YES
NO
No ! Governments broke, sell off's ?!?!??!! Penny pinching ? Not for me
The answer to this question is in one of the four options presently being included by Fisheries in a Regulatory Impact Statement which will be released next year for public comment. Lets hope that the correct option gets the nod. A general fishing licence is not an option
Cheers
Barry
fishing costs enough as it is with out paying for a stupid licence , so instead of trying to grub more bucks from the poor fisho how about grub the bucks from all them other mobs fishing the big bucks from us instead?
nooooooooooo
Scott..the answer is policing of current regulations..and bag and size limit controls...NOT paying people to sit on some board and reckon they represent all rec anglers. Round and round and round you go again....the reality is Scott..you pocketed money from being on the NSW board..I find that offensive and disgusting..and you reckon you represented rec anglers? By pocketing their money.
Let the dollars and your ego have a rest for a while.
ECOFishers QLD recently held there AGM & the response from members was a big NO !
Damo.
Ahh Pinhead - You can't see the logic in having committee members compensated for the dedication & time in representing their area's , which really comes at a marginal cost when you look at the total revenue potentially available. BUT you see more value in paying to be a members of "lobby" organization so they can be heard independently
It has been a long 3 months since I raised this topic & I appreciate the comment & time from all who responded.This is not a conclusive discussion by any means - rather a way of getting the angling community to discuss their options.
I believe the next 12 months will be an important period for the rec angling community in Qld & I hope to see as much participation when it counts.
Regards Scotto
Last edited by Scott Mitchell; 29-11-2009 at 09:13 AM.
So we sould throw money at a dictatership that is broke !!!! (Bligh ?)
History says we are about to get shafted once again (Snapper ?!)
Get ready for a pineapple !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Damo
Might as well bring out an exam for it and charge you for that as well
You can study up on your fishing rules fish identification green zones and so on .
$30 here another $30 there. if you pass or not.
That will fix up a few recreational fishing people when they can't pass the test
then they can fine you another $30 for not having a fishing license
WTG.
[quote=Scott Mitchell;1102673]Ahh Pinhead - You can't see the logic in having committee members compensated for the dedication & time in representing their area's , which really comes at a marginal cost when you look at the total revenue potentially available. BUT you see more value in paying to be a members of "lobby" organization so they can be heard independently
Once again I deleted what I typed..no more comment on an rfl for Qld from me...I am strictly against it and will fight it anyway I can if one is proposed.
No!!
No!!
No!!
No!!
No!!
No!!
No!!
Some good reading on Alternative funding solutions can be found @ http://www.recfish.com.au/old%20site...Associates.pdf
Quote:
"Recommendation 1: Roll out of licences at State/Territory level subject to public benefit test findings.
State/Territory Governments should roll out recreational fishing licences (RFLs) where they are deemed to pass a public benefit test – potential benefits include: (i) enhanced ‘beneficiary pays’/equity; (ii) greater management control; and (iii) greater transparency in funding decisions. This will be offset by implementation and annual administration/compliance costs. A licence – quite apart from raising revenue – is considered an important first step in being able to understand the potential impact of these fishers.
As an example, there are up to 750,000 recreational fishers in Queensland, and establishing a firm database of all fishers greatly facilitates surveys which, in turn, support improved understanding of the social and economic value of the sector as well as impacts on fish resources."
It's all about "options"
Regards Scotto
I'm sure I read this on another thread......
Cheers,
Chris
Carbon Really Ain't Pollution.