new bag limits

[agnes_jack]

Phill
To me a possesion limit refers to all fish you have in your possesion. This includes what you have in the freezer at home. A bag limit refers to what you can catch on any particular day, taking into account what you have at home in the freezer and deducting those from your days catch. Therefore if you caught 5 hussar yesterday and they are at home in the freezer, then today you cannot keep any hussar. This therefore means that today you can only keep only 15 coral reef fin fish but no hussar.
I am still unsure about grass sweetlip, basically if they are a coral reef fish then they should be included in the in possesion limit of 20 reef fish, and therefore Should have a bag and possesion limit of 20.

Hope that confuses the issue even more

Tony

[mackmauler]

Tony, grass sweetlip are not on the lists where is your doubt coming from although i can understand some doubt, yes Phill it is the joke of the day ???

Rob

[Lucky_Phill]

Well, Tony, let me say this.

You will never read in the papers that a rec angler has had his freezer raided by authorities and was found to have 3 fish too many as per the possession limit.

A raid on your freezer at home will take the resources of QFS, DPI, Qld police and Courts to issue search warrants. This will not happen.

Possession will be in your boat, in your esky and while at the boat ramp, the day anyone gets pulled up going home, at home etc, I'll give up fishing and take up knitting.

NO, Tony, a Bag limit does not mean what you catch on a particular day, a bag limit is on Fish. Possession is what the angler has in his possession. The definition of ' in possession ' is really up to interpretation.

Once the fish is in my freezer, it is no longer in my possession. That's my interpretation. Shoot, if I have 6 kids at home, I can say those 20 Hussar are 5 each for 4 of me kids. Get the picture.

The best bet is to have the regs in ya boat, say that you don't quite understand them and can the officer please explain them FULLY, including scientific names, possession interpretations and bag limits.

Put the emphasis back onto the people who are there to inforce the law. These people will eventually ask their bosses for change.

These regs are confusing enough, and Yes Tony, you're adding to it ???

Mateeee, I think we'll just take it as it comes.

Cheers Phill

[NQCairns]

Hi Agnes, you could well be right? if taken to the letter of the law but fisheries regulations are not real laws to the common man (like common law is) so they can do more or less as they like without fear of justice being done in most cases. Yes you did confuse me more but thats an easy task,nq

[jaybee]

Phil from what I read into it, you have some right and some wrong. So I guess none of us will get it right. Just wonder when they are going to start closing off some of moreton bay next eh.
1.5 Regulated fish (i.e. fish taken in excess of a bag limit)
Some confusion exists regarding interpretation of the provisions within the Regulation (and some management
plans) regarding regulated fish with respect to limits on taking and/or possession of certain numbers of fish
(often referred to as ‘bag limits’).
Specifically, relevant concerns relate to the use of the terms ‘take’ and ‘possession’ and the meanings of those
terms as they are used for prohibitions about regulated fish. Ordinarily, with fish that are regulated by size,
gender or other physical characteristics it is possible to determine that a person has either taken or possesses
such a regulated fish and the relevant offence can be proven. However, when fish are regulated by limits on
numbers confusion arises, primarily with regard to the time periods during which the prohibitions on taking and
possession apply. Some people, for example, believe (incorrectly) that bag limits apply on a daily basis and
that if a number limit for a species of fish appears in the Regulation then that is the number a person may take
each day.
Under the Regulation as it is currently drafted, it is only an offence to possess fish regulated by number if they
were taken in excess of that number. In other words, this is not a straight out limit on the number of fish that a
person may possess, regardless of the circumstances. This causes difficulties for fishers and enforcement
officers, as it is often impossible to determine whether fish were taken in one fishing ‘episode’ or not. For
example, if a person takes less than the permitted number of fish on one day and takes a similar number for
the next three days, that person could potentially possess a large number of fish, none of which are regulated.
The intention of the regulated fish provisions is to allow fishers to take a certain number of fish and be
prohibited from taking more than that number unless and until those fish are no longer in their possession, for
example, until they have been consumed, given away, or otherwise disposed of. This is intended in order to
achieve an ongoing and enforceable limit on the number of fish that a person can take and retain at any given
time, while ensuring that a person is only committing an offence by being in possession of a number of fish if
they took those fish themselves.
For these reasons, it is proposed to amend the Regulation (and some management plans) to provide that all
fish subject to a limit on numbers are also subject to a restriction on the number of fish of that species that a
person can possess, irrespective of when the fish were taken. However, it is recognised that people will
sometimes be in possession (or appear to be in possession) of fish regulated by number that they did not take
themselves. It is, therefore, proposed that such people will not be subject to the relevant offence provisions if
they can substantiate the fact that they did not take the fish in question.

[Lucky_Phill]

What did you just say ?

I think you said " bag limits ' are on fish and ' possession limits' are on anglers.

I do believe that's what I said a couple of pages ago.

NOW, what parts did I have wrong ? I need to know as to set meself straight and not confuse others ?

