Page 2 of 50 FirstFirst 123456789101112 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 748

Thread: LNP Fishing policy

  1. #16

    Re: LNP Fishing policy

    Quote Originally Posted by finga View Post
    boat rego's capped??? How high is the cap?? What does capped mean exactly??


    Good point about the SIP Mike. A question I'd like to hear the answer to.
    Capped means that regos will stay the same and won't increase.........right up until the next increase. I thought Can Do capped my rates at no more than CPI, until I got the bill. Besides, how can the LNP be taken seriously if they claimed the last boat rego increases by Labor were outragious (which they are if you have a large boat) but when they get in it's ok to leave them as is and just cap them? Isn't that hypocritical?
    If the LNP think regos are way too high they should be lowering them. Nothing to stop it being done either. When the Goss Government got in power in 89 they reduced boat rego fees because they thought the Nat's rego increases had been too high.

    Yes finga I would love for Mark to explain Mr Newman's bright idea about the SIPs, hopefuly it's only just that at the moment.

  2. #17

    Re: LNP Fishing policy

    Mike D,

    What was his bright idea on SIPs,? as capped till the next increase is totally self explanatory from a pollie ..but 'Newman' and 'bright idea' in the same sentence? he hasnt come out with an idea yet as he is doing a Sgt Schultz till elected and seeing the books.

    Has 'Can Do Schultz' pulled a hammie or a groin on this SIPs thing?
    Tangles KFC


  3. #18

    Re: LNP Fishing policy

    Quote Originally Posted by PinHead View Post
    They have all lost me..can someone just come out and say..WE WILL DO THIS THIS AND THIS.
    I have been noticing this trend in what comes out of politicians gobs.
    If they say they're going to do something....they don't.
    If they say they're not going to do something... they do.
    If they say they're going to fix this.... they don't.
    If they say they're not going to fix it.....they don't.
    If they say something is not going to rise in cost...it does.
    If they say the cost is going to rise inline with CPI....then it's 10 times the CPI rate.
    If they spruke about the good job they've done....they've done JJ's cousin Jack. Jack Sh!t that is.
    The list can go on for-ever I reckon
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Delisser View Post
    Capped means that regos will stay the same and won't increase.........right up until the next increase. I thought Can Do capped my rates at no more than CPI, until I got the bill.
    So when capped comes out of the gob of a politician means about the same, and has about the same number of clauses and explanations and exemptions as when capped comes out the gob of a Telstra or Vodafone or any other mobile phone seller?? ie means Jack Poo.

    We ask our insurance companies for plain English policies....we get them (kinda)
    We ask advertisers for truth in advertising....they're supposed to be very honest. Governments have pushed for these.
    How come politicians do not have to, nor do they, follow the same guidelines. You know...the practice what you preach kinda stuff???
    I intend on living for-ever....so far so good


  4. #19

    Re: LNP Fishing policy

    Watching this thread with a feeling of angst.

    Can anyone who has replied here please post up THEIR , fully funded rec fishing policy / policies for all to disect.

    That way, we can at least compare apples with apples in regard to what should or will be done to assist the Rec fishing industry in Qld.

    Me ?

    Yes...... in short, I have proposed a number of issues and have submitted them to the LNP & ALP.

    1. The boat rego thing was one of them capping the current fee and only increasing with CPI.

    2. Artificial reef roll out proposal has been submitted and is fully funded.

    3. Recreational Fishing Havens be established and one in particular ( not my idea but is fully supported ) is in the Cooloola Coast area. Ideally in SEQ, Fraser, Moreton and Stradbroke island beaches become Rec Fishing Havens.

    Many other issues have been put on the table and need addressing.

    Stocked impoundments....... species and impoundments better managed
    Protection of Mangrove forshores
    Healthy Waterways........... no good producing a report if nothing is done to achieve better results
    Dubious Green zones removed or moved
    Reduction of the trawl industry in significant populated regions
    Assistance to Aquaculture and Marine Farming
    Much better managment of National Parks for both land and water areas
    Significantly increased penalities for " Shameatures " and the retailers they supply
    Cross border parity in Fishing Regulations
    Retail fish marketing to be consistant and ALL species in retail to be consistant with Qld Regs.
    All unused commercial licences ( 12 months, non use ) to be revoked.
    ALL commercial by-catch to be consistant with recreational regulations

    There are still many things that need addressing in the short term and certainly more in the long term. The recreational industry needs a vision, a plan for the very long term and in saying that, steps need to be taken now to alleviate the current concerns and misguided regulations.

