RJ5023

Evening all, Agree with the previous posts, although I think 'apathy' might be a bit strong. 'Apathy' has been an overused cop-out term within SA Rec fishing circles for decades. Although it certainly does exist, "apathy' doesn't mean the same thing as "I want change, but I can't be buggered fighting with the SA rec fishing system", and if surveys are going to be distorted or ignored - why bother? But regardless of anyone's level of interest, it's hard to engage with a representative system that didn't work very well and didn't welcome 'outsiders'. The SA rec fishing representative s

Reckon you're right Barney, but no-one seems to want to run an economic survey, and maybe the only way to prove it's true would be to get bums on seats in an environment where the Govt will have to listen - eg as members of their own RF Council. Cheers, RJ

All of them live in the box labelled "Others". IT people love Flow charts and Org charts and Gantt charts - just about any kind of chart. - mostly because we only speak Geek Cheers, RJ

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

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 par

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 vie

Not allowed to use pillies or snook and whiting heads for crab bait? <confused> as usual...

That sounds great, but I don't think local Councils have any jurisdiction beyond the high water mark, and any regulation would need to be implemented by a Govt Department and/or legislated by politicians? (ie - via the existing Fisheries management system). For whatever reason, I don't think that anything has been done to bring the representatives of each sector together and attempt to come up with a solution, even though that may be the only way this can be resolved without years of ongoing dispute - during which time the fishery will continue to suffer (ie business as usual). But it

Just a word please (or several). Some time back I decided to no longer be involved in the politics of fishing in SA - but this current situation is a step too far. This issue is not between recs and pro's. It's about Govt policy and PIRSA's implementation of that policy. It's really about what's best for everyone involved and (primarily) for the SA fishery itself. I'm absolutely certain that there are pro's who are just as concerned about the future of the SA fishery as any rec fisher - probably even more so. There are also some pro's who will take advantage of any opportunity to

I'm still watching this, but not to get involved snapps. But your question is fair and needs to be answered. If I had identified the organisations by name I think it would have already resulted in an enormous (and pointless) shit-fight on S&H, resulting in this thread being (rightly) locked by the Admins - and I didn't want that to happen. Some members of several organisations have become expert at arguing from behind keyboards, and no result is ever achieved from that other than they continue to do the same thing. Every online discussion is driven around and around in circles by t

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

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 t

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

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, be

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 starte