Jump to content
Dangerous

End of RecFish SA?

Recommended Posts

On 09/08/2018 at 2:10 PM, kon said:

Some might suggest such a release would probably not be the most politically savvy action at this juncture. Never mind.
 

But this does add a little "hmmm" factor...

Where does a "South Australian Recreational Fishing Advisory Council" ring a bell from?
Seat/popcorn/watch...


http://www.pir.sa.gov.au/fishing/publications/fishfacts_e-newsletter/fish_facts_august_2018/new_ministers_recreational_fishing_advisory_council_for_south_australia 

 

The haters are out again -     how about you put your glasses on Mr hiding in the shadows -

From todays Yorke Peninsula Times -

The Marshall Liberal Government is moving full steam to deliver our commitment establishing a new body to be the voice of recreational fishers to government.

As promised, recreational fishers will have the chance to stand for election and be voted onto the new representative recreational fishing council.

Existing organisations like RecFishCentral will be given a seat at the table, as promised at the election.

A final consultation paper will be issued to the sector in coming weeks, with an intention for the body to be established for the new year.

Consistent with historical practice the previous government entered into a two-year funding agreement with RecFish SA which ends on 30 June 2019.

Prior to the March 2018 State Election, the Government made an election commitment entitled Representation for Recreational and Commercial Fishers.  

This commitment aims to ensure recreational fishers have much better representation and proposes to establish a new body for recreational fishers, including representatives from RecFish SA, Recfish Central, the SA Fishing Alliance and any other relevant groups.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 09/08/2018 at 9:15 AM, Jay R said:

Hows this working out for you Mr Keegan?

 

Supposedly 277,000 Anglers have an invested interest in this situation, you claim to represent how many of them?

Whats the update from SAFA?

 

RecfishCENTRAL who claim to represent .08% of them has come out with the attached  "media release" admitting he and his members may have very well been shafted

libs_break_policy.pdf

Well Mr hide in the shadows, taking cheep shots. Put your glasses on, we now represent all of them - From today's Yorke Peninsula times -

The Marshall Liberal Government is moving full steam to deliver our commitment establishing a new body to be the voice of recreational fishers to government.

As promised, recreational fishers will have the chance to stand for election and be voted onto the new representative recreational fishing council.

Existing organisations like RecFishCentral will be given a seat at the table, as promised at the election.

A final consultation paper will be issued to the sector in coming weeks, with an intention for the body to be established for the new year.

Consistent with historical practice the previous government entered into a two-year funding agreement with RecFish SA which ends on 30 June 2019.

Prior to the March 2018 State Election, the Government made an election commitment entitled Representation for Recreational and Commercial Fishers.  

This commitment aims to ensure recreational fishers have much better representation and proposes to establish a new body for recreational fishers, including representatives from RecFish SA, Recfish Central, the SA Fishing Alliance and any other relevant groups.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Um,not quite 😂😂😂

You nor RecfishCentral represent ANYONE on ANY Council at this point in time.

You’ve just posted another promotional political article published in a small newspaper about the same concept that’s been spruiked pre election.

The liberals havnt firmed anything up other than the fact RecFish are still the peak body and have a valid contract till next year.

By all means tho, please do check in and let us know when something actually happens.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hating? I'm just pointing out the facts Graham!!

What is this curtain you speak off? This is the internet mate, we use handles on Forums.  You'd know exactly who am if you hadn't blocked me on social media where again you refused to answer any questions I posed to you.

I wait to see your notes from this meeting!! Good luck 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jay R said:

Hating? I'm just pointing out the facts Graham!!

What is this curtain you speak off? This is the internet mate, we use handles on Forums.  You'd know exactly who am if you hadn't blocked me on social media where again you refused to answer any questions I posed to you.

I wait to see your notes from this meeting!! Good luck 

I didn't block you, another admin did- but I did see your usual constant attacks. And no I don't know who you are, so as far as I'm concerned,your a hater hiding in a dark room behind black curtains. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Yelliwtail said:

I didn't block you, another admin did- but I did see your usual constant attacks. And no I don't know who you are, so as far as I'm concerned,your a hater hiding in a dark room behind black curtains. 

Oh, and your we use handles on the internet. Well you didn't let me enjoy the same, did you. But see I haven't got anything to hide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Yelliwtail said:

I didn't block you, another admin did- but I did see your usual constant attacks. And no I don't know who you are, so as far as I'm concerned,your a hater hiding in a dark room behind black curtains. 

So you didn't block me, you had "admin" block me, but some how you don't know who I am.....If that the case, how can you be sure your admin blocked me?    You make zero sense. and as per usual going on some tangent instead of focusing on the question at hand.

The fact remains RecFish are still the peak body (initial question asked of this thread), and the liberal government have confirmed Recfish have a valid contract till next year.

The libs have again said they are looking at forming some form of council with the exact details yet to be confirmed.

