kon

So...what message does this send to any like-minded people of the same background?http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-06/native-title-abalone-owen-daniel-karpany-undersize/5072466?section=sa $400K of taxpayer money being put to great use there too... :vomit:

Spider crabs?

Spider crabs?

NTTThe rules were adjusted late 2012 to cater for exactly that sort of thing while still making it very difficult to hook (and stay hooked up!) to a big toothie. If the hook measures up okay and the mono diameter is less than 1mm - no probs.60lb should be well under a mil...

Seal numbers increasing metro - summer coming on - increased shark presence (little sharks and big sharks) - big sharks go yum-yum on seals - lots of people in the water...What could possibly go wrong? :evil: But seriously - what to do, realistically? :whistle:

If the snails were collected from an intertidal rocky reef below the high tide mark then it was illegal. There is no size or bag limit. If they were collected from a break wall rock or the like then that would be legal.Also the definition of intertidal rocky reef as per PIRSA is from the high tide mark down to 2m depth. http://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/13100/intertidal_zone1.pdfIf the snails were collected from above the high tide mark, then technically this is legal."The highest, most exposed sectionThese areas are generally wetted only by extreme high tides or by spray. The zone is known as the 'littoral fringe'. In South Australia, this zone is dominated by:â—¾littorinid snails (Nodilittorina unifasciata) â—¾dark patches of cyanobacteria (Calothorix fasciculate, Entophysalis) â—¾lichens (Lichina confinis) in the lower reaches."http://www.pir.sa.gov.au/fisheries/recreational_fishing/habitat/intertidal_habitats

i use the top one for everything, caught tuna, groper, snapper, rays with it and never had a problem with them opening. i have had the second from bottom one open on me though so i do not use them anymore.

chuckembackAm I thinking what you`re thinking...in terms of karma...regarding his tie-ins with the Valentine`s Day [shark tackle restrictions] Massacre?

Further to the Nielsen poll above - just found this on a blogsite, someone having run the figures through an online election calculator and came up with this gem.It`s all about the preferences...remember how Fielding scored a senate seat for Family First with 1.9% of the primary vote?The Queensland Nielsen poll is extremely interesting, given the results for the Senate. The results of the poll were: ALP 31% LNP 45% GRN 8% PUP 8% KAP 4% OTH 4%I put those figures through Antony Green’s ”Senate Calculator” below. The results were amazing. There are 3 ALP senators and 3 LNP senators up for re-election. Now I don’t know the break-up of “Other Parties” (4%), but adjusted the prior 2010 figures already in the calculator as best I could. I don’t think they really make that big a difference. The results came out as follows: LNP ALP LNP ALP LNP PUP Glenn Lazarus of the Palmer United Party becomes a Senator for Queensland come July 1, 2014, and the ALP loses a Senate seat. The absolute irony is that the final seat came down to this: PUP KAP GRNThe Greens’ preferences (the smallest quota of the three) flowed to the Palmer United Party. So Sen. Christine Milne and her merry band of little green munchkins have elected a candidate of the “billionaire” coal polluting and CO2 producing baron, Professor Clive Palmer. I think the word I’m looking for is “irony”And it gets better - a bit of historical background from the calculator site;We have assumed that all votes are ticket votes. At past Federal elections, around 95-98% of mainland voters, and 80-85% of Tasmanian voters, fill in their ballot paper using the group ticket ('above the line') voting option. Given the number of candidates contesting this year's election, the rate of group ticket voting may be even higher in 2013.I personally am gobsmacked by that percentage. But congratulations, Mr Palmer. And thanks a lot, Chrissie. Not. :vomit:

UglyI know someone who was associated with the SA Greens on a professional (not ideological) basis - their SHY appraisal was ..."she`s not real bright"...

Eek. have a look at this (admittedly Bananabender-specific) polling.Palmer and the Greens have hopped into bed with cross-preferencing for tactical reasons, to give both LNP and Labor the big finger - BTW Comrade Milne says he`s no worse than the two majors in terms of pro-coal but their parties have a supposed commonality on asylum seekers, thus no reason for the Greens not to preference Palmer...convenient excuse.Both parties pandering of course to the LCD voters who would like "free stuff that Mr Nobody will pay for".Check out the Greens and PUP. After preference transfers, there`s gotta be a Queensland Senate seat in there for at least one of the loony twins...Take the time, vote below the line.

ausea, you saidNow, having logged on, I saw 45 members and 2462 guests online.My average observation seems to be about 30-60 members and 900-1200 guests.I am intrigued as to what may have been driving the assertions you make in both sentences... PS Dell laptop - Vista - Mozilla browser - no probs.