    Queenslands future is not in mining, LNG, CSG etc, it is in a Sustainable food source industry where the world beats a path to our door for our crops and more-so the worlds tourists turn up in droves to fish our plentiful marine and aquatic waters.

    I have much more to say on this matter and most of it goes directly to LNP & ALP headquarters. No point blowing smoke around the forums if you do nothing or say nothing where it really counts.

    Like it or not, politics runs our lives and severly impacts on our leisure time, including fishing. Deal with it.

    Let's also not forget, that the departments of Government remain despite a change of Government and sometimes, this is where decisions are made for the betterment of the industry.



    LP.
    Kingfisher Painting Solutions:- Domestic and Commercial.

    For further information, contact details, quotes or advice - Click Here





  5. #20

    Re: LNP Fishing policy

    I can understand your frustration Phill, and i personally find some people's suggestions (not necessarilly in this thread) completely unfeasible and unreasonable.

    I also tend to agree with you in that blowing off steam on a forum is definitely not the correct way to get yourself heard or even make a difference, however big kudos to Mark Robinson for taking the time to comment and also listen/read other's comments on here where his opposite number has remained silent.

    There is one thing that we all do have to understand and live with however, and that is the fact that this thread is all about LNP policy (leaked or otherwise) and not about recreational anglers trying to make a difference. In this regard, this thread is only about the LNP or the ALP trying to sell policy to the recreational angling public in order to buy votes. That is why I stand by my comment that the LNP's "one line allowed in green zones" leaked???? policy is every bit of a political red herring that the ALP's "you can take female muddies" was.

    My despair, is that good fisheries and waterways management goes way deeper than superficial political stunts and we haven't seen any serious policy yet other than these two bits of brilliance from the two major parties. If these two policies indicate the level of seriousness that the two major parties are taking with the issue of waterways and fisheries management then god help us all.

  6. #21

    Re: LNP Fishing policy

    I think the main problem is people are sick and tired of the crap that comes out of politicians mouths Phill. All words and no positive action.
    About the only action we see id stop gap measures (trying to appease a few) and increasing fees and fewer options to enjoy an outdoor lifestyle.
    If they actually did something visible that would help us instead of just yammering on about it would sooth many of us I reckon.
    And were all sick and tired of getting positively hammered harder every day of the week (in regard to lifestyle, recreation and amenities) with no improvements in sight. I know I seem to be getting further and further behind the eight ball where my lifestyle is concerned. I'm sure others feel the same.
    Some of your suggestions seem a very logical thing to do. And they would appear to be a simple thing to do. Could that be why they have not been done? Too simple and logical??

    How refreshing it would be to have some decent research/discussions/studies done to determine the true state of the environment (which includes pelicans, people and places), have some decisions made without the influence of minorities??
    You know....have the environment as major stake holder.....not the green's, not the developers and not the areas of government who seem to move the goal posts all the time to suit themselves ie storm water run-off, dredging for airport etc etc.

    What happens to all the money the State gets from boat rego's??
    Ramps?? Facilities???
    I intend on living for-ever....so far so good


  7. #22

    Re: LNP Fishing policy

    Representing the interests of Recreational Fishing
    No Green Areas Without Independent Science

    Mr. Bateman Deputy Chairman of Sunfish today recognised the statement by the LNP to allow limited fishing in Marine Park Green Zones as a progressive step. He said that the existing Green zones in most State Marine Parks had been established with little or no science to justify their establishment.

    “The latest ones in Moreton Bay were created by Marine Parks to satisfy a percentage that even exceeded that recommended by their own scientific panel. Along the rest of the coast green zones were created to complement the GBRMPA zoning plan and few had any of the essential characteristics worthy of total protection”, he said.

    "Sunfish is not suggesting that anglers be able to access all the Green zones as some are recognised as being environmentally significant and need full protection”, Mr. Bateman said. However others could be opened to LIMITED RECREATIONAL fishing activities that do not disturb the substrate such as trolling or drifting USING ONE LINE ONLY PER ANGLER.