But Yelliwtail, please be sure to keep us in the loop when something comes to fruition from all your hard work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Jay R said:

So you didn't block me, you had "admin" block me, but some how you don't know who I am.....If that the case, how can you be sure your admin blocked me?    You make zero sense. and as per usual going on some tangent instead of focusing on the question at hand.

The fact remains RecFish are still the peak body (initial question asked of this thread), and the liberal government have confirmed Recfish have a valid contract till next year.

The libs have again said they are looking at forming some form of council with the exact details yet to be confirmed.

But Yelliwtail, please be sure to keep us in the loop when something comes to fruition from all your hard work.

Your Avatar was blocked, it isn't hard to understand. RFSA have a contract with PIRSA until the end of June, we are on a council that deals direct with the Minister.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The Minister’s Recreational Fishing Advisory Council will provide feedback and advice to government on recreational fishing development issues and initiatives and big picture policy issues that impact the recreational fishing sector."


http://www.pir.sa.gov.au/fishing/publications/fishfacts_e-newsletter/fish_facts_august_2018/new_ministers_recreational_fishing_advisory_council_for_south_australia
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 13/08/2018 at 2:00 PM, Jay R said:

... Just doing a quote so you get a notification.

Hi Jay,

I notice that you seem to be very anti SAFA/RecFishCentral, is this because you are happy with the status quo?

I'm assuming as this is a rec fishing site that you are here as a rec fisher, do you believe RecFishSA has and is doing a good job of representing rec fishers?

Were you happy with RecFishSA's representation in the following issues;

  • Marine Parks.
  • Blue Swimmer Crab bag limits.
  • Blue Swimmer Crab commercial season opening at the beginning of December just to make sure there was no metro crabs left by Christmas for recs.
  • KGW bag and possession limits.
  • The amount of noise they are currently making RE. cutting the Southern Bluefin Tuna bag in half.

I'm interested if you feel RecFishSA represented you strongly enough on the above issues?

 

A bit about myself, I'm not aligned with SAFA or RecFishCentral, I'm just a passionate Rec Fisher and believe me I hold them to account too (check the dark side), I have no allegiance to SAFA, RecFishCentral or RecFishSA.

I think SAFA and RecFishCentral at least have whats best for rec fishers in mind in what they are doing, I've been scrutinising them for about 18 months now and have not seen them put a foot out of place. I disagree with their assumption that because they did a deal with the Libs the Libs are going to do anything about the peoples resource being privatised and it all being moved to a pro resource, I believe that is against Liberal ideology but they are confident that they have a deal with government so until such time as we have a Rec Fishing Council that fails to make a difference or not I'm reserving my judgement.

RecFishSA, well, they have proven to be unable to represent rec fishers on the above issues, I've talked to Danny Simpson and given him the benefit of the doubt as these could be reflective of previous personnel of RecFishSA and asked him to prove to me that RecFishSA under him is better but the crickets I'm hearing over the SBT issue seems to be giving me the answer.

So we have a situation of no representation under RecFishSA or to try something different. A wise man once said that continuing to do the same thing expecting a different outcome is the definition of insanity, are we insane?

 

Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Aussie Dave,

Love your posts this year so please don't take this as an attack on your views which I believe you are more than entitled to have. But I would like to step in here just to highlight that not all rec fishers fully support the ideals of SAFA etc.

While I don't think SA has the optimal rec fishing representation currently I am very cautious about supporting rec fishing bodies like SAFA. My caution comes from some of the material I read from their site which is clearly wrong or demonstrates a lack of ecological understanding.

A bit about me, I am not aligned with any particular rec fishing body - I follow all of them as I believe they are united in the overarching goal to make rec fishing better and fairer, so in that they all have my support. I am a keen recfisherman since forever, I also have a PhD in Aquatic ecology and spend a great deal of my time learning about fish biology/physiology and about our aquatic ecosystems.

So in saying this I do support recfish SA's stance on marine parks and am glad we have them - whether they are in the correct places is outside the scope of this post to debate so let’s just leave that there.

I am happy with the 20 blue crab limit for recs – I am not happy about the pro situation

I do not support the commercial export of KGW (who can afford to buy local whiting??) and think the bag limit for recs is very low. But I am happy to cop it on the chin if it means stock replenishment.

I was not fussed by the recent cuts to rec bag limits and think that some are still way too high. Boats limits of 30 for flathead (we don’t even have a flathead fishery in SA) and bream are ridiculous and show a total lack of knowledge about rec fishing from PIRSA (imagine we all went and ripped 30 big bream out of the Port on a weekly basis). The population of people keeps growing therefore the bag and boat limits can only keep decreasing if we are to remain sustainable. More thought needs to be given towards the sustainability of commercial fisheries given the small percentage of people these industries represent when compared to the increase in general population and the economic contributions rec fishers make. In that I do agree with SAFA as I believe I have read similar on their site before.

So that’s all from me I hope people read this in the respectful tone it was intended. Keep fighting the good fight. We’ll get there eventually.

