT a rehearsal, it is here and now and no second chances. Prioritize your life. If it is tyhat important to catch the same amount of fish as the twice-a-weekers, do it.

Over the years ( and I have been around for many ), I have had numerous folk say to me, ' Hey, next time you go fishing, give me a call and I'll come along ". I call, and they always seem to find an ' excuse ' not to go.

I use the 3 strikes method now, and have my list of deckies shortened to ' real ' fishoes. At the end of the day guys, and that's all of us, practice good fishing methods and practice the rules, you get that warm fuzzy feeling inside, and that's what counts.

Let's face it, the more you fish, the better you become and the more aware of your ' fishing' surounds. There will come a stage in the " Ladder of Fishing Life " where you reach a rung that allows you to be selective. For those of us that have reached this, you know what I mean. But some of the most rewarding experiences is climbing that Ladder.

Yours.......Phill the Fill-oss-a-Fir

;) ;) ;D 8) ::)

[jaybee]

The question here also is the tourist industry, who is going to tow a boat a few hundred plus klms to only be allowed 20 fish in possesion if you are going to be away three weeks. I know quite a few people from NSW who come up here to fish from mooloolaba to hinchinbrook. Recreational fishing creates a lot dollars, so the affect is going to be detrimental to say the least. I have no worries about 20 fish in possession if i can catch them, But over three weeks one is bound to acheive just that if not more, however, the offspin has to be detrimental not only to the tourist industry but the boating industry as a whole. So if its going to be cheaper for me to buy the fish, then try and catch them on a three week holiday, is then going to put more pressure on commercial fishing? too little too late eh.
cheers
Joe.

[Gazza]

I have to partly agree with Dazza, I would like to ' see ' the Law on the water a lot more, maybe not get checked everytime, but certainly like a presence there.

And Gazza, mate, you sound a little jealous of people like Dazza and Cloud_9, and come to think of it, about a 100 other fishoes on this site, that fish twice a week or more. ;)

I used to do the same theory about 1 bloke going fishing twice a week every week of the year and say, hey you caughta thousand fish this year, and I only go on a charter and am allowed 20, or I get out once a month and get 10 times less than you. #Well, so what. #Fishing is a lifestyle that sits in different positions in ones list of priorities.

This ' Life " is NOT a rehearsal, it is here and now and no second chances. #Prioritize your life. #If it is tyhat important to catch the same amount of fish as the twice-a-weekers, do it.

Over the years ( and I have been around for many ), I have had numerous folk say to me, ' Hey, next time you go fishing, give me a call and I'll come along ". #I call, and they always seem to find an ' excuse ' not to go.

I use the 3 strikes method now, and have my list of deckies shortened to ' real ' fishoes. #At the end of the day guys, and that's all of us, #practice good fishing methods and practice the rules, you get that warm fuzzy feeling inside, and that's what counts.

Let's face it, the more you fish, the better you become and the more aware of your ' fishing' surounds. #There will come a stage in the " Ladder of Fishing Life " where you reach a rung that allows you to be selective. #For those of us that have reached this, you know what I mean. #But some of the most rewarding experiences is climbing that Ladder.

Yours.......Phill #the Fill-oss-a-Fir

;) # # # # #;) # # ;D # # # # # 8) # # # # #::)

Yeah Phil ,poor choice of word, "Envious" fits better ,and closer to reality , of what I meant ;)

(note:- will edit jealous ---->Envious)
Wow ,102+ fishos :D , "Fishing for Recreation ,not for profit" twice a week or so..............excellent!!! [smiley=2thumbsup.gif]

Do you ALL have ugly spouses ??? ;D ;D
and can't imagine why anybody would "cancel" on a fishing trip ;)

The other point Phil ,was that I can understand WHY you/Dazza etc. wouldn't want more than a 'few' by fishing often ,compared to those with the odd trip every now and then, but you shouldn't include all 600,000 fishos in that same boat ,as Joe mentioned above ,it ain't cheap to fish :o

And beware of the LCD (lowest common denominator) ,or we all will have a 20--->10---->5 problem in the future, IF you get my drift ;)
Hope that clarifies the fill-os-if-err in ya ;D
Regards
Gazza

[Lucky_Phill]

It ain't cheap to fish ?

