Classifieds

View Poll Results: Would you like to see a state wide Rec Fishing Licence introduced in Qld

Voters
211. You may not vote on this poll
  • YES to the Qld Gov introducing a Rec Fishing Licence

    72 34.12%
  • NO to the Qld Gov introducing a Rec Fishing licence

    139 65.88%
Page 10 of 14 FirstFirst 1234567891011121314 LastLast
Results 136 to 150 of 198
  1. #136

    Re: Qld Rec Fishing Licence? Yes or No

    My thoughts are that if an amount of money is required for managing fisheries and boating etc it would be far better to be a levy added to boat rego. Maybe it could be described as waterway users tax or something, If they went the RFL way probably half of the revenue would be wasted on management and enforcement of the licence. I thought Campbell Newman was about removing the red tape....

  2. #137

    Re: Qld Rec Fishing Licence? Yes or No

    Think of really effective groups that get gov funding and decisions

    I'll start the list

    Cycling - No lic ,no fee, nadda. They are a very focused and well organised group who force existing expenditure to be used for their advantage.


    The problem with adding it to boat rego ( ski, pleasure,sailing cruiser) is that there are a lot of boats that are not used for fishing and many fishing boats have more than one person on board. I'm not sure on teh numbe rof boats compared to current lic fishermen in NSW . Land based fishers also wouldn't be contributing.

  3. #138

    Re: Qld Rec Fishing Licence? Yes or No

    Quote Originally Posted by Gazza View Post
    Respect your perspective Nagg ,and agree with your pov

    you also agree then , that you "CHOOSE" whether to pay a toll or camping "fee"...agreed??

    as it exists....
    we presently have a SIP/ppv , note "S" equals "Stocked" , RFL does not equal "stocked" ....you agree ??

    DO you further agree 'I' can choose whether to fish a "stocked impoundment" for a ....yep 110% worthy-fee concept that includes your wife ' n 2kids? (if <18)...mine R grown up ,or we CAN camp on a river reserve AT NO CHARGE , and fish Freshwater rivers AND Saltwater estuary/ocean ..... IF WE CHOOSE for no fee/tax/levy......"CHOOSE" is my keyword of choice.

    jmo , sorry for the bible non-rfl bash
    I've waffled on enough, BB rfl brigades turn
    Gazza

    2 key objectives to come from a RFL are Commercial buyouts & fish stocking (they would be mine anyhow) . The mulloway stocking in NSW has been a great success & I know that fisheries (NSW) were also looking into prawns & snapper (plus the 2 freshwater hatcheries)........ So yes fish stocking should be high on any list .
    I'm not too sure about what work the Qld government has done on fish stocking ( except for barramundi research many years ago) but there are private enterprises that could be supported initially.

    Chris
    Give a man a fish & he will eat for a day !
    Teach him how to fish
    & he will sit in a boat - & drink beer all day!
    TEAM MOJIKO

  4. #139

    Re: Qld Rec Fishing Licence? Yes or No

    Quote Originally Posted by Qlder1 View Post
    My thoughts are that if an amount of money is required for managing fisheries and boating etc it would be far better to be a levy added to boat rego. Maybe it could be described as waterway users tax or something, If they went the RFL way probably half of the revenue would be wasted on management and enforcement of the licence. I thought Campbell Newman was about removing the red tape....
    The trouble is (IMO) when you link fishing with ownership of a boat you miss a massive slice of the fishing public - sure there a lot of boats in qld ...... but there would be several times more fishermen fishing as deckies , fishing landbased , out of a tiny / yak that may not require registration .... or those 100,000 odd that cross the border to fish in Qld .
    In reality a RFL is in no uncertain terms a revenue stream . That revenue can be used directly for fishing outcomes ....... & if set up correctly allows our representatives to best determine how we would spend this income.

    Chris
    Give a man a fish & he will eat for a day !
    Teach him how to fish
    & he will sit in a boat - & drink beer all day!
    TEAM MOJIKO

  5. #140

    Re: Qld Rec Fishing Licence? Yes or No

    We might need to have a few fishos starve to death from lack of fish Cormorant to get the funding the cyclists do.

    And herein does lie a problem. Cyclists are non-polluting road users that don't suck up big licks of health care funds. Fishos are polluting, drinking, smoking, resource consuming, habitat damaging .....

    And fishos only comprise about 16% of the Qld population.

    So it's kind of understandable that the perception of the other 84% of the population is that we shouldn't be receiving government funding for our pleasure to further go about polluting, drinking, smoking ......


    And the government's ear would be leaning the way of the 84%.

