Jump to content

so you want a rec fishing license?


Recommended Posts

 

 

There are bigger fish to fry. As the biggest stakeholder, we are being treated like chicken little. Our rights as equal stakeholders of a shared resource, have been sold off to backroom deals with a Minister. An RFL will not fix this situation, nor will it stop the encroaching conservationists. The first move forward, should be the formation of a Rec fishing council. Here reps from the various representative groups would form an independent body. This would have a powerful voice. We need our rights under, the fisheties ACT restored, proper surveys and community impact. studies done etc. From here this council, could manage an RFL from a trust fund. Ensuring that our money is protected from abuse.

Unfortunately the pathetic response from rec fishers to the recent government attempt to ask what we wanted pretty much summed up the reason for what happens. Out of about 280K rec fishers, 800 or so turned up at the community consultations and about 1500 bothered to fill in the questionaires.

 

Trust funds do not ensure protection of monies from abuse, many a lawyer has diddled their trust fund & I have had first hand experience of it when my mother passed.

 

Only 6% of the Vic RFL goes directly to Fishng related benefits. Here the RFL money would be handled and distributed by DEWNR. I would prefer to take the punt on a Rec Fishing council, where we got to vote in our representatives, not the current situation !

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 110
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

This was presented to the Committee more than 6 months ago (July 2016), and hasn't been mentioned since (to my knowledge). It was not a formal submission by the MFA, although one presenter was/is a Bo

I love the RFL - Riverland Football League   Cant wait 

The rec fishing licence is being pushed by the pro fishers to parliament.. Anyone think they are doing it for our good?

Posted Images

 

 

 

There are bigger fish to fry. As the biggest stakeholder, we are being treated like chicken little. Our rights as equal stakeholders of a shared resource, have been sold off to backroom deals with a Minister. An RFL will not fix this situation, nor will it stop the encroaching conservationists. The first move forward, should be the formation of a Rec fishing council. Here reps from the various representative groups would form an independent body. This would have a powerful voice. We need our rights under, the fisheties ACT restored, proper surveys and community impact. studies done etc. From here this council, could manage an RFL from a trust fund. Ensuring that our money is protected from abuse.

 

Unfortunately the pathetic response from rec fishers to the recent government attempt to ask what we wanted pretty much summed up the reason for what happens. Out of about 280K rec fishers, 800 or so turned up at the community consultations and about 1500 bothered to fill in the questionaires.

Trust funds do not ensure protection of monies from abuse, many a lawyer has diddled their trust fund & I have had first hand experience of it when my mother passed.

Only 6% of the Vic RFL goes directly to Fishng related benefits. Here the RFL money would be handled and distributed by DEWNR. I would prefer to take the punt on a Rec Fishing council, where we got to vote in our representatives, not the current situation !
Any proof of this?
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

There are bigger fish to fry. As the biggest stakeholder, we are being treated like chicken little. Our rights as equal stakeholders of a shared resource, have been sold off to backroom deals with a Minister. An RFL will not fix this situation, nor will it stop the encroaching conservationists. The first move forward, should be the formation of a Rec fishing council. Here reps from the various representative groups would form an independent body. This would have a powerful voice. We need our rights under, the fisheties ACT restored, proper surveys and community impact. studies done etc. From here this council, could manage an RFL from a trust fund. Ensuring that our money is protected from abuse.

Unfortunately the pathetic response from rec fishers to the recent government attempt to ask what we wanted pretty much summed up the reason for what happens. Out of about 280K rec fishers, 800 or so turned up at the community consultations and about 1500 bothered to fill in the questionaires.

Trust funds do not ensure protection of monies from abuse, many a lawyer has diddled their trust fund & I have had first hand experience of it when my mother passed.
Only 6% of the Vic RFL goes directly to Fishng related benefits. Here the RFL money would be handled and distributed by DEWNR. I would prefer to take the punt on a Rec Fishing council, where we got to vote in our representatives, not the current situation !
Any proof of this?

 

The DEPI have annual statements on their website. Who is managing our grant money ? DEWNR !

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe try again....

 

Whenever this subject (representation) is discussed, it invariably becomes a debate about the merits (or not) of what we currently have, and of what might be - usually focused on all the possible negatives.