I suppose it's all in the interpretation of " cheap ".

I have fished twice this week already and the first trip I used $4 in car fuel and $6 in boat fuel. #Second trip, car and boat fuel was paid for by deckie.

Bait was caught on a previous trip. Consumables equalled 1 can of coke.

I might have to put you, Gazza, on my deckie list for some $10 Moreton Bay trips. #;) # # # #;D

Of course the offshore and big rig trips cost more !

Good fishing and cheers # #Phill

In reality, to me anyway, fishing ( this ones ) was cheap, and got a feed to boot.

It gets me away from the ' ugly ' missus and the anklebitters and the phone and the mowers etc. #These trips were straight after work.

[dazza]

gazza,
just to clarify, i may get out weekly, but never bring home 20 fish, i am too bloody lazy to clean them 8) 8). i often bring home nothing. (catch and release) and sometimes don't catch anything worth keeping.
i try and avoid freezing fish, and mainly eat fresh, therefore usually one or two fish is ample for my family.
i am able to do this as i have chosen to live near the ocean so i can fish and enjoy the outdoors. for me, life is too short and i want to be doing the things i love.
i also don't want to see checkpoint charlieland, but some visible presence would be good.
gazza, i am often chasing a decky, come out for a fish, relax and enjoy the outdoors, we may even bring home a feed, pm if interested.

thanks to phill and jb and others, for trying to clarify the new regs, i recon the people trying to enforce them will be more confused than us ::) ::)

i'm going fishin'
dazza

[agnes_jack]

Did anybody see last sat courier mail?
Apparently there was some contradicting stuff in there about hussar not being included in the 20 CRFF limit. This write up was supposedly by the dpi. Had about 3 people tell me about it but still havent seen it myself. I will try and get hold of a copy. If any one has it let us know how it reads.

REgards Tony

[gif]

New laws set to hook fishermen
Steven Wardill
06dec03

RECREATIONAL anglers dropping a line during the Christmas break have been warned about new restrictions on what they can take home for their festive feasts.


Limits on the number and size of numerous fish species that can legally be caught come into force next weekend along with a range of other measures.

The looming deadline has sparked fears that many casual anglers might not be aware of the reforms and could be inadvertently fined for what had been legal.

Anglers caught breaking the new laws face on-the-spot fines from $150 to a maximum $75,000.

Sunfish Queensland executive officer David Bateman said fishers would now have to take a "wad of documents" with them to ensure what they caught was legal.

"It is a Christmas present that is going to take a fair bit of unwrapping," he said.

Mr Bateman called on the Government to go easy enforcing the confusing array of laws on anglers over Christmas.

But Primary Industries Minister Henry Palaszczuk rejected suggestions anglers might not be aware of the reforms.

Mr Palaszczuk said the Queensland Fisheries Service had ensured fishers were made aware of the changes with widespread information, including several new brochures on the changes.

He said he was confident the laws would be adhered to with 90 per cent of inspections by Queensland Fisheries Patrols finding current laws were being followed.

The new rules take effect on December 13 and include the State Government's coral reef fin fish management plan and new limits for spanish mackerel and blue swimmer crabs.

Under the coral reef plan new size and bag limits will be introduced, seven species will added to the no-take list and the total combined limit of reef fish capped at 20.

Anglers on charter trips also will face tough new restriction in a bid to stop over-fishing.

Coral reef fish will only be allowed to be taken by handline or rod while recreational fishers will be allowed to use hand-held spears or spear gun. Anglers are limited to the use of a maximum of six hooks in any configuration and may only use up to three lines at a time.

One of the most controversial measures is to ban recreational fishers taking more than three spanish mackerel each, a significant reduction on the current 10 fish limit.

Another significant restriction will be the move to change the method of measuring blue swimmer or sand crabs to a "notch-to-notch" system with a minimum legal size of 11.5cm.

Mr Palaszczuk said such a system would stop unscrupulous anglers keeping crabs under the legal spine-tip measurement of 15cm by breaking the tip so a measurement cannot be taken.

Other new measures include provisions for filleting fish at sea and removing the authority to use live red claw crayfish as bait at one of north Queensland's most popular angling spots, Lake Tinaroo.