Peace

mrfish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, AuusieDave said:

Hi Dave

Dave, I’ll take your bait, simply because you asked nicely and asked for my opinion (not that it matters).

My reply will also be way of topic.

 

I don’t have an affiliation with any of these groups, I just don’t like seeing people get mislead with blanket statements and fake news.

I see a lot of hypocrisy in these topics, and people taking the  kudos for stuff they haven’t done, and counting chickens well before they’ve hatched.

Ultimately , the egg ends up on their face and like many before them, they fade away, never to be seen again.

 

In regards to the topics you raised, whether Recfish, PIRSA, SAFA, Central or FistnSA have played a part in any of if it, makes no difference to me:

  • Marine Parks.
  • Blue Swimmer Crab bag limits.
  • Blue Swimmer Crab commercial season opening at the beginning of December just to make sure there was no metro crabs left by Christmas for recs.
  • KGW bag and possession limits.
  • The amount of noise they are currently making RE. cutting the Southern Bluefin Tuna bag in half.

Not one marine park introduced has affected me personally, it was a huge storm in a tea cup in my opinion and I don’t know of one person that no longer gets fish cos of them.

As a side note, neither SAFA or RecfishcENTRAL where around when they were introduced, all FistnSA did was have a few loud mouth’s at a meeting and print some bumper stickers..

From my understanding some other people who just carry on behind the scenes had more political clout during this debate, to this day they still carry on behind the scenes, no internet glory for them.

 

I’m 100% totally in agreeance with 20 crabs/person being the limit, I see no reason for a person being able to take 40, you didn’t ask but I’m the same with Garfish.

Commercials taking Crabs before xmas, that’s an easy one, money makes the world goes around, and just like prawns and Snapper, Australians like to eat seafood on Xmas day, not all of them have the privilege to own a boat nor be good enough to catch them, so they must buy.

 

No problem with 10KG’s/ person, again, 10 fish provides my family of 4 with a good nights feed.

 

No problem with SBT getting cut to 1 /person, a 13kg Tuna will feed my family for months, if for whatever reason I wanted more, I’d just go out again and keep another. Every summer we see lots of fish left to rot in bins and charter operators being left with excess fish cos customers kept their limit without needing to.

 

The above are my opinions only and I won’t bother replying to anyone how questions my thinking, its only cos you asked that I replied.

Not a single one of my fisher friends have trouble getting fish, actually the opposite, as boats get bigger, equipment gets better and social networking improves, we find fishing easier every year.

On the most, they all agree with me on the topic of Crabs, KG’s, Tuna bag limits

 

So it erks me when I see people talking all gloom and doom about fishing politics, all it does is create disunity and miss information.

Many of these types talk about fishing for the future and the chance to give their kids and grandkids a chance to get some fish.

But not once have I seen them post about taking their kids and grandkids fishing in the now!!

 

 I’ve travelled the world, fished in many places and am well aware that we have it very good in Australia.

But not for a second do I think we should just take it for granted and not care about our future, I just don’t think chest beating on the internet or resorting to 80’s style Painters and Dockers is the right way .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, mrfish said:

Hi Aussie Dave,

Love your posts this year so please don't take this as an attack on your views which I believe you are more than entitled to have. But I would like to step in here just to highlight that not all rec fishers fully support the ideals of SAFA etc.

While I don't think SA has the optimal rec fishing representation currently I am very cautious about supporting rec fishing bodies like SAFA. My caution comes from some of the material I read from their site which is clearly wrong or demonstrates a lack of ecological understanding.

A bit about me, I am not aligned with any particular rec fishing body - I follow all of them as I believe they are united in the overarching goal to make rec fishing better and fairer, so in that they all have my support. I am a keen recfisherman since forever, I also have a PhD in Aquatic ecology and spend a great deal of my time learning about fish biology/physiology and about our aquatic ecosystems.

So in saying this I do support recfish SA's stance on marine parks and am glad we have them - whether they are in the correct places is outside the scope of this post to debate so let’s just leave that there.

I am happy with the 20 blue crab limit for recs – I am not happy about the pro situation

I do not support the commercial export of KGW (who can afford to buy local whiting??) and think the bag limit for recs is very low. But I am happy to cop it on the chin if it means stock replenishment.

I was not fussed by the recent cuts to rec bag limits and think that some are still way too high. Boats limits of 30 for flathead (we don’t even have a flathead fishery in SA) and bream are ridiculous and show a total lack of knowledge about rec fishing from PIRSA (imagine we all went and ripped 30 big bream out of the Port on a weekly basis). The population of people keeps growing therefore the bag and boat limits can only keep decreasing if we are to remain sustainable. More thought needs to be given towards the sustainability of commercial fisheries given the small percentage of people these industries represent when compared to the increase in general population and the economic contributions rec fishers make. In that I do agree with SAFA as I believe I have read similar on their site before.

