nok

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

good job,SAFA have been out and about during this process which is a lot more than i can say for the other mob.The submission is fair and equatable as well.
             cheers b

SAFA's Submission to PIRSA has been put up  in the SAFA - South Australian Fishing Alliance section of Strike & Hook. SAFA have done well, with this submission. The thought , planning, putting together and presentation of this submission, shows the commitment that SAFA has to those that SAFA represent, This is us, Rec Fishers. The Submission makes for some very good reading and I recommend it to all on Strike & Hook. Thankyou to the mods that run Strike & Hook, for allowing SAFA to show that they truly represent Rec Fishers. The voice  of Rec Fishers is now getting heard and our reach in increasing as now we are in an alliance with RecFish Central. SAFA and all those that have helped to get SAFA to this stage, are to be congratulated. You all have done well. Now the Rec Fishers of South Australia, need to add their support to SAFA as SAFA truly represents us.
 
 

" an absolute joke ",......" a pathetic way " ................." to achieve their evil plans "         I think you summed it up, nicely brenton.

The rec survey data is an absolute joke only 3 people out of the 150 at the glenelg meeting had ever done a survey in the last 25 years then PIRSA extrapolate this data X 236,000 anglers to reach the tonnage we catch.Now if thats not a pathetic way to quantify our catches i'll go he for chasey.......unless of course it suits them perfectly to achieve their evil plans.
cheers b

The Survey type is not designed to reliably estimate angler catch.  This is well known.  To get accurate recreational catch a survey specific for that purpose is required.  The problem is the gov is unwilling to fund it, and reduced the funding for the present 2013/14 survey which shows in the parts missing and the marked error associated with estimates.

Yes, you are quite correct and a good pick-up I was at the meeting also and the presenter said the CPUE (kg KGW per fisher day) had fallen recently.
If you go to the KGW 2014 publication by SARDI [p14 Fig 3.c] you'll see the graph used.  Ignore the line for gill-nets because it is based on limited data.
Well if that CPUE handline graph is not in a steady even climb between 1984 (minimum value) and 2013 (maximum value), then ?
I noted the slight inflection in the presenter's voice as he ran his pointer along the most recent years and said it had fallen.  I felt he could not really believe what he was saying, because it was so obviously incorrect.

The Survey type is not designed to reliably estimate angler catch.  This is well known.  To get accurate recreational catch a survey specific for that purpose is required.  The problem is the gov is unwilling to fund it, and reduced the funding for the present 2013/14 survey which shows in the parts missing and the marked error associated with estimates.

The Survey type is not designed to reliably estimate angler catch.  This is well known.  To get accurate recreational catch a survey specific for that purpose is required.  The problem is the gov is unwilling to fund it, and reduced the funding for the present 2013/14 survey which shows in the parts missing and the marked error associated with estimates.

Yes, you are quite correct and a good pick-up I was at the meeting also and the presenter said the CPUE (kg KGW per fisher day) had fallen recently.
If you go to the KGW 2014 publication by SARDI [p14 Fig 3.c] you'll see the graph used.  Ignore the line for gill-nets because it is based on limited data.
Well if that CPUE handline graph is not in a steady even climb between 1984 (minimum value) and 2013 (maximum value), then ?
I noted the slight inflection in the presenter's voice as he ran his pointer along the most recent years and said it had fallen.  I felt he could not really believe what he was saying, because it was so obviously incorrect.

Yes, you are quite correct and a good pick-up I was at the meeting also and the presenter said the CPUE (kg KGW per fisher day) had fallen recently.
If you go to the KGW 2014 publication by SARDI [p14 Fig 3.c] you'll see the graph used.  Ignore the line for gill-nets because it is based on limited data.
Well if that CPUE handline graph is not in a steady even climb between 1984 (minimum value) and 2013 (maximum value), then ?
I noted the slight inflection in the presenter's voice as he ran his pointer along the most recent years and said it had fallen.  I felt he could not really believe what he was saying, because it was so obviously incorrect.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, even one so obviously biased as yours.  The page is providing a direct link to all relevant topics of interest to anglers.  It is not a Forum.  However at least SAFA is promoting attendance at tonight's meeting, and irrespective of your "opinion" on the aesthetics of the FB page (somewhat, if not totally irrelevant) not many of the main angler organisations like RFSA are even bothering to mention the metro meeting is on today, where a huge number of anglers can attend.
 
Nevertheless your acknowledgement of people working to improve the position of rec anglers is noted and appreciated.

How do you like it? Hope you enjoy!

I showed the graph given by the Chairman of Recfish SA, where he plots the weights of snapper caught by reccos.
Yes, I assume these values were from the 2000/2001 and 2007/2008 surveys, and on checking appear close to the values stated.
Your value for 2001 is not correct according to the original survey.  I have not misled anyone, and the graph was produced by Recfish SA.
I am unsure what I have to exactly explain.  I just thought the graph would be useful to reccos.