    So although we might expect gov to come up with the funds, why would they? They don't know that net free regions are a conservation measure that will improve the commercial fishery. They don't know that our fisheries are even in trouble - FQ seem to be keeping that from them and there might be a motivating factor for that. They (gov) don't know that fishos from all around the world are going to come to fish our net free regions - or that they won't because we have none. They don't know about nets spooking fish and evolutionary changes and reduced fecundity.

  6. #141

    Re: Qld Rec Fishing Licence? Yes or No

    Anyone waiting for Fisheries/govt to lessen the impact of commercial interest should understand a very important point,fisheries charter and duty of care (so to speak) lies soley with the commercial fishers.Rec fishers are goverened so as not to impact on commercial catch......not the other way round.I don't care which side of the fence your on up there (for or against), but you are sadly mistaken if you think you are going to get more than a couple of crumbs that fall from the table without a vested interest in the fishery.

  7. #142

    Re: Qld Rec Fishing Licence? Yes or No

    Quote Originally Posted by NAGG View Post
    The trouble is (IMO) when you link fishing with ownership of a boat you miss a massive slice of the fishing public - sure there a lot of boats in qld ...... but there would be several times more fishermen fishing as deckies , fishing landbased , out of a tiny / yak that may not require registration .... or those 100,000 odd that cross the border to fish in Qld .
    In reality a RFL is in no uncertain terms a revenue stream . That revenue can be used directly for fishing outcomes ....... & if set up correctly allows our representatives to best determine how we would spend this income.

    Chris
    My point was that an RFL will rake in more money, but the sheer scale required to police it will negate any benefit of the extra dollars. I personally have no probs with land based fishers not paying,(except in stocked impoundments) and pleasure boaters and ski boats still use the water and ramps etc.

    I can also see no reason why a levy on rego would be easier to divert to general revenue than a RFL... rather than have a whole new govt. dept. managing this RFL we already have a perfectly good transport dept..

    It would be interesting to see the expected revenue less costs of admin and policing...I really hate the thought of money from fishing licences wasted by beaurocratic govt departments.

  8. #143

    Re: Qld Rec Fishing Licence? Yes or No

    Quote Originally Posted by Qlder1 View Post
    My point was that an RFL will rake in more money, but the sheer scale required to police it will negate any benefit of the extra dollars. I personally have no probs with land based fishers not paying,(except in stocked impoundments) and pleasure boaters and ski boats still use the water and ramps etc.

    I can also see no reason why a levy on rego would be easier to divert to general revenue than a RFL... rather than have a whole new govt. dept. managing this RFL we already have a perfectly good transport dept..

    It would be interesting to see the expected revenue less costs of admin and policing...I really hate the thought of money from fishing licences wasted by beaurocratic govt departments.
    I'm a bit open minded to how an RFL is spent & would love to see any admin cost minimised too ....
    I do see policing / enforcement as important as there are a hell of a lot of people out there that will either not buy an RFL or break the law ( how often do you hear the yellow raincoat brigade mentioned or share farmers) . Having fisheries flying squads hitting boat ramps or doing under cover work will quickly see the level of complience rise not just for buying a licence but also for bag and size limits .
    Now I wouldn't want to see government turn around and just use the RFL to fund fisheries but wouldn't mind if it meant that they spent some of it for additional measures .
    The same goes for fisheries research ...... yes additional funding could come for an RFL for say research into snapper , mangrove jack , mulloway or barramundi stocking as these will have a direct impact in future years ...... and we as fishoes can see the benefit .
    One of the downsides of any licence is the administration (collection / processing) The smaller the revenue stream the worst it will appear . Unless you can use some existing agency or online if possible ........ It's never going to be easy .

    Chris
    Give a man a fish & he will eat for a day !
    Teach him how to fish
    & he will sit in a boat - & drink beer all day!
    TEAM MOJIKO

  9. #144

    Re: Qld Rec Fishing Licence? Yes or No

    Quote Originally Posted by Slider View Post
    We might need to have a few fishos starve to death from lack of fish Cormorant to get the funding the cyclists do.

    And herein does lie a problem. Cyclists are non-polluting road users that don't suck up big licks of health care funds. Fishos are polluting, drinking, smoking, resource consuming, habitat damaging .....

    And fishos only comprise about 16% of the Qld population.

    So it's kind of understandable that the perception of the other 84% of the population is that we shouldn't be receiving government funding for our pleasure to further go about polluting, drinking, smoking ......


    And the government's ear would be leaning the way of the 84%.