So that’s all from me I hope people read this in the respectful tone it was intended. Keep fighting the good fight. We’ll get there eventually.

Peace

mrfish

Hi mrfish,

 

Thanks for your contribution to the discussion.

 

In relation to SAFA's science, they may be misinterpreting some of the data but from what I see PIRSA/RecFishSA just make up the data they want to support what they want, complete privatisation of the public resource that is our salt-water fishery. I assume you agree that PIRSA/RecFishSA's science is equally if not more flawed. See I would have said that reducing the rec bag limits while increasing the commercial take for a species would be demonstrating a massive lack of ecological understanding, surely you agree with this? As a Doctor of Aquatic Ecology you would understand that unless the total amount harvested is decreased it is a reduction in sustainability which seems to be what PIRSA believes to be an increase in sustainability, gotta let those grandkids catch a fish... 😉

In relation to the Marine Parks, I too agree with the principle, what I believe was a massive act of bastardry was asking all the recs where they fish and locking up those spots, this is a very bad approach, I would have thought this should have been a scientifically based, i.e. Marine Biologists/Aquatic Ecologists study the fish and state where a park would do most good. I think this is why so many people are against them. Personally it is only the one at Port Augusta that bothers me as it's taken my only chance at catching a SA Dolphin Fish away from me.

I think the previous points lead into the next point on bag limits, I only have to feed my father and myself so the bag limits are fine for me, but many rec fishers have a lot more mouths to feed than me. The point about bag limits is two fold, firstly the survey asked if we rec fishers are willing to have lower bag limits if it improves sustainability (assumed of the fishery), most rec fishers including me said yes but well, we all know what happened rec fishing bags were slashed and the pro's got extra quota resulting in a greater number of fish harvested resulting in a less sustainable fishery while being told it's to make it more sustainable. Convoluted, yes, but this is how PIRSA and RecFishSA operate, by betrayal. The second point only really relates to SBT's at the moment and that is 'who would tow their 20 foot boat with their big 4X4 down to Cape Jervis or Encounter Bay, motor the 90kms out to the Pages only to catch one 8kg SBT?' (anyone know the cost of this operation?), a split limit like we have with Snapper would work fine, 1 > 25kg or 2 < 25kg. But hang on we're not talking about the actual limits, we're talking about the representation we are getting which seems to be none.

I agree 100% about the export of prime species to interstate and overseas markets, the commercial sector, if they are genuine about wanting to put fresh fish on the plates of locals, would have to support this export ban. This would also force the price down and make local fresh fish an option for local South Australians again also helping the commercial sector to fulfill their desire to feed the locals. I suspect they aren't genuine about this and only say it to throw some smoke in front of the mirror.

I also agree that something will have to give with larger populations but hey, we're stagnant SA that isn't growing in population so the increased demand on the fishery is only due to better technologies and techniques utilised by the commercial sector. The economic value of the resource is far greater from rec fishing so some rec fishers may have to go the way of Holdens workers as they can't generate the optimum economic benefit for the state.

This is a bit side-tracked though, the question is are we being represented properly? No

 

Peace out dude and thanks for your contribution.

 

Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jay,

 

7 hours ago, Jay R said:

...

I don’t have an affiliation with any of these groups, I just don’t like seeing people get mislead with blanket statements and fake news.

...

Do you have any affiliation to any other groups that might have a stake? Your responses seem familiar, like I've heard them before?

7 hours ago, Jay R said:

...

I see a lot of hypocrisy in these topics, and people taking the  kudos for stuff they haven’t done, and counting chickens well before they’ve hatched.

Ultimately , the egg ends up on their face and like many before them, they fade away, never to be seen again.

...

I tend to agree with you there about jumping the gun, in reality nothing has changed... yet. There's still no representation of rec fishers.

7 hours ago, Jay R said:

...

As a side note, neither SAFA or RecfishcENTRAL where around when they were introduced, all FistnSA did was have a few loud mouth’s at a meeting and print some bumper stickers..

...

If you're so knowledgable about the history of the Marine Parks issue you should also know that SAFA and RecFishCentral were created in response to the betrayal felt from recFishSA at the time.

 

7 hours ago, Jay R said:

...

Commercials taking Crabs before xmas, that’s an easy one, money makes the world goes around, and just like prawns and Snapper, Australians like to eat seafood on Xmas day, not all of them have the privilege to own a boat nor be good enough to catch them, so they must buy.

...

So you agree with robbing the South Australian economy of economic activity as the recs taking their boats out to get their own crabs has a significantly higher economic return than just selling the crabs to interstate and overseas markets. If you feel this passionate about local South Australian locals that can't get their own crabs do you then support a ban on any exports of these crabs to interstate and overseas markets? It'd be great all South Aussies would have fresh cheap quality seafood, at the current prices they can only afford crappy Mekong Delta fish.

7 hours ago, Jay R said:

...

No problem with 10KG’s/ person, again, 10 fish provides my family of 4 with a good nights feed.