Phill

[jaybee]

I read (Interpreted) what you wrote about in possession as being wrong, boils down to interpretation i guess, however, after talking to fisheries last year they were quite adamant in possession even means in your freezer at home, now did the fisheries officer i spoke to, have the correct interpretation of "in possession", as State law says possession is 9/10 s of the law. But then he went onto say that if i was fishing at Fraser and caught more then the limit of tailor, if i filletted them, breaded and half cooked them, then froze the fillets they are then classed as food, and I can catch more fresh tailor. Now tailor also come under the "in possession" rule i beleive. So I guess if this interpretation is right, as long as well know when a fish becomes food, we will no longer be in possession, I guess.
cheers.

[blaze]

Hi all
go fishing catch a couple for a feed and let the rest go
no problems
cheers
blaze

[Lachie1]

Just to add a bit more confusion to everything What happens if for example i got to a fish shop n buy 6 hussar when there is only a bag limit of 5 on this species (dunno if thats right - but for arguments sake). Am i breaking the law? ???

Cheers, Lachie

[NQCairns]

Lachie no you would not be breaking the law, if you kept the reciept to protect yourself because as whole fish they would have both pectral fins therefore commecial caught, but without a reciept it would be your word against theirs and that means a loss in court. With comercial caught fillets go by the grace of god with or without a reciept.
Thanks for that I now understand why the fin cutting thing. It is solely to catch the rec if he makes a mistake. nq

[agnes_jack]

Some clarity to some of the confusion. (I think)
Where my confusion over grassies is in that Grass sweetlip are an emperor and as such are a coral reef fish. On the new reg brochure it states that all coral reef fin fish have a combined take and possesion limit of 20. Grassies are the only coral reef fin fish that have been listed under Other tidal species. The only other one listed with no limit is fusilier which still remains in the coral reef fin fish section. My confusion was if it had wrongly been placed in the other tidal species section or not, I did not realize that phils list was a fully comprehensive list of what comes under the clasification of coral reef fin fish. I rang fisheries and they confirmed that although it is a c r f f it will not be counted as part of the 20 fish per day limit. I stand corrected.

Mack mauler
The Bodianus after grass tuskfish is simply a typing error and should have been on the next line down. It refers to the Hogfishes.

The fisheries confirmed to me this morning that in possesion means that technicaly all fish in your possesion including any you have in your freezer or anywhere else for that matter. You can give fish to your friends or family And they are no longer in your possesion. But if for example you are staying on frazer and you take a freezer with you and you have more than the take and possesion limit in your freezer you will be charged. Possesion means all fish in your possesion wherever you happen to have them stored. They are not going to raid your home unless they have reason to believe you are excesively exceeding the limits, or selling fish .But they can if the need arises. Same goes on offshore charters, you must be on a trip of 3 or more days duration before you can keep up to twice the daily take and possesion limit. This aparently changes again after 8 days duration. Hope this corrects some of the confusion from yesterday.

Agnes jack- with brain strain ??? ??? ??? ???

[Lucky_Phill]

Well JB< my interpretation of ' in possession " is right.

example. I have 30 Coral reef fin fish in my freezer, I have 7 snapper, and 2,175 Grass sweetlip. I am not breaking the law. Why, well the onus is on the Law Enforcement agency, firstly to get into my house to see this, secondly prove they are my fish alone. OK, so wife bought freezer, she owns freezer, maybe the freezer is in my house, say I rent, is the freezer the landlords ? The house is under mortagage, does the Bank then become responsible for having this many fish in it's freezer ?

All this crap about ' In possession ' like in ya house etc is just crap.

Now to serious business.

I can have 20 Coral Reef fin fish in my esky with ( fins of ), 5 snapper, 10 Grassies and 5 Pearlies and still be within the law, as it stands of the 13th Dec. ( and If I had that, it's be in my dreams anyway ).

I think maybe we are all looking toooooooo hard into this .

Take ya leaflet out with ya's and there'll be no probs.
[smiley=laola.gif] [smiley=laola.gif] [smiley=laola.gif]cheers Phill

[jaybee]

Umm phil agnes jack has and interesting paragraph above yours, but as he also says they are not going to raid your home. So at a guess i would say you also spoke to fisheries and if so, maybe a different officer with a different interpretation. What i posted from the regs also says the same thing. Plus henry is saying ignorance is no excuse, so who is going to be right and or wrong when quizzed by fisheries. ???

The fisheries confirmed to me this morning that in possesion means that technicaly all fish in your possesion including any you have in your freezer or anywhere else for that matter. You can give fish to your friends or family And they are no longer in your possesion. But if for example you are staying on frazer and you take a freezer with you and you have more than the take and possesion limit in your freezer you will be charged. Possesion means all fish in your possesion wherever you happen to have them stored.

[Gazza]

Lucky ,blame the wife for the freezer ,good one!

Mate ,
divide your catch between the family ,
whole fish with one fin only relates to catching and back to ramp,
40cms fillets w-i-t-h skin on ,only applies to catching and back to ramp.

Skin your fish ,cut into 10~20 cm chunks, chuck em in ya fridge/freezer and relax ,you've disposed of your catch ,to fish another day ,if you really need to ???

[Lucky_Phill]

I like ya way of thinking Gazza