 

As a result, there is a lot of passion and opinion expressed, but no progress is made.

 

If we want change (and I'd say that everyone does), surely the first step is to agree on that one point - change is needed - and then to get as many people as possible working on what that change should look like. If we are going to continually try to guess what the future will look like and to find reasons not to do anything simply because our crystal ball views don't agree with each other, we'll be stuck in the endless loop forever.

 

We've already been doing this for far too long. For a change, we need to find some trust in our own abilities (and each other), and accept that whatever future direction is determined by our own rec fishers, it will always have some components that won't be completely agreed by everyone. In those circumstances we will all need to trust in the majority view and give it a chance to succeed.

 

If there's another way, please speak out. But let's not get bogged down in detail that may never apply to our situation in SA.

 

That's the future, and it's up to the rec fishers of SA to create it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe try again....

 

Whenever this subject (representation) is discussed, it invariably becomes a debate about the merits (or not) of what we currently have, and of what might be - usually focused on all the possible negatives.

 

As a result, there is a lot of passion and opinion expressed, but no progress is made.

 

If we want change (and I'd say that everyone does), surely the first step is to agree on that one point - change is needed - and then to get as many people as possible working on what that change should look like. If we are going to continually try to guess what the future will look like and to find reasons not to do anything simply because our crystal ball views don't agree with each other, we'll be stuck in the endless loop forever.

 

We've already been doing this for far too long. For a change, we need to find some trust in our own abilities (and each other), and accept that whatever future direction is determined by our own rec fishers, it will always have some components that won't be completely agreed by everyone. In those circumstances we will all need to trust in the majority view and give it a chance to succeed.

 

If there's another way, please speak out. But let's not get bogged down in detail that may never apply to our situation in SA.

 

That's the future, and it's up to the rec fishers of SA to create it. 

Our own Rec fishers have spoken, but been ignored time and time again !

Link to post
Share on other sites

The direction for a rec fish council has been given RJ. Funding to facilitate needs via the 3rd round of grants etc. Thats the advice.

 

I read the trade ministers releases. Maximising recreational fishing isnt on his or the govs radar its all about maximising, maintaining interstate and overseas exports.

 

You say there's rec fishers who are capable and shouldn't be underestimated. Summons them together and go and do it just accept that those your up against are a part of a global industry with endless funds and influence over state policy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The direction for a rec fish council has been given RJ. Funding to facilitate needs via the 3rd round of grants etc. Thats the advice.

 

 

Well that's a relief. Be good to know that this is fact though.

 

Who has given this "direction", and who has allocated the funds from the Grants? Who is going to put together the "rec fish council", and when?

 

If this is really happening, there's no need for any other arrangement in SA because (I'd guess) the people who would want to be involved will already be part of the "rec fish council". To attempt to do something else at the same time would simply muddy the waters.

 

I've been around this too long to believe every rumour though because most simply never happen, and I think this one needs some proof.

 

Be a very happy chappy if it's true.

 

Cheers,

Link to post
Share on other sites

Drat. Thought you'd heard something else Wade. No apology needed.

 

Problem with communicating only via social media - messages can easily be misunderstood.

 - and often are :-(

 

I think that there are far more things that bind all rec fishers together rather than keep us apart, and it's time we all made the most of that. History very clearly shows that we can't rely on anyone other than rec fishers, and when we publicly fight among ourselves over differences in how to get things done and what should be done, we only succeed in shooting ourselves in the foot.

 

We all need to get together and get started, face-to-face. But that has to be a commonly agreed goal, with no encouragement for spectators or anyone who's not prepared to work as a team and contribute their own personal skills and effort. Meetings are wonderful things for everyone to get the measure of everyone else present, but IMO they lose most of their value if the meeting doesn't result in agreement and action.

 

Anyone who might choose attend such a meeting:-

  • Should be fully prepared to leave it with a job to do (with their agreement) - and do it willingly.
  • Everyone is equal
  • Any organisational differences are left at the door.
  • Everyone's opinion is listened to and respected.
  • What is agreed and decided at a meeting will be published and feedback sought.

 

 - this was/is the fundamental meeting rule of the MFA, CRG and DRFC, and it works.