THIS article was posted earlier - about 6 pages back.
THE ARTICLE potentially referring to Hussars was on page 5 - but I could not see it on the web for download. I will try to get a copy and type it out the old fashioned way.
Gary

[jaybee]

Gee Gary you are a bit slow eh i posted that on the 8th Dec
keep up with it eh, same heading under general chat, DUH
cheers
Joe.

[Gazza]

Lucky (better be :)) /Dazza Bribie? ,accept both [smiley=2thumbsup.gif] ,toooo short notice for now ,Jan 2004 ,sounds a great possibilty. [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

p.s. hopefully storms and 3 mtr waves ;D , but DON'T rely on me to supply the burley :P :P :P , but do expect a good bumshot of me pulling the anchor ,and contributing to costs ;)

Gazza 8)

[Lucky_Phill]

Some interesting notes, straight from the DPI, Saltwater, Freshwater & Noxious Species " Fish Guide ".

Hussar ( Lutjanus adetii )

Notes :- This abundant fish is taken by line fishig along rocky mainland shores, around islands and adjacent reefs. Hussars form extensive shoals that may dominate your catch when you are seeking other species.

Shoot man, if they are in great numbers as suggested, why the %%$ do they get put into the CRFF regs ?

Phill

[jaybee]

well from feedback i recieved tonight it just doesnt pay to post on this board, as in previous instantances, eh, not being a member of the rat pack i guess i deserve it but who gives a shit, i did try to warn everyone two years ago about this (and crabmac) and was howled down eh, shit happens. i don't care, i am at a stage (health wise) i cant fish anymore. when it all boils down, every fisherperson on this site and in australia, only have themselves to blame for over fishing 20 yrs ago. no good trying to point the finger now. TOO LITTLE TOO LATE so put up and shut up i say.
cheers
Joe

[webby]

HI Just going through the new prochure on all this bullshit they have just brought out, but heres a few interesting topics.
First off for the hulla bull loo on some one posting a jack photo and all you vegie eater and do gooders say all jacks should be released, how come there's no bag limit on jacks, fisheries must think theres plenty out there.

This is new on me Coral reef fin fish closed seasons
alll coral reef fish have a closed season during the new moon perioeds for spawning,
2004 8 oct to 16oct
6nov to 14 nov
6 dec to 14dec.
Didnt know about that one,

Skinning and filleting fish
What if i want to have a feed of fish on board during a allniter.

Misceallaneous prohibitions.
Jagging or foul hooking fish, shite am i supposed to send a note down with me bait telling the bloody fish how to swallow the hook.

Just a few that stood out
regards

[webby]

Geez Joe after you last little outburst, i'd suggest you find a good "Shrink", and tell him all you woes.
regards

[jaybee]

GEE Brian sounds like you are just as confused as everyone else eh, even the fisheries give different answers to people who ring them,Oh BTW, be careful how you write your next fishing trip up in BNB, it may be seen by the fisheries that you have taken over ya quota, guess, it may just pay to stay home and buy ya fish eh. cheers
Joe

[jaybee]

oh damn it appears u wrote as i did, such is life eh, by the way brian, i am a qualified welfare worker/counsellor, wont say anymore, here, ;D good for assignments tho. ::)
cheers
Joe

[jaybee]

If everyone on this board over the age of thirty eight pushed for bag limits 20 yrs ago we would be sweet now. I think! I can put my hand up and say I am guilty of over fishing all those years ago. Thing is why has the government made it so confusing for both sides of the fence?
Minister Henry Palaszczuk rejected suggestions anglers might not be aware of the reforms i know quite a few people who arent aware of the new regs, well they do now as i have told them. I am not into tv and print media, more radio and net, and yet i have not heard any advertising on the radio, and only seen it through this web site, not all anglers spend time in a tackle shop, i have enough gear to keep me going for quite a while yet. Typical of an Government i spose, keep us in the dark and feed us on S***. It appears there is no amnesty over the christmas break, so some anglers might be in for an extra xmas present they cant afford.

