Qld Rec Fishing Licence? Yes or No

[goat boy]

I looked as well, I found this report that mentioned 20mil. The report is a bit over my head and I only had time to skim through it, but it does seem quite interesting. Please have a read of it guys and tell me what you think.
http://uow.academia.edu/alistairmcil...ew_South_Wales

Cheers

Thats the figure I came across too (quoted in a QLD game fishing paper on the advocacy of an RFL, if I remember correctly). It also stated the amount was a loan and that the trust was (still is?) repaying it. I can't see anywhere that the loan repayments are accounted for (and by that, I don't mean dodgy book keeping but in the readily available split of how trust funds are spent). I also saw quoted in a parliamentary paper that as of (sometime in) 2010 1.5 mil was put aside for licence buyback. There was no mention if this was a loan, or money from the trust.
That same report quoted that as of 2010 the annual amount earned from licence fees was '12-13' mil and that the income generated from fees rose from inception to a peak and plateu around 05/06. So as a rough figure, say 10 mil a year from 02 to 12, thats 100 mil. After those initial buybacks, what happened? is that loan still being repaid? why is not more money put aside for commercial buyback? why is money in a trust being wasted on govt priorities? why isn't the benefit of the RFL spreading over the state as time goes on (rather than staying in the same general areas, but that's another gripe). It seems the RFL had a significant impact in it's beginnings, but has tapered off into not really providing anything substantial anymore?
Rather than just say 'oh, a RFL is the answer to all our problems'! the mechanics of existing RFLs should be examined beyond their 'feel good' exteriors. Devils advocate and all that..

[NAGG]

Thats the figure I came across too (quoted in a QLD game fishing paper on the advocacy of an RFL, if I remember correctly). It also stated the amount was a loan and that the trust was (still is?) repaying it. I can't see anywhere that the loan repayments are accounted for (and by that, I don't mean dodgy book keeping but in the readily available split of how trust funds are spent). I also saw quoted in a parliamentary paper that as of (sometime in) 2010 1.5 mil was put aside for licence buyback. There was no mention if this was a loan, or money from the trust.
That same report quoted that as of 2010 the annual amount earned from licence fees was '12-13' mil and that the income generated from fees rose from inception to a peak and plateu around 05/06. So as a rough figure, say 10 mil a year from 02 to 12, thats 100 mil. After those initial buybacks, what happened? is that loan still being repaid? why is not more money put aside for commercial buyback? why is money in a trust being wasted on govt priorities? why isn't the benefit of the RFL spreading over the state as time goes on (rather than staying in the same general areas, but that's another gripe). It seems the RFL had a significant impact in it's beginnings, but has tapered off into not really providing anything substantial anymore?
Rather than just say 'oh, a RFL is the answer to all our problems'! the mechanics of existing RFLs should be examined beyond their 'feel good' exteriors. Devils advocate and all that..

I think you'll find that there have been some decent outcomes each and every year .... aside from the buybacks. The arti reef projects have been a bit of a priority.
here is a link that contains the latest info on expenditure - http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/__data/ass...lan-Nov-11.pdf
As I said - it's not a perfect scheme ..... but it is a scheme

[Slider]

You just have to look at commercial catch statistics to see that the rest of the state is benefitting from net free regions in NSW. Granted, the benefit is certainly going to be less for recs than from within the RFHs, but there is a far better balance of resource allocation occurring.

$20 mil hey? Drop in the ocean.

Have just been down to the shop at the Beachfront Caravan Park at the 3rd cut and asked John whether anyone is catching anything. His response was an emphatic "No, nobody is even losing a bait". Then I asked the pro who lives in the park whether they're getting anything. "No" was all he said.

Nobody was fishing at all within sight to the north of Teewah this morning and nobody fishing between Teewah and the 3rd cut. Understandable, but on the first good weekend weather wise for quite a while, still there are no recs coming here to fish. But it's not just Teewah Beach suffering, Fraser is equally as serious, as is the entirety of the Sunshine Coast and Gold Coast and it seems the rest of the state.

So what we have occurring is, a reduction in participation, a reduction in tourism, a reduction in business in local economies, a reduction in our quality of life and a reduction in marine biodiversity. Can't get any worse and there's no prospect of it getting any better. I shake my head again at FQ statements that everything is fine.

[Gazza]

Have you 'pro-RFL' bible-bashers finished patting each other on the back yet ??

[Slider]

Nothin to celebrate Gazza. Quite the opposite. Think you summed it up with your post earlier in the thread.

[NAGG]

Have you 'pro-RFL' bible-bashers finished patting each other on the back yet ??

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

[Black_Rat]

So we have had 200 years + in this country to get it right, how is a fee in any guise going to fix things now?

[Slider]

Think that should be 200 yrs and we still can't get it right.

[NAGG]

So we have had 200 years + in this country to get it right, how is a fee in any guise going to fix things now?

More like 200 plus years to stuff it up .......
It's only in the last 20 years that we started to even think about the implications.

If the government were to inject $10M pa - and allow the expenditure to be determined by a committee of stakeholders & the government supports their decisions ......... then you dont need a RFL (in theory) .
I just cant hold my breath that long

Chris

[Gazza]

Hi Nagg/Slider (or others ) , simple clarification m8(s)....call it a 'bible-bashing' Q. from Gaz

Q. IF we need more docs/nurses or police (given the $$horrendous state of affairs$$ ), left by the ALP, should we have a Doc/Nurse and/or Police tax/Lic/levy ???

Just trying to 'Quantify' your 'pro-RFL' logic

[NAGG]

Hi Nagg/Slider , simple clarification m8(s)....call it a 'bible-bashing' Q. from Gaz

Q. IF we need more docs/nurses or police (given the $$horrendous state of affairs$$ , left by the ALP, should we have a Doc/Nurse and/or Police tax/Lic/levy ???

Just trying to 'Quantify' your 'pro-RFL' logic

We do ...... It's called Tax's - Tax's are paid to provide essential services ... somehow improving fishing doesn't quite fall into the category . Then under this government even essential services are under attack .
Even look at roads ....... you want improved roads - we pay for it via tolls . You want to camp in a national park - you have camp fees.
I'd like nothing more than see things change for the better without paying extra for it !

Chris

[Gazza]

you want improved roads - we pay for it via tolls . You want to camp in a national park - you have camp fees.

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

[Slider]

Thanks Gazza..... I think. Certainly the first time that a bible and myself have had anything to do with each other.

I'd really like to know, at this point, how are we to recover the Noosa North Shore and Fraser Island recreational fisheries? Something has to be done and we all know what that something needs to be. If the government isn't going to fund it, as they've said they won't, how then is it to be funded? Surely we can't just sit back and watch a tragedy of this proportion go through to the keeper without some sort of effort on the part of the rec community. I feel that I'm doing my bit, what can the rest of you do? Or is apathy the real enemy here? Remembering that the tailor that are netted here are the same tailor that won't be caught at Fraser, or the Goldy, or Newcastle . ...

[Gazza]

If the government isn't going to fund it, as they've said they won't, how then is it to be funded?

hmmm , maybe Mark can give us some input on LNP guv't FAILINGS, maybe you can vote "Greens" next time m8, they'll shut-it-down for us all ??

[Slider]

The Green representative for Noosa is already on side actually. I've done a fair bit of legwork in ensuring that the State Greens understand that a RFH is an effective conservation measure for Cooloola and Fraser Island.