 

Should we try to arrange an initial combined SA rec fisher meeting on that basis?

 

Cheers,

Roger.

0438 020 858

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks RJ for the response. Just a trivial misunderstanding I agree. I had a bit of a chuckle to myself (not being derogatory).

 

As for getting together. I think it needs to happen at a representative level between the existing groups.

 

I now have three kids, work and I am in the midst of starting up a new soccer club/working at a soccer academy etc wearing several hats.

 

Sorry to let you down but I can't go back to it all and I no longer bother to go fishing anyway. I would have to file for divorce first if I did want to lol... :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

That was another miscommunication Wade. I didn't intend the second pat of that post to be directed at you. My bad.

 

 

This is what I intended:-

 

 Everyone,

 

I think that there are far more things that bind all rec fishers together rather than keep us apart, and it's time we all made the most of that. History very clearly shows that we can't rely on anyone other than rec fishers, and when we publicly fight among ourselves over differences in how to get things done and what should be done, we only succeed in shooting ourselves in the foot.

 

We all need to get together and get started, face-to-face. But that has to be a commonly agreed goal, with no encouragement for spectators or anyone who's not prepared to work as a team and contribute their own personal skills and effort. Meetings are wonderful things for everyone to get the measure of everyone else present, but IMO they lose most of their value if the meeting doesn't result in agreement and action.

 

Anyone who might choose attend such a meeting:-

  • Should be fully prepared to leave it with a job to do (with their agreement) - and do it willingly.
  • Everyone is equal
  • Any organisational differences are left at the door.
  • Everyone's opinion is listened to and respected.
  • What is agreed and decided at a meeting will be published and feedback sought.

 

 - this was/is the fundamental meeting rule of the MFA, CRG and DRFC, and it works.

 

Should we try to arrange an initial combined SA rec fisher meeting on that basis?

 

Cheers,

Roger.

0438 020 858

Link to post
Share on other sites

That was another miscommunication Wade. I didn't intend the second pat of that post to be directed at you. My bad.

 

 

This is what I intended:-

 

 Everyone,

 

I think that there are far more things that bind all rec fishers together rather than keep us apart, and it's time we all made the most of that. History very clearly shows that we can't rely on anyone other than rec fishers, and when we publicly fight among ourselves over differences in how to get things done and what should be done, we only succeed in shooting ourselves in the foot.

 

We all need to get together and get started, face-to-face. But that has to be a commonly agreed goal, with no encouragement for spectators or anyone who's not prepared to work as a team and contribute their own personal skills and effort. Meetings are wonderful things for everyone to get the measure of everyone else present, but IMO they lose most of their value if the meeting doesn't result in agreement and action.

 

Anyone who might choose attend such a meeting:-

  • Should be fully prepared to leave it with a job to do (with their agreement) - and do it willingly.
  • Everyone is equal
  • Any organisational differences are left at the door.
  • Everyone's opinion is listened to and respected.
  • What is agreed and decided at a meeting will be published and feedback sought.

 

 - this was/is the fundamental meeting rule of the MFA, CRG and DRFC, and it works.

 

Should we try to arrange an initial combined SA rec fisher meeting on that basis?

 

Cheers,

Roger.

0438 020 858

 

How many attempts at resurrection of the phoenix is it now?

RJ several years ago you said anglers now had a choice between SAFA and RFSA.

You joined RFSA.  Did you find everyone was "equal" in RFSA?

Obviously not.  At SAFA they know their goal, and it is certainly not appeasing and grovelling to PIRSA.

Who by the way have no respect for the angling fraternity whatsoever.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

How many attempts at resurrection of the phoenix is it now?

RJ several years ago you said anglers now had a choice between SAFA and RFSA.

You joined RFSA.  Did you find everyone was "equal" in RFSA?

Obviously not.  At SAFA they know their goal, and it is certainly not appeasing and grovelling to PIRSA.

Who by the way have no respect for the angling fraternity whatsoever.

 

 

Too many Nok.

 

And I think we're never going to progress by concentrating on the past. All that does is continue with the sense of injustice that everyone (on all sides) is currently feeling. Hard to imagine I guess, but there are many SA rec fishers who feel that they've been wronged, and they aren't all in one camp - or two camps.