    The problem our members have is that there is no science that says recreational fishing is detrimental to the environment. It may have some temporary effect on fish stocks but most fish migrate within or travel up to hundreds of kilometres in any ecosystem. The worst part is that there is no prior data to assess whether or not any change has occurred since fishing was stopped.

    “Fishing is already governed by a multitude of regulations all designed to maintain sustainable fish stocks and is administered by Fisheries Queensland “, he said.

    Sunfish will work with any government to ensure the integrity of the environment is maintained but won’t accept ambit closures to fishing that are not backed by reliable independent science Mr. Bateman said.

    Contact Points – Mr. David Bateman AM 3880 4261

    Mrs. Judy Lynne 3882 4518

    Regards
    Judy Lynne
    Executive Officer
    Sunfish Queensland Inc 23 November, 2011
    Ph 07 3882 4518
    Fax 07 3882 5680
    Mob 0409 056 437
    PO BOX 3013 Warner QLD 4500 Phone (07) 3882 4518
    www.sunfishqld.com.au ABN 26 590 693 754
    Fishing for the Future
    MEDIA RELEASE

    ...
    ..
    .
    LP
    Kingfisher Painting Solutions:- Domestic and Commercial.

    For further information, contact details, quotes or advice - Click Here





  8. #23

    Re: LNP Fishing policy

    A copy of a letter to Mark



    Dear Mark
    My name is Robert Anderson and I am a participant on the Ausfish chatboard where I have sometimes contributed to discussions with or about you and current or future policy directions.

    Mark I have a strong conviction that management practices for fisheries have been based on maintaining a remnant population.

    I cannot see why a set of management practices cannot be adopted that has as its long term goal the restoration of the original biomass of all commercial & recreational take species.

    I do not believe in leaving it to chance and hoping the various remnant populations can sustain themselves because inevitably these populations will come under more pressure both from fishing in all its guises, and from environmental factors, pollution habitat loss etc etc.
    Under the current paradigm the only management tools are an increasingly restricted access to the resource

    A responsible government should be looking 50-100 years into the future and putting in place policy structures to ensure that fishing will still be a way of life then.

    As you know past practices both commercial and recreational have been extremely wasteful and have left us with a diminished fishery across the board.

    We should make a start on replacing what we take.That is replace the take with a recruitment that is, when at legal size the equivalent of that years harvest. Taking into account natural rates of survival.


    We have data on spawning survival rates of many of our target species and we have harvest data (commercial at least) Various government departments have not been not unpracticed in extrapolating such data to suit their particular policy objectives in the past. Perhaps the can turn their attention to supporting a progressive paradigm.

    I call on the L N P to instigate a program designed to replace the take.
    The mechanism I suggest is to have DERM/DEEDI spawn and release hundreds of millions of individuals at the times and in the locations of naturally occurring recruitment events for all the various taken species.
    I do not advocate an expensive grow out process, rather an assisted recruitment process, that is, get the "hatch" past the first most critical stages till it is 10-15mm then let it go and take it chances.

    This process mimics nature and enhances the food chain near the bottom. An individual that does not survive through predation or other mortality directly assists the food chain

    Now the scientists will tell you this will not work.But their objection is based on the lack of an effective means to monitor results.
    It will work and it is the smart way to ensure the future.

    The funding mechanism initially is through the recreational vessel levy attached to vessel registration and a appropriate & proportionate impost on commercial take.

    If this program is vigorously pursued, in time, fishing both commercial and recreational will improve. Commercial take and employment opportunities in the fishery improve .
    Recreational fishing and fishing tourism will improve and increased participation will generate GST revenue.

    Imagine a Queensland where it is easy to take a kid fishing.Its easy to catch a feed like it was when i was a kid.
    There is no reason not to try to achieve this.
    Not to try is a dereliction of our duty to our future generations

    Kind regards
    Robert Anderson




  9. #24

    Re: LNP Fishing policy

    Yes Rob,

    Sow the seeds and reap the harvest.

    Think of this as " Fishing Superannuation "...

    cheers Phill
    Kingfisher Painting Solutions:- Domestic and Commercial.

    For further information, contact details, quotes or advice - Click Here





  10. #25

    Re: LNP Fishing policy

    Quote Originally Posted by Lucky_Phill View Post
    Watching this thread with a feeling of angst.