...

There's the issue right there, you might be able to fish multiple times a week but most rec fishers are lucky to get on the water once a month so one feed is not really enough, this needs to be doubled.

7 hours ago, Jay R said:

...

No problem with SBT getting cut to 1 /person, a 13kg Tuna will feed my family for months, if for whatever reason I wanted more, I’d just go out again and keep another. Every summer we see lots of fish left to rot in bins and charter operators being left with excess fish cos customers kept their limit without needing to.

...

But the average size of a SA SBT is 8 to 10kg, even down the South East. an 8kg SBT will give you about 4.5kg of meat, how much a kilo is that one fish once you tow your boat to the launch and do the massive k's to access the fish? $100/kg

I agree that no-one needs two barrels, a split limit like Snapper is best.

7 hours ago, Jay R said:

...

Not a single one of my fisher friends have trouble getting fish, actually the opposite, as boats get bigger, equipment gets better and social networking improves, we find fishing easier every year.

...

Come on mate, are you serious?

Maybe it's that the people you socialise with are not actually rec fishers, the fishermen with better boats and technology are the commercial fishermen, if that's the angle you're coming from, yes you would of course be very happy with the non-representation that RecFishSA provides us.

7 hours ago, Jay R said:

...

 I’ve travelled the world, fished in many places and am well aware that we have it very good in Australia.

But not for a second do I think we should just take it for granted and not care about our future, I just don’t think chest beating on the internet or resorting to 80’s style Painters and Dockers is the right way .

I'm glad you have travelled the world and seen what is at stake if we can't get any decent fisheries management, PIRSA's 'optimal utilisation' method of destroying a fishery and then waiting decades for it to recover is extremelly dangerous.

Painters and Dockers style representation is exactly what we're missing, there is absolutely no representation of rec fishers, we should be parking all our fishing cars/boats in North Terrace, you know that thing called democracy French farmer style.

Unfortunatelly RecFishSA doesn't represent rec fishers to PIRSA they represent PIRSA to rec fishers and this is why they have to go as they are supposed to be representing the rec fishers to PIRSA.

 

Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you Aussie Dave  are one clued up fella and your ability to read between the lines is spot on,ive folowed your posts on this and other forums and you have always called a spade a spade on either side of the political/rec/commercial divide and i don't reckon you have missed a beat in your commentary.Please stay involved or even better get further involved because rec fishing needs people like you. 

For all the other seemingly considered opinions above i would just like to add that atm sustainability is only  Pirsa spin and is in no way relative to their policies implemented or sadly the many and varied recreational and commercial target species,added to this i'm not aware of any species in our country that has been fished into oblivion by recreational fishers....same can not be said for the commercials and never will be.

                             cheers b

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dave,

I reckon most rec fisherman would welcome a better level of representation.  However what I reckon has been a turn off by many is the behaviour by some of the representative groups.  Tit for tat shit slinging online, the lack of open conversation of different views and opinions, hard line views, then the total alienation with the commercial sector.  Perhaps this is what some people think is needed?  Personally I feel that a much more collaborate and pragmatic approach is required, which isn't where we are headed IMHO.

I'd like to also respond to some of your points in your previous posts:

Quote

 The second point only really relates to SBT's at the moment and that is 'who would tow their 20 foot boat with their big 4X4 down to Cape Jervis or Encounter Bay, motor the 90kms out to the Pages only to catch one 8kg SBT?

I would, and do.  I have the 20ft boat and the 4X4. The effort to drive down to Cape Jervis and chase tuna, is not much more than launching the same boat and fishing the passage for snapper.  Most people who make the effort to chase tuna, don't just chase tuna.  Throughout the day they'll come across nice bits of bottom structure whilst trolling and stop and have a fish.  More often than not a tuna trip will see you come home with your esky not only filled with tuna, but nannies, snapper and trevally.  Then there's the by catch that you get whilst trolling, including big arse salmon, snook and the occasional kingfish.  

If people are travelling that far, chasing tuna only, then they're doing it all wrong....   

Quote

Do you have any affiliation to any other groups that might have a stake? Your responses seem familiar, like I've heard them before?

See, your response here is typical and is exactly the point I was making at the start.  It's the condescending tone and your point that Jay R must have some hidden agenda.  He stated his position, yet why the need to question it?  Perhaps it's because he has a different take on things than you?

Quote

There's the issue right there, you might be able to fish multiple times a week but most rec fishers are lucky to get on the water once a month so one feed is not really enough, this needs to be doubled.

And again.  I'm guessing you must know Jay R well to know how often he's fishing?  Or are you just speculating as it supports your argument?

Quote

But the average size of a SA SBT is 8 to 10kg, even down the South East. an 8kg SBT will give you about 4.5kg of meat, how much a kilo is that one fish once you tow your boat to the launch and do the massive k's to access the fish? $100/kg  

If your justification for going fishing is based purely on kilo's of fish you can catch..... you're fishing for the wrong reasons.  If you're worried about the cost per kg of fish you catch, just buy it from the market as I can guarantee it's more cost effective and much less effort than catching it yourself....