 

What's done is done, and can't be completely undone, but I really believe that it's the future that we should all be concentrating on, and learning from what has gone before.

 

I'm a bit curious to see how many others out in the world feel the same way, because if there isn't sufficient will, I think we're going to keep on like this until someone steps in and makes our decisions for us - and I think it's very likely that won't be a good day for rec fishing.

 

You could say that PIRSA and DEWNR are doing that already, and with a very mixed bag of results for both the fishery and rec fishers. It's my belief that won't change unless the rec fishers of SA combine our strengths and make it change.

 

Just my view....

 

Cheers,

R.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How many attempts at resurrection of the phoenix is it now?

RJ several years ago you said anglers now had a choice between SAFA and RFSA.

You joined RFSA.  Did you find everyone was "equal" in RFSA?

Obviously not.  At SAFA they know their goal, and it is certainly not appeasing and grovelling to PIRSA.

Who by the way have no respect for the angling fraternity whatsoever.

 

Too many Nok.

And I think we're never going to progress by concentrating on the past. All that does is continue with the sense of injustice that everyone (on all sides) is currently feeling. Hard to imagine I guess, but there are many SA rec fishers who feel that they've been wronged, and they aren't all in one camp - or two camps.

What's done is done, and can't be completely undone, but I really believe that it's the future that we should all be concentrating on, and learning from what has gone before.

I'm a bit curious to see how many others out in the world feel the same way, because if there isn't sufficient will, I think we're going to keep on like this until someone steps in and makes our decisions for us - and I think it's very likely that won't be a good day for rec fishing.

You could say that PIRSA and DEWNR are doing that already, and with a very mixed bag of results for both the fishery and rec fishers. It's my belief that won't change unless the rec fishers of SA combine our strengths and make it change.

Just my view....

Cheers,

R.

 

Fair enough RJ.   But nothing will change until the toxic culture of PIRSA Fisheries changes.

But you already know this, but rarely push the most important issue.

They have to be held to account for all the falsehoods and misinformation they continually spread.

Remember they abolished the "recreational fisheries manager" position within PIRSA in 2001.  That's how much recreational fishing means to them.

And they really DON'T want to deal with any independent angler groups.

They want people who follow orders, and are happy to do so.  Plenty of those around.

Only when they realise they ARE in fact 'answerable' and willing to 'respect' SA anglers things might change.

When you are committed to true change -  at the moment you are regurgitating failed past pathways - can I take your comments seriously.

In that context an RFL or similar 'old' ideas are an impediment.  What we want is simply our rights, then all will progress.

BTW it won't be easy to achieve at all, especially if our mindset does not change.

Link to post
Share on other sites

...no offence to anyone...but...seems to me like RJ5023 has the biggest set of balls here and is the only one out of the lot of us whose prepared to stand up and TRY...much respect to you chief...much respect...im not the smartest cat here but I'm more than willing to help out in anyway i can...you can count me in...ill be contacting you shortly chief...cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Fair enough RJ.   But nothing will change until the toxic culture of PIRSA Fisheries changes.

But you already know this, but rarely push the most important issue.

They have to be held to account for all the falsehoods and misinformation they continually spread.

Remember they abolished the "recreational fisheries manager" position within PIRSA in 2001.  That's how much recreational fishing means to them.

And they really DON'T want to deal with any independent angler groups.

They want people who follow orders, and are happy to do so.  Plenty of those around.

Only when they realise they ARE in fact 'answerable' and willing to 'respect' SA anglers things might change.

When you are committed to true change -  at the moment you are regurgitating failed past pathways - can I take your comments seriously.

In that context an RFL or similar 'old' ideas are an impediment.  What we want is simply our rights, then all will progress.

BTW it won't be easy to achieve at all, especially if our mindset does not change.

 

 

At the moment there is no group in SA who can claim to represent the entire SA rec fishing community.

At the moment whenever one group says "A", the other is very likely to say "B".

 

Faced with that kind of approach, politicians and would-be politicians can have the luxury of ignoring both while using either one (or both) as a get-out-of-goal card and doing nothing. Currently we are our own enemy in achieving any kind of long-term political commitment for rec fishing in SA.