    So although we might expect gov to come up with the funds, why would they? They don't know that net free regions are a conservation measure that will improve the commercial fishery. They don't know that our fisheries are even in trouble - FQ seem to be keeping that from them and there might be a motivating factor for that. They (gov) don't know that fishos from all around the world are going to come to fish our net free regions - or that they won't because we have none. They don't know about nets spooking fish and evolutionary changes and reduced fecundity.
    Slider - here in lies the problem - perception.

    Fishermen may make up 16%. but their families make up a hell of a lot more and people who have enjoyed the freedom of fishing if only for a couple of days make up a hell of a lot more.

    Everyone cycled as a kid - it was a freedom and people enjoyed it. It was for most of us our freedom

    Look at the actual % of people who seriously cycle as a commute - not many, but they demand huge respect and resource from every level of Govt as they are well organised. As soon as you mention that they should be Licensed they immediately say it will cost more than any possible benefit followed by the "look at the health benefits etc etc" and totally ignore the road space they utilise, it's capital cost and it's possible ecconomic value in increasing productivity.

    It is about perspective , how you target your campain and not about money raised. Money raised and Lic schemes box you in.

    Look at the green groups and teh way they lobby.

    Banshee comments on the whole fisheries charter and the commercial side show that no matter how much raised you are pushing crap uphill whan the original base policy is against you.

    There is a huge difference between being recogonised as a stakeholder ( and being walked over whilst doing fluffy things on the side) compared to being a key effective stakeholder who can affect wide ranging long term effective change . Once you start down one path it is very difficult to change and go down the longer term path.

    Here is another thing to consider.

    Lets say you spend 2 mill on extra fisheries staff and that is ongoing ( perpetual) of your 10 mill budget . You are locked in 100% forever as you can hardly ever in the future say that you don't need those officers and the govt doesn't up it's numbers ( or reduces them) and the RFL can be seen as reducing it's spend on enforcement. Fund ramp surveys - sheeeshhhhhh.

    So you are doing the govts money collecting, paying some of it's staff, paying for part of their program responsibilities and you are doing it to get a seat at the table to allocate a small protion of the overall fisheries budget.

    Have a good read of Rec fish SA today as they have just had rec fishers in posession limit added to their rules but no similar rules on commercial fishers. They have a seat at the table but it is not the main table .

  10. #145

    Re: Qld Rec Fishing Licence? Yes or No

    I'm only going by the stats - 750000 fishers out of a pop of 4.5 mil. And the cost of healthcare for smokers and drinkers is rather large. Rec angling does destroy habitat, kill fish, consume fossil fuel - you're not getting this point are you Cormorant?

    I did say earlier in the thread - think it was this thread anyway - that the rec fishing sector need to become more organised. But when Sunfish can only rustle up 4 paragraphs for their pre-election submission, then you can see we're in trouble straight away on that front. And they're not going to get organised, so what then are we supposed to do? Wait for gov to volunteer the funds when they aren't really even being asked for them? So no money coming from either of those sources, ahh bugger it we'll just let the fish stocks disappear - it's all too hard.

    Btw, cyclists - school age, commuting to work, cycling for fun/exercise, are road users. No infrastructure = deaths. Thus my point about us needing a few deaths from starvation - but you would have got that one surely.

  11. #146

    Re: Qld Rec Fishing Licence? Yes or No

    Quote Originally Posted by NAGG View Post
    Why do you refer to pro RFL supporters as bible bashers ? ........ as far as I'm concerned I see it as a better way forward ......... sorry , I should say "a way forward"

    I'm still yet to hear a sound argument for not having an RFL -- The best that they come up with is that "Government can't be trusted , It will go into consolidated revenue , we already pay GST on our fishing gear or that we already pay a amount when we register our trailers / boat's.......or - wait for it - - - - - Government should already be doing something"
    Yeh what ever! "

    Chris
    Hey Chris
    That's not my argument at all. I don't have an issue with trusting the government. Well I probably do, but it's got nothing to do with why I don't want a licence.
    I don't want to licence because it's another method of any qld government, labor or lnp, being able to control what I do.
    I already feel constricted enough without having to pay for what i consider my right. To fish where and when I want, within reason, so long as I'm not impacting on the environment.
    hope that makes sense

  12. #147

    Re: Qld Rec Fishing Licence? Yes or No

    Quote Originally Posted by Sheik View Post
    Hey Chris
    That's not my argument at all. I don't have an issue with trusting the government. Well I probably do, but it's got nothing to do with why I don't want a licence.
    I don't want to licence because it's another method of any qld government, labor or lnp, being able to control what I do.
    I already feel constricted enough without having to pay for what i consider my right. To fish where and when I want, within reason, so long as I'm not impacting on the environment.
    hope that makes sense
    Sorry, I know i'm going to be impacting on the env to some degree. My point is, within the realms of approved fisheries guidelines.