[dazza]

JB,
you hit the nail on the head. we are paying for past practices.
nothing gives me the shits more than some oldtimer saying "geez, we used to go fising and catch 300 bream a night etc etc" whats wrong with you young fellas. my usual reply is "if you had not played a part in wiping out the resource there would be plenty around." take it another step further and look at land clearing, pesticide residues etc etc. as well. we cannot repair past damage, but we can go a long way to improve things.
If Henry thinks everyone knows about the new regs, what a joke. The majority of this thread is about some fairly well read and researched fishos trying to make sense out of it, how is some bloke taking his kids fishing over christmas supposed to understand them ::) ::)
cheers
dazza

[agnes_jack]

Your dead right gazza, ive been handing out the regs for nearly a week now and most people are not aware of the fact that as of tomorow they could face prosecution and heavy fines. Quite a number of people when asked if they are aware of the new regs respond with: so how are we supposed to know where we can and cant fish? Seems like the great barrier marine park authorities have much better publicity officers than the dpi. Its fairly obvious that nowhere near enough publicity has been done on this subject.As you say most fishos on this site are fairly on the ball with whats going on but your average once-a-year tourist hasnt got a hope in hell of making sense of this before his holiday in a weeks time. Another common one Im getting is people think that thier 20 fish includes all species even pelagics. I just hope that fisheries show a bit of leaniency towards those who do mean to do the right thing. One week is all they have allowed for pamphlets to be distributed, read and understood. Up until today some tackle shops still havent recieved copys of the regs to hand out to thier customers. Not good enough Henry!

[Lucky_Phill]

Jeez it's good to see so many taking part in this ' debate '. What this does , is get the tongues going and in so doing , that helps others to make sense of the regs. The more you talk, possibily, the more you learn.

Well Dazza, 300 Bream at night sessions don't really happen. That may have been for 2 people in a boat. The best catch this year ( by a Club fisherman ) was 170. Having said that, Bream don't come under bag limit regs, for a specific reason, they are not in danger. Club records from up to 50 years ago confirm that numbers of fish caught then and now have remained constant. Same as Whiting. BUT, I do know what ya saying, and I believe that Clubbies, in particular, should have a re-think on the way they operate.

As JB was saying about us old timers, 20 years ago we may have been putting a good number of fish in the esky, but hey, at he time, the FISH were in good numbers and didn't appear to be waneing. Hindsight is a wonderful thing. But, once we started to see fish number reductions, the first folk to say ' we should do something about this ' was the rec fishoes. We just needed a bold Government to make the changes.

And sure, rec fishoes equipment has improved out of sight in recent years, and so have the Pro's " effort ". So again, the old ' blame ' finger pointing happens, and yes Joe, we are all in there somewhere. But, at least we ( recs ) are doing something, and all that is, is obeying the Law and practicing " catch & Release ".

Just because ya jumped up and down a while ago , JB, doesn't mean law has to change imediately, and it never will. The Government process is a long drawn out affair that depends on elections and enthusiasum by those elected. But I'm sure, yourself and others can look back in years to come and say " I had a hand in helping this resource, I had my say ! "

Let's just hope we can put a little ' reverse spin' on what has happened over the last 20 years.

And a big help, will be no more JB, out there doing the big ones ;) ;D ;).

If for some reason, you are not happy with the regs as they stand, tell someone, NOT ya mates at work, tell Henry, Peter, Robert, or at least your local member. And don't just email, write them once. Get into it, make it a monthly effort, weekly effort, daily effort!

The rec and pro fishing industry , I think, is the most Economic Productive industry that Australia has, in that the vast majority of money spent in this industry stays in Oz. That fact should be re-inforced to anyone you speak to, who happen to be on the publics' payroll ;)

cheers Phill

[rakinray]

G/day all i have just read all the 8 pages of this topic and i think we have lost the real reason for our love of fishing, its not not the amount of fish we get, or the type of fish we get surely its because we just love to fish. A good example of this is when i arrive home from my monthly,weekly, daily fishing trips my darling wife says to me CATCH ANY ? and more often than not i say no, but as we all know theres always next time ! Remember playing the game is better than the win or lose.

