hhmm I can see that Scott has got a lot of exposure during this post, and all for free.
YES
NO
hhmm I can see that Scott has got a lot of exposure during this post, and all for free.
MMM Caught myself a politician fish..
Sorry scotto it was a baited hook. knowing full well what your response would be.
regards
HOnda
Scott still trying to understand how a RFL will help improve fishing for me on the sunny coast...
So in the interest of fair play could you tell me 5 things that in your opinion you would do to improve the fishing in Queensland. please be specific not generalize your response. i mean like build artifical rees not do studies or s..it.
just trying to gauge your angle on this cause i still fail to see how money will improve fisheries. FIP is working cause the fish stocking program is contained within the dams or weirs.
i think you should really look hard at the fact that the government will not allow any group to control that much money or say in what you might think is yours to control. we will only be allowed to put forward ideas and all money will be used as the government sees fit.
i have mates in fisheries and even they agree money will not fix the corruption that is riff in this government and the fisheries dept. money will not fix out fisheries mate it will jst bleed us dry, you might have the money to waste but most of us spend more than enough just going fishing now.
but i am iterested in your list of 5 things to improve the fisheries and please be specific. the first 5 thing you would do mate
thanks kel....................
Kel - It is not up to me - but I am happy to outline some of the pro's & con's of the proposed model discussed here & what I believe could be achieved :-
PRO's
* PPV levy would be removed
* The current SIP's program would be removed as it currently sits - taking an average of the last three years monies raised being transferred across to the freshwater trust account to kick off with.
* A number ( ? ) of Recreational angling only area's be identified - where ALL commercial effort could be brought out.No further commercial fishing can take place in these areas again.
* ALL the money raised will go into two TRUST ACCOUNTS - one for freshwater & one for saltwater
* TOTAL administration fee to run the program will be capped at 10% of total revenue raised & allocated to DPI&F
* ALL venue raised under via "the proposed" general rec fee/license would be managed by expenditure committee's consisting of key user groups with representatives from across the state.
* These trust expenditure committees WILL DECIDE where the money will be best spent & will direct DPI&F on how we would like to see our fisheries managed & will appoint research priorities to be conducted by "independent" biologists.
* Taking ownership of our recreational fisheries
Con's -
* Receiving "even- balanced" input on how the money will be best spent ?
* Selection & the process for selecting the recreational angling only area's
* Costing the real value of commercial effort to be brought out of teh rec fishing only areas.
* re-location of commercial effort from the rec fishing only areas
* Managing compliance
"Potential" projects that could be achieved with funding support :-
If you have the money & control over how it can be spent - it's up to state based priorities then
- Angling facilities
- Artificial reefs
- Communication and education
- Essential research
- Fish Aggregating Devices - FADs
- Fish stocking
- Fishcare volunteer program
- Fisheries Officers
- Fishing competition management
- Fishing event management
- Fishing workshops
- Gamefish tagging program
- Habitat Action Grants (funding up to $30,000)
- Habitat restoration programs
- Recreational fishing expenditure report
- Recreational Fishing Havens
- Recreational fishing management
- Recreational fishing survey
- Research and economic reports
- Small grants program
If we get stung with a species specific permit system - it will be the beginning of the end in my view - Just like if you think we're not headed towards a general rec license system you have your head in the sand - So "I" suggest we start campaigning for a model that will give us the most control .
The eternal optimist - Scotto
Scott, I have a question for you.
Let me reflect on the 2 polls posted here.
First poll: 41.5% in favour of a rec licence, 49.5% against it.
Second Poll:24.6% in favour of a rec licence, 75.4% against it.
Clearly the majority do not want a licence. I think the first debate may have influenced the second poll. I would like to say that the AF members are a bit better educated on the topic now, but I cant be certain on that. The second poll is much closer to the repsonses that I get from all the local rec fisherman in my area.
So , my question to you Scott, given the fact that the majority of rec anglers do not want a rec licence, are you as a representative of Sunfish going to continue to push for a RFL?
Of course he is mate, he has made that very clear.
Andy - get your head out of the sand mate. Even your Eco president ( Chris ) is hearing that a RFL is clearly on the cards in the not to distant future. I also believe this to be the case & stated this poll to get the wider community discussing it - understanding the pro's & con's ,having been involved in the process in NSW.
"If" given the choice - I will continue to push for a model along the lines of the NSW one as I believe it is A LOT better than the WA model. I also believe a RFL that holds the TOTAL revenue raised in TRUST ACCOUNTS & allows direct input from the rec fishing community in how it is spent - is a lot better than where we are now as well.
So "I" say start thinking about what is the better of what some may see as bad options & get behind one - before the decision is made for us.
If we get a Species specific permit for snapper - It will the first step towards the WA model !
Regards Scotto
persoanlity
Yes absolutely correct a little applied education and the reasonable masses will then vote with their mind and logic, there will always be the elitist go get em, look at me nich (fanatical) element within Angling often easily identified by their chosen Angling method - will always vote based solely on their chosen self serving ideology.
Sadly this is the element fishery's management and government in general always hunts out to align with when chasing backup for more ideological regulation, never do they represent the masses and given the clinical personality type needed for this they simply cannot see past which side their own bread is buttered and never will.
It's been a fascinating experiment watching these two polls, it would be hard to argue that once the typical masses get an applied sniff of what it's actually all about...only 1 in 4 of all Anglers will ever vote for any licence!
The trick is to poll when/where the massed are as ignorant/nich orientated as possible, then extol only those results as some sort of reality...it's pretty low but seen as politically acceptable behaviour by these types, fishery and government loves them to bits.
cheers fnq
I am hearing an RFL is being watched - the WA model. There is no movement within Fisheries to put one in place and a discussion document has been created within the Government on the implications of one. I can't recall having said it is in the not too distant future.
Cheers,
Chris