Quote

 

Come on mate, are you serious?

Maybe it's that the people you socialise with are not actually rec fishers, the fishermen with better boats and technology are the commercial fishermen, if that's the angle you're coming from, yes you would of course be very happy with the non-representation that RecFishSA provides us.

 

Once again you're implying that Jay R has some hidden agenda because his experience is different yours.  Why don't you just say you think he's lying and he's likely a commercial fisherman?  

Quote

Painters and Dockers style representation is exactly what we're missing, there is absolutely no representation of rec fishers, we should be parking all our fishing cars/boats in North Terrace, you know that thing called democracy French farmer style.

If you're talking about acting like the unions have in Australia, all the best with that approach as history shows how well that worked for most longer term.

Anyways, I'm not trying to be argumentative.  Just pointing out that there's some interesting behaviours and common tactics often played out in these discussions and hence why many people are simply turned off from positively contributing.

Cheers.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After reading all of the comments posted lately it seems to me that there's a perception that because things didn't go the way some people wanted them to then RecfishSA didn't fight on their behalf and just rolled over and let PIRSA do what they want. Were you there? Were you in the room during these negotiations? I was in the room at the bag & boat limit discussions and had to sign a confidentiality agreement to be there, as did everybody in the room. All I can say is that RFSA fought their arses off to prevent the KGW bag limit reduction as did I and just about everybody else that was present. PIRSA went ahead and reduced them anyway. 

The Libs have stated that RFSA will be part of the new recreational fishing council, personally, if I were part of RFSA I would be thinking long and hard about whether I wanted the continued grief and hand it all over for someone else to cop it all. 'Coz make no mistake, the new team will cop it just as much as the old team when things don't go our way, and there will be things that go against our collective wishes, that's the nature of the beast. Having just potentially burned my bridges with the above disclosure I may well not be accepted anyway were I to be dumb enough to put my hand up. Why dumb? because I'm too thin skinned to cop the online abuse when things go awry.

No offence to anybody is intended, if any is taken I apologize in advance.

Go for your lives, I won't be back online 'til next Wednesday. 

Cheers

Wahoo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rotare touched on three things which seem to be under the radar for most people;

1. I have always cringed at the supposed argument of "get a feed of fish for the family" - it is a recreational pastime, not some form of subsistence necessity.

2. Likewise, the bleating about "not worth putting my boat in the water for X whiting or Y snapper" - it is a recreation, not an expense-neutral exercise let alone a defacto money-making venture. Nobody is forcing anyone to buy a $50K (or whatever) boat in the first place. And if cost per se is the main determinant in terms of "a feed of fish", much cheaper to go to a seafood outlet than do it from your own boat.

3. There is a difference between being "as firm as circumstances allow" and "absolutist-combative on principle" when it comes to representation. The latter, whilst all well and good in a sympathetic audience echo-chamber, is hardly an advisable approach to take (for the sake of professional image and credibility for a start) when dealing with the likes of government departments.... who are the ones who will make final determination regarding any rule changes in any case.

To add another consideration to what Wahoo said - those who constantly push the theme of "what have RFSA done for us" would do well to keep in mind that, for instance, the RFSA rep at the much-derided Marine Parks "secret meeting" was in no small measure responsible for SA ending up with closer to 6% than 10% SZ content.
But the nature of the beast is what it is - "wins" are relatively infrequent, at best the wolves are kept from the door for the most part.
The new RFC (or is it RFAC now?) will have to put up with all the same stuff...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 17/08/2018 at 10:03 AM, rotare said:

Dave,

...

Once again you're implying that Jay R has some hidden agenda because his experience is different yours.  Why don't you just say you think he's lying and he's likely a commercial fisherman?  

If you're talking about acting like the unions have in Australia, all the best with that approach as history shows how well that worked for most longer term.

...

Cheers.   

Fair call about jay Rotare, I don't know him and I'm just making an assumption as he uses the same rhetoric as the commercial fishers. Sorry jay

Unfortunately as citizens and not businesses we don't have the money to compete in a electoral donations/bribery war with commercial fishers so we need to use people power to force the government to listen to us, the only way to do this is to take to the streets, it's exactly the same as the plight of workers where they can't afford to play the corruption game so need to use democracy and harness people power. It's been reported that the MFA donated $300K to the parties in the last election, how do we compete without taking to the streets?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 17/08/2018 at 4:02 PM, Wahoo said:

After reading all of the comments posted lately it seems to me that there's a perception that because things didn't go the way some people wanted them to then RecfishSA didn't fight on their behalf and just rolled over and let PIRSA do what they want. Were you there? Were you in the room during these negotiations? I was in the room at the bag & boat limit discussions and had to sign a confidentiality agreement to be there, as did everybody in the room. All I can say is that RFSA fought their arses off to prevent the KGW bag limit reduction as did I and just about everybody else that was present. PIRSA went ahead and reduced them anyway. 