    Can anyone who has replied here please post up THEIR , fully funded rec fishing policy / policies for all to disect.

    That way, we can at least compare apples with apples in regard to what should or will be done to assist the Rec fishing industry in Qld.

    Me ?

    Yes...... in short, I have proposed a number of issues and have submitted them to the LNP & ALP.

    1. The boat rego thing was one of them capping the current fee and only increasing with CPI.

    2. Artificial reef roll out proposal has been submitted and is fully funded.

    3. Recreational Fishing Havens be established and one in particular ( not my idea but is fully supported ) is in the Cooloola Coast area. Ideally in SEQ, Fraser, Moreton and Stradbroke island beaches become Rec Fishing Havens.

    Many other issues have been put on the table and need addressing.

    Stocked impoundments....... species and impoundments better managed
    Protection of Mangrove forshores
    Healthy Waterways........... no good producing a report if nothing is done to achieve better results
    Dubious Green zones removed or moved
    Reduction of the trawl industry in significant populated regions
    Assistance to Aquaculture and Marine Farming
    Much better managment of National Parks for both land and water areas
    Significantly increased penalities for " Shameatures " and the retailers they supply
    Cross border parity in Fishing Regulations
    Retail fish marketing to be consistant and ALL species in retail to be consistant with Qld Regs.
    All unused commercial licences ( 12 months, non use ) to be revoked.
    ALL commercial by-catch to be consistant with recreational regulations

    There are still many things that need addressing in the short term and certainly more in the long term. The recreational industry needs a vision, a plan for the very long term and in saying that, steps need to be taken now to alleviate the current concerns and misguided regulations.

    Queenslands future is not in mining, LNG, CSG etc, it is in a Sustainable food source industry where the world beats a path to our door for our crops and more-so the worlds tourists turn up in droves to fish our plentiful marine and aquatic waters.

    I have much more to say on this matter and most of it goes directly to LNP & ALP headquarters. No point blowing smoke around the forums if you do nothing or say nothing where it really counts.

    Like it or not, politics runs our lives and severly impacts on our leisure time, including fishing. Deal with it.

    Let's also not forget, that the departments of Government remain despite a change of Government and sometimes, this is where decisions are made for the betterment of the industry.



    LP.

    we are not the ones standing for public office, Phill. Those that aspire to these positions are the ones that have to show us their funded policies. If they want our votes then the ball is in their court to provide us with the relevant information.

  11. #26

    Re: LNP Fishing policy

    Quote Originally Posted by rando View Post
    A copy of a letter to Mark



    Dear Mark
    My name is Robert Anderson and I am a participant on the Ausfish chatboard where I have sometimes contributed to discussions with or about you and current or future policy directions.

    Mark I have a strong conviction that management practices for fisheries have been based on maintaining a remnant population.

    I cannot see why a set of management practices cannot be adopted that has as its long term goal the restoration of the original biomass of all commercial & recreational take species.

    I do not believe in leaving it to chance and hoping the various remnant populations can sustain themselves because inevitably these populations will come under more pressure both from fishing in all its guises, and from environmental factors, pollution habitat loss etc etc.
    Under the current paradigm the only management tools are an increasingly restricted access to the resource

    A responsible government should be looking 50-100 years into the future and putting in place policy structures to ensure that fishing will still be a way of life then.

    As you know past practices both commercial and recreational have been extremely wasteful and have left us with a diminished fishery across the board.

    We should make a start on replacing what we take.That is replace the take with a recruitment that is, when at legal size the equivalent of that years harvest. Taking into account natural rates of survival.


    We have data on spawning survival rates of many of our target species and we have harvest data (commercial at least) Various government departments have not been not unpracticed in extrapolating such data to suit their particular policy objectives in the past. Perhaps the can turn their attention to supporting a progressive paradigm.

    I call on the L N P to instigate a program designed to replace the take.
    The mechanism I suggest is to have DERM/DEEDI spawn and release hundreds of millions of individuals at the times and in the locations of naturally occurring recruitment events for all the various taken species.
    I do not advocate an expensive grow out process, rather an assisted recruitment process, that is, get the "hatch" past the first most critical stages till it is 10-15mm then let it go and take it chances.

