Maxg
08-12-2002, 12:47 PM
Because I don't get on WA boards I'm going to put my view up here. And it is simply this.
While we have the fisheries pandering to the greens, and the pro's and advising the Gov, there will never be an acceptance by Gov of the need to give any credance to the Recfish claims that we should have a say. And it ends up "no pay, no say".
The idea that there should be a rec license send shivers through the opposition and they are supported by anglers who cannot see the woods for the trees. We should ALL pay to fish, its only a small cost but it means then that the Gov HAS to listen to what license holders say, they can no longer whitewash the recfish view.
I'll happily pay a license fee, because it will stick a big noose around the Gov's throat, and they will have to take note of what licensed fisho's want. They happily grab the GsT from tackle etc sales so they should listen but they prefer to give us the shaft. Go for a license, give Gallop the trots. Max
While we have the fisheries pandering to the greens, and the pro's and advising the Gov, there will never be an acceptance by Gov of the need to give any credance to the Recfish claims that we should have a say. And it ends up "no pay, no say".
The idea that there should be a rec license send shivers through the opposition and they are supported by anglers who cannot see the woods for the trees. We should ALL pay to fish, its only a small cost but it means then that the Gov HAS to listen to what license holders say, they can no longer whitewash the recfish view.
I'll happily pay a license fee, because it will stick a big noose around the Gov's throat, and they will have to take note of what licensed fisho's want. They happily grab the GsT from tackle etc sales so they should listen but they prefer to give us the shaft. Go for a license, give Gallop the trots. Max