The Libs have stated that RFSA will be part of the new recreational fishing council, personally, if I were part of RFSA I would be thinking long and hard about whether I wanted the continued grief and hand it all over for someone else to cop it all. 'Coz make no mistake, the new team will cop it just as much as the old team when things don't go our way, and there will be things that go against our collective wishes, that's the nature of the beast. Having just potentially burned my bridges with the above disclosure I may well not be accepted anyway were I to be dumb enough to put my hand up. Why dumb? because I'm too thin skinned to cop the online abuse when things go awry.

No offence to anybody is intended, if any is taken I apologize in advance.

Go for your lives, I won't be back online 'til next Wednesday. 

Cheers

Wahoo

I think you have hit the nail on it's head there Wahoo.

It's the secrecy that is bad, why is PIRSA so afraid of the truth if they are 'the best fisheries managers in the world'? What are they trying to hide?

Your post sums up everything that is wrong with RecFishSA. What we need is representation and that representation must be public and not behind closed doors. How can they lobby/fight for change in such a secretive arrangement? What we need is representation for rec fishers that is independent of PIRSA, are RecFishSA allowed to publicly lobby against PIRSA? How do they stand up for us when they are not allowed to stand up? Would RecFishSA be allowed to arrange a protest where we all take our boats in to North Terrace to fight a PIRSA decision?

What we really need is for RecFishSA to become part of either the Tourism or Sports and Recreation departments and be cut free of PIRSA so that they can fight for the beneficiaries of rec fishing (bait/boat/tackle stores, regional tourism operators and regional towns) against Primary Industries that don't care any more for these rec fishing beneficiaries than they did for Holdens workers.

Oh, and I'm in the IT business making software for the building industry so my only interest is rec fishing as a rec fisher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 18/08/2018 at 8:01 AM, kon said:

...

3. There is a difference between being "as firm as circumstances allow" and "absolutist-combative on principle" when it comes to representation. The latter, whilst all well and good in a sympathetic audience echo-chamber, is hardly an advisable approach to take (for the sake of professional image and credibility for a start) when dealing with the likes of government departments.... who are the ones who will make final determination regarding any rule changes in any case.

...

Here is where I disagree Kon.

Unfortunately we have to play the game of politics and we, or especially our representatives, need to exaggerate or case equally to what the MFA are, rec fishers are responsible for overfishing, pffft, lets attack those that take less than 5% of the fish, lets fiddle while Rome burns, this way we can come to a fair compromise, the politicians can save face by giving neither side exactly what they wanted but by giving both sides some of what they wanted.

An example of this is the KGW bag limits where the rec survey asked if we were willing to take a cut in the interests of sustainability, I and I believe most rec fishers checked yes and for that fairness we had a reduced bag limit while the users that take the majority of the KGW, the commercial sector, had no reduction, that's what being fair gets you, it gets you screwed over.

Unfortunately our representatives need to be a squeaky wheel as it's the squeaky wheel that gets the oil not the one that is fair and not squeaky.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 18/08/2018 at 9:50 AM, brenton said:

well someones doing a shit job because plenty of fisheries are a shadow of their former selves,its all down to Pirsa then for allowing their demise?

                 cheers b

                                              

 

Yep, the best fisheries managers in the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, AuusieDave said:

Unfortunately our representatives need to be a squeaky wheel as it's the squeaky wheel that gets the oil not the one that is fair and not squeaky.

With respect AD,

To achieve any outcome at all, the place to do that would be in the yet-to-be-created Fisheries Council - not social media - and in order to achieve a good outcome for rec's, the arguments put to that overriding Council by our representative(s) will need to be 100% valid, supported by facts and (somehow) agreed by the majority of recs's.

With the election of a new Government the entire face of fishing politics in SA has changed, and we need to change with it. There is no place for continued attacks between members of the rec fishing community. Different points of view should result in respectful discussion and eventual compromise, not short term point scoring.

May be worth remembering that every person who becomes seriously involved in rec fishing representation in this State is a volunteer *, and we will need them all if we're going to progress. There really aren't that many - never has been.

I believe that we have from now until the official formation of the Recreational Fishing Council to get our act together, else the current divisions between our existing organisations will simply be carried into the business of that Council - to the detriment of the entire SA rec community.

Right now the primary focus of our existing organisations should be on overall organisation of the SA rec sector, not individual fishing issues (KGW, SBT etc). We get one chance to get the foundations right.

Cheers,

RJ

* For about 40 years, the only paid rec fishing representatives in SA have been the successive Executive Officers of SARFAC/RFSA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AussieDave, your "representation firmness" post well received.