 

Personally I think it's great that there are alternative plans such as yours out there Nok, and I also think that these plans should be presented to the "rec fishing community" to see how they feel about them and to gather their support. You might be surprised how people react when they are not stuck in the trenches.

 

In order to share opinions and plans, there needs to be a common forum (meetings) where this can occur. A no-man's-land if you like.

 

All I'm doing here is trying to get things started so that those meetings can actually take place. What will be proposed and agreed at those meetings is yet to be determined, but as the politicians love to say "everything should be on the table".

 

I think it's vitally important that we get our act together in order to present a "united" front to the political candidates prior to the next election. Essential that we are all asking for the same thing(s) so that we - as a united group -  can nail their feet to the deck and hold them to account.

 

Question is - can we do it? I think so, but it needs a bit of goodwill and trust (plus a bunch of hard work).

 

Cheers,

R.

Link to post
Share on other sites

At the moment there is no group in SA who can claim to represent the entire SA rec fishing community.

At the moment whenever one group says "A", the other is very likely to say "B".

Faced with that kind of approach, politicians and would-be politicians can have the luxury of ignoring both while using either one (or both) as a get-out-of-goal card and doing nothing. Currently we are our own enemy in achieving any kind of long-term political commitment for rec fishing in SA.

Personally I think it's great that there are alternative plans such as yours out there Nok, and I also think that these plans should be presented to the "rec fishing community" to see how they feel about them and to gather their support. You might be surprised how people react when they are not stuck in the trenches.

In order to share opinions and plans, there needs to be a common forum (meetings) where this can occur. A no-man's-land if you like.

All I'm doing here is trying to get things started so that those meetings can actually take place. What will be proposed and agreed at those meetings is yet to be determined, but as the politicians love to say "everything should be on the table".

I think it's vitally important that we get our act together in order to present a "united" front to the political candidates prior to the next election. Essential that we are all asking for the same thing(s) so that we - as a united group -  can nail their feet to the deck and hold them to account.

Question is - can we do it? I think so, but it needs a bit of goodwill and trust (plus a bunch of hard work).

Cheers,

R.

 

If you are to achieve what you  propose, I feel you have to be honest and transparent in your comments.

Failing or not acknowledging known problems does nothing for potential joiners.

Yes, no one can claim to represent anglers in SA, but there are clear differences between the organisations engaged in this way.

If you cannot even bring yourself to admit this openly and why, openess is gone before we start.

when you say "At the moment whenever one group says "A", the other is very likely to say "B".", you are incorrect in an unacceptable way.

That reflects on the issue of transparency, or lack of it at any round-table discussion.

SAFA is continually citing serious errors and misinformation by PIRSA, which undermines their claims wrt the bag/size limit cuts.

RFSA is saying nothing at all, and is very compliant to the PIRSA policy line.  They never criticise PIRSA for their unwarranted actions to anglers

Reminds me of the time PIRSA convened the "Change Champions" to spearhead rec progress.

RJ to convene your meeting all those old ideas/loyalties have to be gone.  The one and only loyalty is to the rec fishing sector.

PIRSA, etc is not a part of it whatsoever.  The group must assert their independence and PIRSA has to wear it.

Now RJ are you willing to do that?  There must be actual change.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Failing or not acknowledging known problems does nothing for potential joiners.

 

If you are to achieve what you  propose, I feel you have to be honest and transparent in your comments.

Yes, no one can claim to represent anglers in SA, but there are clear differences between the organisations engaged in this way.

If you cannot even bring yourself to admit this openly and why, openess is gone before we start.

when you say "At the moment whenever one group says "A", the other is very likely to say "B".", you are incorrect in an unacceptable way.

That reflects on the issue of transparency, or lack of it at any round-table discussion.

SAFA is continually citing serious errors and misinformation by PIRSA, which undermines their claims wrt the bag/size limit cuts.

RFSA is saying nothing at all, and is very compliant to the PIRSA policy line.  They never criticise PIRSA for their unwarranted actions to anglers

Reminds me of the time PIRSA convened the "Change Champions" to spearhead rec progress.

RJ to convene your meeting all those old ideas/loyalties have to be gone.  The one and only loyalty is to the rec fishing sector.