CHEERS RAY ;D

[agnes_jack]

Rakinray
I think that the purpose for this topic is to encourage people to discuss swap ideas and learn about our chosen lifestyle. Up here in queensland we have a huge range of different species, all with different size and bag limits. Some of these have only very subtle differences for identification purposes. As fishermen in this area it is very important to know these differences and how the rules affect each different species. I dont think that you will find many fishermen or women who are soley interested in filling the esky, but many of us do enjoy going out to catch a feed. It is therefore vital that we all understand the new regs and how they effect us when pulled up at the ramp. I personaly get my greatest satisfaction from my fishing when I set out to target a certain species, do the reasearch and come home having achieved the desired goal, wether that be bringing home a feed or just doing some catch and release. As much knowledge as possible is the way to go regardless of how many fish I catch. Another purpose to this forum is just to help others understand the rules as well.
Try playing cards or monopoly without knowing the rules!

REGARDS TONY

[rakinray]

G/day tony i agree with all the regs mate no probs with that but my point was that the topic was turning into a shit fight !I just felt they had got away from the issue. Like you i live in QLD and i too fish the bay and offshore so any thing thats going to help our fish stocks be around for our grandchildren im all for.I just wish i had to worry about the 20 in posession rule.

CHEERS RAY ;D

[Graham_N_Roberts]

20 fish? 20 fish? crikey mate, I wouldn't know what to do with them if I bagged 2!
:P ;D ;D

[Fitzy]

I've stayed out of this topic so far (dumb old freshwater fishos aren't affected by this). However, someone at work today said to me that he was thinking about cutting the pectoral fins on everything he catches & releases. Big chance it will heal up, but will deny the pros that fish if captured later? :-/

Apart from the fact its not real good in the fish, has anyone got any comments on this?

Fitzy..

[Gorilla_in_Manila]

Fitzy,
Thought crossed my mind also, but bit harsh on the fish.
Also, do you think a pro will release the fish in a state that it actually survives? Probably just get chucked over the side dead and no good to anyone. Don't know if the pros are allowed to say they caught some as a rec angler, and therefore keep it themselves also. ???
Might also single the fish out for a predator's lunch if it looks weaker than the other fish.
Therefore can't see the point in maiming a fish to try and spite the pros. A couple of fish in a couple of tons isn't really going to make a difference anyway - far better to buy them out or restrict them.
Cheers,
Jeff
PS please tell that little guy casting his heart out at the bottom of your posts, that he ain't gunna catch nothing except seagulls unless the actually drops the line in the water. ;D

[webby]

Poor bloody fish would most likely get dizzy, swimming left or right in circles, depending what side you snipped. ;D

[agnes_jack]

Fitzy
Reckon you got about 2 chances of a fish surviving without a pectoral fin before it gets eaten- None and a damn site less. The theory behind it is good though! The pros would just kill em to spite us back anyway. Dont think anybody would win out that one especially not the fish. :'( :o ;D

[mackmauler]

Fitzy, the pros would sell the fish as fillets ???

[Lucky_Phill]

The bloke who told you this Gary, needs a good rodgering. He is in a minority of " One " when it comes to thinking like that.

Better leave it there................ :-/

Phill

[Kerry]

".... thinking about cutting the pectoral fins on everything he catches & releases .... to deny pros ...."

Honestly how bloody mindless are some people.

Cheers, Kerry.

[Kerry]

There appears this misconception (for want of a better word) coming thru regarding those that might catch a few occasionally and if deemed to have caught 20 fish whoa behold them badged/called all sorts of things yet the regular fisho who by their own admission fishes at every opportunity (several/many times a week) keeps a couple, lets a few go is slotted into a different mould, something about looking after the fishery etc etc etc.

Anyway, what makes one actually different from the other, the person who due to conditions, weather, distance etc cathes a few more than some people expect every so often (maybe months, even many months apart) of them or the person catching one or two every second day and generally in areas where fish populations are at their most vulnerable due to proximity to population centres etc

One could/might hazard a guess at who is actually affecting the "thinking" about this stock decline type of stuff the most.

Perceptions are not necessarily as they might first appear.


Cheers, Kerry.

[Gazza]

The bloke who told you this Gary, needs a good rodgering. He is in a minority of " One " when it comes to thinking like that.

Better leave it there................ :-/

Phill

Gary ,the fish was NOT dead ,before clipping ,it IS illegal , and,and,and...

C&R Fishos MAIM fish ,is not a good headline :-X