Just a couple of real-world pragmatic points;
- In my (albeit rather limited) personal experience, the "just say no" approach is futile and, in fact, counterproductive.
- "playing the game of politics" and an absolutist "not one step back, comrades" are, with respect, mutually exclusive concepts in a PIRSA office. Been there, I can assure you the latter is not an option, it is what it is. Maybe the new RFAC can somehow do better for some reason, who knows... but the "feedback and advice" duty statement [hmmm, a caveat indicator perhaps, even at this stage?] flagged by TPTB at this time does not fill me personally with much confidence in that regard.

Those issues aside, RJ nailed another matter of relevance;


 

Quote

May be worth remembering that every person who becomes seriously involved in rec fishing representation in this State is a volunteer *, and we will need them all if we're going to progress. There really aren't that many - never has been.



Finally, seems we may be waiting a little while yet for any substantial outcomes - from the latest PIRSA "Fish Facts" advice;

"Recreational fishing groups and the broader community will soon be engaged in consultation regarding the process of formation, structure and function of the new body."

All rather wet cement. And to those, even altruistically, pushing for a "change" - careful what you wish for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the difference between our viewpoints is that I am commenting on what I believe a rec fishing peak body should be and I understand that you guys are talking about the reality of the current situation and the compromises that you have had to make just to have some skin in the game.

 

These compromises are why I don't think the new Rec Fishing Council will make any difference what-so-ever, the main problem is that RecFishSA is entrapped by PIRSA and PIRSA don't have the best interests of rec fishers as a priority. PIRSA have set up RecFishSA to deliberately be a toothless tiger and give rec fishers an impression only that they have some representation enabling PIRSA to work against the interests of rec fishing while saying that they are helping rec fishers.

Oversight of any rec fishing body needs to be separated from the Primary Industries portfolio as rec fishing is not a Primary Industry but a sports and rec industry with tourism having a giant stake.

I will say that PIRSA have done one good thing, they commissioned the study into Shark Shields proving that they are effective against even breaching GWS's, as a kayak fisher I appreciate this although they would have done it for commercial divers and not rec kayak fishers.

 

Do you guys really think that the commercial fishers unions like the MFA take fairness to rec fishing into consideration when lobbying for their members?

Did the commercial sector reps take the

18 hours ago, kon said:

"not one step back, comrades"

approach to KGW bag limits?

It is very concerning to hear that RecFishSA are required to be secretive about what happens in negotiations, what are PIRSA trying to hide?

A peak Rec Fishing representative body needs to mirror the fairness that the commercial sector shows rec fishers so that a happy compromise can be reached. If we are fair to them and they are not fair to us the result of a compromise will be unfair to rec fishers.

 

Three cheers to all volunteers that have tried to further the cause of rec fishing, I and I think many others are very grateful for your efforts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, AuusieDave said:

These compromises are why I don't think the new Rec Fishing Council will make any difference what-so-ever, the main problem is that RecFishSA is entrapped by PIRSA and PIRSA don't have the best interests of rec fishers as a priority. PIRSA have set up RecFishSA to deliberately be a toothless tiger and give rec fishers an impression only that they have some representation enabling PIRSA to work against the interests of rec fishing while saying that they are helping rec fishers.

I don't think you'll find too much argument with that point of view AD, but whether that situation persists in this brave new world seems to depend upon the structures that are put in place by the Govt. and the way that these are organised. As things have so far been described (very sparsely), RFSA will become just one input into the decision making process, rather than the only input. But it's how the overall new fisheries management structure is designed that will make the biggest difference.

For example (similar to RFSA), if PIRSA themselves were to become one shared input into the parliamentary decision making process rather than the only input to the Minister (or delegate), we might see a whole range of other social and economic issues gain much more precedence in future Government policy considerations. 

I've put together several different "possible" crude organisational charts <attached> to try and demonstrate how this could occur.

It seems to me that right now we have an opportunity to reform this system completely (assuming a Government committed to reform - which seems to be the case).

Although crucial to everyone here and in urgent need of fixing, the issues within the rec fishing community are not part of this.

For whatever it's worth, I believe that individual issues such as SBT, KGW, Carp virus, Coorong Seals or even equitable allocation of resources between sectors should be put on the back-burner until this new management structure is sorted out - after which (hopefully) the right people will be making decisions for the right reasons and will be agreed by the majority.

Could it happen? I don't know.

Cheers,

RJ

Org Chart 1.pdf

Org Chart 2.pdf

Org Chart 3.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies all, I don't know how, but I screwed up and uploaded the same file 3 times. Correct versions are attached for those interested.

I think that if you're confronted with a brick wall (PIRSA), it's better to try and find a way around it rather than to continue to bash your head.

I don't think that anyone outside of the organisation really knows why PIRSA act as they do, and I guess they have their reasons. But even so, a way has to be found to improve things. Perhaps one way would be to change the reporting structure at the top (political) level so that alternate voices can be heard, and that's what I'm suggesting here.

Thanks for your time.

Cheers,

RJ

Org Chart 1.pdf

Org Chart 2.pdf

Org Chart 3.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×