PIRSA, etc is not a part of it whatsoever.  The group must assert their independence and PIRSA has to wear it.

Now RJ are you willing to do that?  There must be actual change.

 

 

Deliberately and out of respect for Bjorn and the S&H team I have not named any rec fishing organisation nor any person in my posts on this subject. 

 

I am totally disinterested in any argument between any of them  - couldn't care less. Is that honest and transparent enough?

 

Like you Nok, my attention is very firmly fixed on the well-being of the SA rec fishing community and the fishery itself. 

 

At this time and on this subject, there is only one question that needs to be answered IMO:-

 

"Should the organisations and rec fishers interested in representation issues in SA get together to achieve one common purpose?"

 

Seems pretty straight forward to me.

 

Cheers,

R.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Failing or not acknowledging known problems does nothing for potential joiners.

 

If you are to achieve what you  propose, I feel you have to be honest and transparent in your comments.

Yes, no one can claim to represent anglers in SA, but there are clear differences between the organisations engaged in this way.

If you cannot even bring yourself to admit this openly and why, openess is gone before we start.

when you say "At the moment whenever one group says "A", the other is very likely to say "B".", you are incorrect in an unacceptable way.

That reflects on the issue of transparency, or lack of it at any round-table discussion.

SAFA is continually citing serious errors and misinformation by PIRSA, which undermines their claims wrt the bag/size limit cuts.

RFSA is saying nothing at all, and is very compliant to the PIRSA policy line.  They never criticise PIRSA for their unwarranted actions to anglers

Reminds me of the time PIRSA convened the "Change Champions" to spearhead rec progress.

RJ to convene your meeting all those old ideas/loyalties have to be gone.  The one and only loyalty is to the rec fishing sector.

PIRSA, etc is not a part of it whatsoever.  The group must assert their independence and PIRSA has to wear it.

Now RJ are you willing to do that?  There must be actual change.

 

 

Deliberately and out of respect for Bjorn and the S&H team I have not named any rec fishing organisation nor any person in my posts on this subject. 

 

I am totally disinterested in any argument between any of them  - couldn't care less. Is that honest and transparent enough?

 

Like you Nok, my attention is very firmly fixed on the well-being of the SA rec fishing community and the fishery itself. 

 

At this time and on this subject, there is only one question that needs to be answered IMO:-

 

"Should the organisations and rec fishers interested in representation issues in SA get together to achieve one common purpose?"

 

Seems pretty straight forward to me.

 

Cheers,

R.

 

Sick to death of the political bullshit if all yous want to do is argue about stuff that will never be ever change go to facebook plenty there up for it. Pretty sure this topic will end in tears it usualy does.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Failing or not acknowledging known problems does nothing for potential joiners.

 

If you are to achieve what you  propose, I feel you have to be honest and transparent in your comments.

Yes, no one can claim to represent anglers in SA, but there are clear differences between the organisations engaged in this way.

If you cannot even bring yourself to admit this openly and why, openess is gone before we start.

when you say "At the moment whenever one group says "A", the other is very likely to say "B".", you are incorrect in an unacceptable way.

That reflects on the issue of transparency, or lack of it at any round-table discussion.

SAFA is continually citing serious errors and misinformation by PIRSA, which undermines their claims wrt the bag/size limit cuts.

RFSA is saying nothing at all, and is very compliant to the PIRSA policy line.  They never criticise PIRSA for their unwarranted actions to anglers

Reminds me of the time PIRSA convened the "Change Champions" to spearhead rec progress.

RJ to convene your meeting all those old ideas/loyalties have to be gone.  The one and only loyalty is to the rec fishing sector.

PIRSA, etc is not a part of it whatsoever.  The group must assert their independence and PIRSA has to wear it.

Now RJ are you willing to do that?  There must be actual change.

 

 

Deliberately and out of respect for Bjorn and the S&H team I have not named any rec fishing organisation nor any person in my posts on this subject. 

 

I am totally disinterested in any argument between any of them  - couldn't care less. Is that honest and transparent enough?

 

Like you Nok, my attention is very firmly fixed on the well-being of the SA rec fishing community and the fishery itself. 