I have found Platypus Platinum good - but Kokoda GTR Ultra better still.

I can just see it now . Me rocking up to get the Canoe a.k.a. Mully Magnet surveyed and the fellas in the white shirts and clip boards saying "are you serious" and just bursting into laughter . Kon said :Particularly given that there is no financial reward for the individual making the upload... I did hear or read that if you use said video on a sponsored site . Then technically , i believe that lures or fishing gear given to you IS the financial reward . So my understanding is if you don't post videos to a sponsored site and don't get Lures fishing gear and the like (financial reward) then you are ok ? Does seem like a lot of ho ha over nothing and just to scare or get a reaction from the fishing masses .

bent87You did mean "night time hours" I presume, if referring to the metro shark fishing tackle restrictions? Probably an irrelevant consideration, because there is actually nothing to stop you from fishing metro LB for shark during the day anyway - as long as you use nothing bigger than an 8/0 and mono trace no thicker than 1mm...although you would be guaranteed a hard time regardless, I suspect, given the political drivers for the introduction of those particular regulations...That aside, an extract from the fishing regs to ponder - note it refers to Berley not Bait;23—Berleying(1) A person must not use blood, bone, meat, offal or skin of an animal as berley (otherwise than in a rock lobster pot or other fish trap) within 2 nautical miles of—(a) the mainland of the State; or( any island or reef that forms part of the State and is exposed at the low water mark.Maximum penalty: $2 500.Expiation fee: $210.(2) A person must not deposit or use in marine waters of the State the body, or part of the body, of a mammal or bird.Maximum penalty: $2 500.Expiation fee: $210.Unless someone interprets the above as "no animal berley within 2nm of land" and "no use whatsoever (ie for bait) in all marine waters" ...thus completely disregarding that Reg 23 is specifically titled "Berleying"... it would appear by logical inference that a chunk of meat on a hook is fine...for Bait.However, the PIRSA interpretation of the Regulations pursuant to the Act appears to be a little different, looking at the last item on the FAQ link;What about the use of small amounts of meat for berley or bait when targeting fish such as mullet? The intent of the law is to minimise the impact berleying may have on attracting sharks to areas close to other water users. It is considered unlikely that these products will have significant attractant properties and so they will be dealt with in the same manner as commercial berley. Compliance officers will use their discretion in weighing up the circumstances of its use.Notice how "or bait" has subtly crept into their departmental interpretation of the Regs? :whistle:

This will end up being as popular as a wet fart in an elevator.Hopefully there will be too much red tape to allow this legislation to be passed.That is if it is legislation yet and not just election hot air by the Libs, who by the way might relent slightly on marine parks, but are more than likely going to allow the supertrawler to operate within our waters.Could be tough times ahead for recreational fisherfolk, whoever wins the next election.

bent87You did mean "night time hours" I presume, if referring to the metro shark fishing tackle restrictions? Probably an irrelevant consideration, because there is actually nothing to stop you from fishing metro LB for shark during the day anyway - as long as you use nothing bigger than an 8/0 and mono trace no thicker than 1mm...although you would be guaranteed a hard time regardless, I suspect, given the political drivers for the introduction of those particular regulations...That aside, an extract from the fishing regs to ponder - note it refers to Berley not Bait;23—Berleying(1) A person must not use blood, bone, meat, offal or skin of an animal as berley (otherwise than in a rock lobster pot or other fish trap) within 2 nautical miles of—(a) the mainland of the State; or( any island or reef that forms part of the State and is exposed at the low water mark.Maximum penalty: $2 500.Expiation fee: $210.(2) A person must not deposit or use in marine waters of the State the body, or part of the body, of a mammal or bird.Maximum penalty: $2 500.Expiation fee: $210.Unless someone interprets the above as "no animal berley within 2nm of land" and "no use whatsoever (ie for bait) in all marine waters" ...thus completely disregarding that Reg 23 is specifically titled "Berleying"... it would appear by logical inference that a chunk of meat on a hook is fine...for Bait.However, the PIRSA interpretation of the Regulations pursuant to the Act appears to be a little different, looking at the last item on the FAQ link;What about the use of small amounts of meat for berley or bait when targeting fish such as mullet? The intent of the law is to minimise the impact berleying may have on attracting sharks to areas close to other water users. It is considered unlikely that these products will have significant attractant properties and so they will be dealt with in the same manner as commercial berley. Compliance officers will use their discretion in weighing up the circumstances of its use.Notice how "or bait" has subtly crept into their departmental interpretation of the Regs? :whistle:

bent87You did mean "night time hours" I presume, if referring to the metro shark fishing tackle restrictions? Probably an irrelevant consideration, because there is actually nothing to stop you from fishing metro LB for shark during the day anyway - as long as you use nothing bigger than an 8/0 and mono trace no thicker than 1mm...although you would be guaranteed a hard time regardless, I suspect, given the political drivers for the introduction of those particular regulations...That aside, an extract from the fishing regs to ponder - note it refers to Berley not Bait;23—Berleying(1) A person must not use blood, bone, meat, offal or skin of an animal as berley (otherwise than in a rock lobster pot or other fish trap) within 2 nautical miles of—(a) the mainland of the State; or( any island or reef that forms part of the State and is exposed at the low water mark.Maximum penalty: $2 500.Expiation fee: $210.(2) A person must not deposit or use in marine waters of the State the body, or part of the body, of a mammal or bird.Maximum penalty: $2 500.Expiation fee: $210.Unless someone interprets the above as "no animal berley within 2nm of land" and "no use whatsoever (ie for bait) in all marine waters" ...thus completely disregarding that Reg 23 is specifically titled "Berleying"... it would appear by logical inference that a chunk of meat on a hook is fine...for Bait.However, the PIRSA interpretation of the Regulations pursuant to the Act appears to be a little different, looking at the last item on the FAQ link;What about the use of small amounts of meat for berley or bait when targeting fish such as mullet? The intent of the law is to minimise the impact berleying may have on attracting sharks to areas close to other water users. It is considered unlikely that these products will have significant attractant properties and so they will be dealt with in the same manner as commercial berley. Compliance officers will use their discretion in weighing up the circumstances of its use.Notice how "or bait" has subtly crept into their departmental interpretation of the Regs? :whistle:

bent87You did mean "night time hours" I presume, if referring to the metro shark fishing tackle restrictions? Probably an irrelevant consideration, because there is actually nothing to stop you from fishing metro LB for shark during the day anyway - as long as you use nothing bigger than an 8/0 and mono trace no thicker than 1mm...although you would be guaranteed a hard time regardless, I suspect, given the political drivers for the introduction of those particular regulations...That aside, an extract from the fishing regs to ponder - note it refers to Berley not Bait;23—Berleying(1) A person must not use blood, bone, meat, offal or skin of an animal as berley (otherwise than in a rock lobster pot or other fish trap) within 2 nautical miles of—(a) the mainland of the State; or( any island or reef that forms part of the State and is exposed at the low water mark.Maximum penalty: $2 500.Expiation fee: $210.(2) A person must not deposit or use in marine waters of the State the body, or part of the body, of a mammal or bird.Maximum penalty: $2 500.Expiation fee: $210.Unless someone interprets the above as "no animal berley within 2nm of land" and "no use whatsoever (ie for bait) in all marine waters" ...thus completely disregarding that Reg 23 is specifically titled "Berleying"... it would appear by logical inference that a chunk of meat on a hook is fine...for Bait.However, the PIRSA interpretation of the Regulations pursuant to the Act appears to be a little different, looking at the last item on the FAQ link;What about the use of small amounts of meat for berley or bait when targeting fish such as mullet? The intent of the law is to minimise the impact berleying may have on attracting sharks to areas close to other water users. It is considered unlikely that these products will have significant attractant properties and so they will be dealt with in the same manner as commercial berley. Compliance officers will use their discretion in weighing up the circumstances of its use.Notice how "or bait" has subtly crept into their departmental interpretation of the Regs? :whistle:

bit of info re Sealions vs Fur seals. Sealions are an Eared Seal, Fur seals are a true seal. Australian Sealions have an 18month gestation period with a 7-10 day rest period before the mother is then on heat again for 24-48hrs. Sea lion pups weight 7kg at birth. bull sea lion in mating season 300-400kg. mating agression is high. this = squashed sea lion pup.often the male sealions do kill babys and this happened on the Jones Island colony this year. we lost quite a few pups just after birth. the colonies are few and far between so this makes genetic inbreeding a possible issue. recent data leads to the figure of 12-13000 Australian sea lion pups between Geraldton western Australia and Victor harbor South Australia. Fur seals gestation period 12 months there for out breeding the sealions almost 2:1. mating aggression not as high. colonies more widespread and greater numbers. population approx 300-350,000 and much wider spread of population. but also inhabits almost all known Australian sealion breeding areas. they do cohabitate in many places. They do interbreed at times but all pups usually die shortly after. Either being underdone or over done due to the 6month gestational difference in cycles. soemthing will need to be done and it wont be pretty. kull/harvesting of the NZ by professional hunters is an option. but not one that will go down in good light to the public and the greenies.

Aah, Lexi, beat me to it...A fair way down for non-diving recfishers to be responsible. It was supposedly tied to the buoy rope?A "false flag" effort not inconceivable - hey, here`s a dead shark, what can we do with this...? Cutting off the fins would target the obvious minority there, but if we leave it pretty well intact that opens up the horizons, etc...a couple of hours later...hey world, look what we came across!!!The location is interesting too.Now, the bolded bits piqued my interest;"Dr David Powter, a senior environmental science lecturer at Newcastle University's Ourimbah campus, says it appears to be a deliberate act of cruelty."http://www.redmap.org.au/my-redmap/view/david.powter@newcastle.edu.au/Just an idle google, of course, nothing inferred...oh yeah, I also googled "Robbert Westerdyk marine", and this came up on the first page;http://www.visitcentralcoast.com.au/activities/diving/ex-hmas-adelaide-reserveRead the "NSW Crown Lands Division" greyed bit.Once again, nothing inferred...

Aah, Lexi, beat me to it...A fair way down for non-diving recfishers to be responsible. It was supposedly tied to the buoy rope?A "false flag" effort not inconceivable - hey, here`s a dead shark, what can we do with this...? Cutting off the fins would target the obvious minority there, but if we leave it pretty well intact that opens up the horizons, etc...a couple of hours later...hey world, look what we came across!!!The location is interesting too.Now, the bolded bits piqued my interest;"Dr David Powter, a senior environmental science lecturer at Newcastle University's Ourimbah campus, says it appears to be a deliberate act of cruelty."http://www.redmap.org.au/my-redmap/view/david.powter@newcastle.edu.au/Just an idle google, of course, nothing inferred...oh yeah, I also googled "Robbert Westerdyk marine", and this came up on the first page;http://www.visitcentralcoast.com.au/activities/diving/ex-hmas-adelaide-reserveRead the "NSW Crown Lands Division" greyed bit.Once again, nothing inferred...

Some recommended reading for any recent sharkfishing arrivals on SH...http://www.pir.sa.gov.au/pirsa/media_list/fisheries/update_to_metropolitan_shark_fishing_rules

Hey ppl, I too am a barefoot fisherman but I absolutely would not use carpet.. It is hard to keep clean, needs to be hung up to dry properly,it smells & holds moisture/dampness which are the enemies of wooden floors. If you must lay something on the floor use rubber matting that can be rolled up to clean under, has good non-slip properties,is soft under foot & can be lifted easily to allow what`s underneath to dry as well. Paramount-Browns have a pretty good range. Personally I like coatings that are non-slip on the floor, so I`d go with Moggy`s sand coating given you can`t get the rubberised paint-on/roll-on coating that is on my floor anymore. Cheers.

JimboYou may be technically correct re advertising, but to be fair I am looking at it more from the perspective of gratis information provision.It may be of benefit for our overall cause to have a seat in the upper house next year occupied by the Fisher/Shooters or SAFLP.WA have one seat (nearly got two apparently), NSW have two...so a little advance clarification on here is probably no bad thing?I am not so much interested in the self-spruiking in relation to finer detail to the n-th degree, but would certainly like to know what the story is with mutual cross-preferencing for both parties...for those who vote above the line, anyway.Although I personally take an extra few minutes out of my life every few years to make the gargantuan effort of voting below the line...