  13. #148

    Re: Qld Rec Fishing Licence? Yes or No

    Quote Originally Posted by Sheik View Post
    Hey Chris
    That's not my argument at all. I don't have an issue with trusting the government. Well I probably do, but it's got nothing to do with why I don't want a licence.
    I don't want to licence because it's another method of any qld government, labor or lnp, being able to control what I do.
    I already feel constricted enough without having to pay for what i consider my right. To fish where and when I want, within reason, so long as I'm not impacting on the environment.
    hope that makes sense
    Rights ..... yeh we all feel that we have a right to fish - cant argue there ........ but maybe in this day and age it's probably a privilege rather than a right - and just maybe we need to be putting something back .
    This is were I sit these days .... we just cant continue to take fish out of the system without doing things to preserve or restore or even improve things.
    Freshwater fishing in NSW is where I cut my teeth & it's where I have seen what can be achieved via a RFL - I saw a decline & then an improvement (NSW had a freshwater licence many years before it ever brought in an RFL) - Today you can head up the snowies or new england area and catch some great trout ( I wont argue to fors & against about trout as an introduced species ). Murray cod fishing has improved significantly - Eastern cod have been brought back from the brink , bass fisheries are on the improve & now work is being done on restoring stocks of silver perch.
    I know that I can take my kids out freshwater fishing today & they will probably have better results than when I was their age .
    Now maybe I'm a bit of a dreamer ...... but why couldn't we see something similar in the salt ( I actually know we can - Botany Bay in Sydney is the poster boy for a fishing turnaround)

    Chris
    Give a man a fish & he will eat for a day !
    Teach him how to fish
    & he will sit in a boat - & drink beer all day!
    TEAM MOJIKO

  14. #149

    Re: Qld Rec Fishing Licence? Yes or No

    NO,as all the moneys raised will only buy back inactive licences up for sale anyone that is useing there licence wont want to sell,the only thing this will achive is no fresh bait or fresh fish and more imported frozen bait,what you all got to consider is how would you like someone affecting your livley hood when all the recfishers only make up a very small percentage of the population and want to dictate to the many that want to eat some fresh seafood and have fresh bait that they will have to eat frozen imports, its a very greedy attitude to have to want it all to them selves,over population and development is the real cause to the decline of the fish population so were all to blame, some just want to pass the buck and blame a few, the only way to stay ahead of it is to restock,but whats the point when mother nature dictates whats happens with 2 flood 2 years running things arent good and will take time to recover.

  15. #150

    Re: Qld Rec Fishing Licence? Yes or No

    Quote Originally Posted by chris69 View Post
    NO,as all the moneys raised will only buy back inactive licences up for sale anyone that is useing there licence wont want to sell,the only thing this will achive is no fresh bait or fresh fish and more imported frozen bait,what you all got to consider is how would you like someone affecting your livley hood when all the recfishers only make up a very small percentage of the population and want to dictate to the many that want to eat some fresh seafood and have fresh bait that they will have to eat frozen imports, its a very greedy attitude to have to want it all to them selves,over population and development is the real cause to the decline of the fish population so were all to blame, some just want to pass the buck and blame a few, the only way to stay ahead of it is to restock,but whats the point when mother nature dictates whats happens with 2 flood 2 years running things arent good and will take time to recover.
    Any buyback that is voluntary is a waste of money ..... no two ways about it ! - buyouts need relate to entire systems and make them recreational only.
    You are quite correct lives will be affected but lets face it - a indiscriminate method like netting should not be used on inshore / estuary waters anyway. In this day and age we should be look more to aquaculture as a means of providing seafood. That episode of the pro's moving in to Gladstone and targeting the barra that come over from lake awoonga was disgusting ..... specially when most of the thousands of fish were dumped .
    As far as Rec fishers making up only a small part of the population goes ...... we need to keep in mind what recreational fishing does for local economies in tourist dollars - take away the fish and you loose the fishing tourism ....... 2 or 3 pro licences will have a lesser effect .
    It's not about passing the buck - it's about what is sustainable .......... and yes we do have to be mindful of what impact we all have on a fishery.

    Chris
    Give a man a fish & he will eat for a day !
    Teach him how to fish
    & he will sit in a boat - & drink beer all day!
    TEAM MOJIKO

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