 

At this time and on this subject, there is only one question that needs to be answered IMO:-

 

"Should the organisations and rec fishers interested in representation issues in SA get together to achieve one common purpose?"

 

Seems pretty straight forward to me.

 

Cheers,

R.

 

Sick to death of the political bullshit if all yous want to do is argue about stuff that will never be ever change go to facebook plenty there up for it. Pretty sure this topic will end in tears it usualy does.

 

 

Yes, you are correct, just a rehash of past failures, with nothing new.  Just a call for "faith". Waste of everyone's time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

...went to Brighton jetty last night to have a fish and feel good...isnt that why we do it...3/4 of the way up the  jetty on the right hand side a beautiful big very expensive vessel parked itself about 10 meters from the jetty... :huh:  2 drunk drongos on this vessel were threatening a recreational fisher on the jetty as he was the only one brave enough to ask these bananas what the hell it was they were trying to prove...hats off to the older bloke for having the balls to stick up for the other rec fishos on the jetty...a quick mention of the authorities being at the jetty entrance and these poor excuse for human beings were off :P ...over an hour later some Asian fellas doing well on the crabs were approached by a drunk aussie fella doing well on the beer...he made an offer to the Asian fellas of $20 for 4 crabs :( they accepted :( WTF IS GOING ON...im not racist in the slightest....first generation aussie and proud...but something needs to be done...it was like the wild west on water...whats the chances of starting a neighbourhood watch type program for our metro jetties where WE are all able to make a difference to stop this type of rubbish happening...I rekn if a few of us were wearing blue t-shirts with FISHERIES on the back with their phone number underneath...no dimwitted fools would be brave or stupid enough to try that type of crapola I witnessed last night...unfknbelievable we call this civilisation when we aren't prepared and\or not allowed to do and stick up for what is right...Id wear that t-shirt or something similar 100%  to ward off the idiots and set a good example for the other rec fishos and fishn newbies just getting into it...teach them the rules...right from wrong sort of thing...if they've got NEIGHBOURHOOD WATCH for the suburbs to keep your neighbourhood safe...why not JETTY WATCH to keep the jetties a protected safehaven for all of us and to uphold the law-rules...I don't hate anything nor do I have hate in me....but theres nothing worse than going for a fish on a metro jetty and walking off that jetty totally pissed off and upset about the pathetic events that transpired....for the first time in my life Brighton jetty has  a zillion blue crabs  everywhere...after the crapola ive witnessed there lately its probably the only time they`ll ever be there....cops are too busy raising revenue to come to the jetties when you call them...fisheries officers are only ever there when things are really really really bad :mellow: â€‹understaffed...WE...only WE can turn this crapola around....from small humble beginnings bigger things and efforts evolve...last night hurt me instead of making me feel good...ill contact the bananas running the show and see how we go....we.ll only get out of this what we put into it...peace

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a though? What about tourists (terrorist's) from other states that are not aware you need a licence ?

Or the family of 4, say teenagers and mum and dad, that save money to hire a holiday house and this a once a year trip ? do they have to fork out money ?  IMO we the people own the waters / share and as a sport why would we have to pay more monies when we do not know where it is going.

 

Just my view looking at the big picture IMO without getting too political

When I go over the border to Victoria I am very happy to buy a fishing licence as it is easy to see that the funds raised are going back into the fishing sector.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yes, you are correct, just a rehash of past failures, with nothing new.  Just a call for "faith". Waste of everyone's time.

 

 

Can't have failed, it's never been tried, and If you have your way, it never will be.

 

"Just a call for "faith". Waste of everyone's time."

 

The silliest statement from a member of an anonymous "representative organisation" ever. 

 

Since there are no office holders, no elections, no meetings and you insist on remaining anonymous -  your entire organisation is relying on "faith" .

 

Your anonymous computer game is based on the hope that maybe you can achieve some kind of change without ever meeting with the wider rec fishing community to confirm that they agree with what you're doing. At the same time you aggressively (and anonymously) attack anyone who tries to tell you that they don't agree or suggests another way.

 

At some point you will all have to come out from behind the keyboard. Or fade away, having created a huge division in the SA rec fishing community, increased conflict with the commercial sector and Govt Departments, and not much else.  