    This process mimics nature and enhances the food chain near the bottom. An individual that does not survive through predation or other mortality directly assists the food chain

    Now the scientists will tell you this will not work.But their objection is based on the lack of an effective means to monitor results.
    It will work and it is the smart way to ensure the future.


    The funding mechanism initially is through the recreational vessel levy attached to vessel registration and a appropriate & proportionate impost on commercial take.

    If this program is vigorously pursued, in time, fishing both commercial and recreational will improve. Commercial take and employment opportunities in the fishery improve .
    Recreational fishing and fishing tourism will improve and increased participation will generate GST revenue.

    Imagine a Queensland where it is easy to take a kid fishing.Its easy to catch a feed like it was when i was a kid.
    There is no reason not to try to achieve this.
    Not to try is a dereliction of our duty to our future generations

    Kind regards
    Robert Anderson



    is their evidence that this will work ???

  12. #27

    Re: LNP Fishing policy

    Quote Originally Posted by PinHead View Post
    is their evidence that this will work ???
    Yes there is,,, naturally recruited populations grow to maturity everywhere all the time.

    Is there evidence it wont?????

  13. #28

    Re: LNP Fishing policy

    Salt water restocking does work and has been proved to work.
    You only need to research the NSW data on restocking Jewfish into some estuaries and the success of those fisheries.

  14. #29

    Re: LNP Fishing policy

    In my management model ALL take species would be subject to assisted recruitment , In spring whiting and flathead In winter tailor bream snapper etc,,, prawns crabs, pillies, mullet even hardyheads mussels & oysters as their spawning seasons roll round.
    The object being to move towards a restoration of the original biomass.

    60 odd years of trawling bycatch and indiscriminate bag limits has damaged most populations to the point that without assistance the best that can be hoped for is maintaining the current remmnant.
    But that will not be possible over the long term due to a natural increase of the various pressures on populations and the end result can only be tighter regulation

  15. #30

    Re: LNP Fishing policy

    Quote Originally Posted by PinHead View Post
    we are not the ones standing for public office, Phill. Those that aspire to these positions are the ones that have to show us their funded policies. If they want our votes then the ball is in their court to provide us with the relevant information.


    Thing is, where do they get the " revelant " information from...

    As we all know, some folks that get into politics have never lived in the real world ( Andrew Fraser comes to mind ), so they don't have a clue and rely on " advice ".

    If I were to run for office and aspire to serve the people I represent and having the background I do, where do I get my info from....... certainly not the halls of government as that is tainted already. Me... I'd be asking the questions of the people....

    Having the people asking me what I would do about xyz, leaves me open to scrutiny and ridicule should I not have the answers. I say to them, " what's your opinion, solution, advice or information " that can assist me making good decisions for you.

    No pollie has all the answers and those that say they have, are BS'ing.

    We know 90% of the population will vote for an extra $ in their pay packet and hang the consequences of bad environmental, employment and leisure-time decisions. Who is going to vote for a pollie that says " I'll let you keep an extra snapper " ?.................................. Times up......... NO ONE. It is the nature of the beast. Smart voters, vote for the party platform and hope that they keep most of their promises.

    I for one, do not expect pollies to be perfect, to have all the answers or indeed please all their constituents, but I do expect to have my opinions, thoughts, ideas and advice heard and noted.

    I still don't think people realise that they do have an impact on decisions made by the major parties. It may not seem so at the time, but the " party machine " whos job it is to get their mates elected next election do in fact take on board what the community is willing to vote for. This can be clearly seen in the past few elections where localised results were attributed to " community input " where the voters demanded change and got it. It may only be small steps, but it is noticable. So noticable in fact, we all here know the results of " ministerial " interference in FQ policy and management. The Ivory Tower seat warmers in ALP HQ are hearing the Rec fishing voice. It would be very wise if ALL canditates and parties took note of the smell of change in the air.


    Let's see:-


    “ if you don't change the regs, you don't care “


    “ if you promise to change them, you only want my vote “


    Is that how it goes ?


    I understand and respect peoples cynicism towards government, but I prefer the “ glass half full “ world. Yes, I know, out there on the limb of the “ dreamers “ tree, but hey, I can see clearly from this far up .



    bed time......... nite !




    LP
    Kingfisher Painting Solutions:- Domestic and Commercial.

    For further information, contact details, quotes or advice - Click Here





Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Join us