 

 

Please don't waste time comparing each organisation. That would simply be more distraction ("look over there!") when the only thing you can directly change Nok, is the fact that your own organisation is not working as you always promised it would - and your Constitution may as well not exist.

 

But your organisation has had one "success" Nok - after my years of direct face-to-face involvement, your organisation has finally succeeded in turning me off anything to do with rec fishing representation in SA. Just one more rec fisher among the very large number in SA who will not get involved.

 

 

Well done. :) I'm going fishing.

 

RJ

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ideally I wouldn't want to pay for a RFL. Its a pain if you are visiting interstate and need a licence to go fishing for like 3-4 hours. Same deal here with interstate tourists.

 

But it wouldn't deter me. My boat cost $35000, insurance is like $400 a year, fuel $25 a modest trip, a service is $500 and so on.

 

A licence would reduce the number of fishers, simple economics, some people would rather spend their $ on something else. So I suppose more fish get to live - for me - which is good. But these guys generally wont be catching much anyway. Compared to the more serious of us, who invest time and money into catching fish. (I keep a log book of what I catch, stick to bag limits - and tallied up it is a bloody great mountain of fish over the years).

 

I have never seen a Fishing Inspector on the water in SA, ever. But I have certainly seen their landcruisers parked out the from of motels and driving around. So your chances of ever getting caught with 50 KGW or 200 crabs are like next to zero - especially if you made some effort not to get caught, sneak back on dark, have the wife at the ramp with a mobile to key an eye out when you came in, do it on a drizzly Tuesday in mid winter.

 

If the licence money went into a bit more enforcement - its not rocket science to work out which locals seem to go fishing every day, week in week out. (If you suspect who they are, their GPS marks are generally very good, and I make a point of getting close to them, take a GPS mark say 100m away, and a compass setting, then going back later and sound the area - bingo). These guys are selling fish for cash - restaurants, pubs, mates, fish & chip shops, doing a deal with a pro whatever. Just one of these illegal "pros" would make a far bigger impact than 100 small guys that couldn't be stuffed buying a licence. I've rang Fishwatch on a certain old mate and guaranteed he will still be out in Moonta Bay after crabs most of this week, and in winter will still be going for KGW most days.  

 

You can debate whether the enforcement should be funded by a licence, or not. But the SA Government is busted A, and the money has to come from somewhere.

 

Unfortunately the SA Government is very inefficient in spending $ and to catch one "pro" they would need 9 Landcruisers, 20x week long training courses and 30 nights in a motel - plus 24 flexi days and sickies.

 

I also think the more the marine parks, in the more remote areas the better. Protecting breeding stocks is super important.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Yes, you are correct, just a rehash of past failures, with nothing new.  Just a call for "faith". Waste of everyone's time.

 

 

Can't have failed, it's never been tried, and If you have your way, it never will be.

 

"Just a call for "faith". Waste of everyone's time."

 

The silliest statement from a member of an anonymous "representative organisation" ever. 

 

Since there are no office holders, no elections, no meetings and you insist on remaining anonymous -  your entire organisation is relying on "faith" .

 

Your anonymous computer game is based on the hope that maybe you can achieve some kind of change without ever meeting with the wider rec fishing community to confirm that they agree with what you're doing. At the same time you aggressively (and anonymously) attack anyone who tries to tell you that they don't agree or suggests another way.

 

At some point you will all have to come out from behind the keyboard. Or fade away, having created a huge division in the SA rec fishing community, increased conflict with the commercial sector and Govt Departments, and not much else.  

 

 

Please don't waste time comparing each organisation. That would simply be more distraction ("look over there!") when the only thing you can directly change Nok, is the fact that your own organisation is not working as you always promised it would - and your Constitution may as well not exist.

 

But your organisation has had one "success" Nok - after my years of direct face-to-face involvement, your organisation has finally succeeded in turning me off anything to do with rec fishing representation in SA. Just one more rec fisher among the very large number in SA who will not get involved.

 

 

Well done. :) I'm going fishing.

 

RJ

 

With a view to helping myself and others understand, RJ could you please let us know the name of the organisation that you are refering to when you say, "your organisation has had one "success" Nok" ? With due respect to you, I do not know which organisation Nok is with, RJ.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...