The only real way to get a politician to listen & act is through the electoral box. 
The Minister for Fisheries represents the Willagee electorate. 

If every recreational fisherman who wanted to get his attention to problems including sharks donated to his opponents in that electorate he might be more willing to take notice. 
Ideally one should choose the opposition to donate to as that would be a far greater threat. 
The most valuable commodity to a politician is his/her seat in Parliament. 
However as has been pointed out to me on many occasions trying to organise fishermen is much worse than trying to herd cats. 
I see no point in trying to support minor parties in such an effort as they are unlikely to pose a serious threat to the re-election of the standing member. 
Hence one would have to direct support to the Liberal candidate in his electorate to have any meaningful effect & this might not sit well with a significant number of recreational fishermen. 
As others have said Reckfish seems little more than a QUANGO. 

Any real fisherman in this State will quickly tell you that the biggest threat to sustainable fishing is sharks. 
Our major problem is getting the Fisheries Minister to listen & take measures to combat the problem short of banning fishing altogether. 

FYI.

Today's West talks about statewide demersal "trip limits" reduced to 10kg with the intent to have a 12 month trial in place before the start of the ususal northen fishing season.  I don't know if it's the media mincing words, but it sounds like it's not just confined to Shark Bay anymore.

There's also mention of allowing commercial shark fishing in the northern regions too.  Sounds like the fisheries minister is dangling the shark fishing carrot as an all or nothing proposal (i.e. the reduced limits and commercial shark fishing as a package).

i'm genuinely annoyed with the politics being played here.  One community cries about the quantity of fish being taken and now reduced limits and commercial shark fishing are on the agenda without wider consultation, despite the wider fishing community pleading with the government for years to greenlight commercial shark fishing.

Any suggestions on what we can do as a community to bring our voice to the table?  Too many closed door discussions going on.  I'll always be supportive of changes to limits if they are scientific and fact based decisions, but i do feel the current limits are appropriately calibrated and the current proposals affecting the majority are based on the cries of a few.

Cheers.

Tom.

I dont agree with the decision given the period and who and how it was raised. Its sad how these things get some air time...before you know it a few more parties buy in and its racing and cant be stopped. Its a pitty the shark issue cant pick up steam like this.

To me it sounds like its already run its race....prepare for 10kg demersal limit state wide, given a top up of quality palagic's is not the end of a great trip away surely ?

I struggle with a $120 fuel bill just trying to catch 2 demersal, so feel for the crew that do invest a lot of money into there boats and trips once a year, I guess were in a similar boat now but can still enjoy the trip yeah.

I'm due for my 3rd trip to the abrohlos end of March on a charter, 2013 with a crew of 10 the boat caught our limit of 10kg with a day to spare, so some quality snorkeling and a few beers topped the trip off.
2015 we struggle for 7kg per head...this due to winds, possible skipper or fish not hungry, still a great trip. During the last few days of that trip we started to see a few more charter boats around...not sure how many large charters operate out of there, how many trips per season of full limits that must go from there and how long the place will hold up even at 10kg per person. Hard to tell and am interested to see how good the fishing quality is this trip.

Bag limits are reflective of people on the water fishing / fish taken via research. Maybe these locations north are now due for this given the population and boaties travelling...covid or not.

 Im sure fisheries have used data gathered from a few licence holders and extrapolated the information, i dont know this for a fact but i had a call fom fisheries asking if i wanted to participate in a survey and 

i said yes until they started asking 'how many times do you go fishing per week? how much do you catch?  i said no thanks stated my reasons and hung up. i bet some people say they have caught more than what they actually have to get a bit of brag in.

Anyone know how fisheries use information from licence holders to assess fish stocks/ catches etc? I bet the way they add up their figures is not accurate or reflective of what rec fishos actually catch.  Weve got jazz charters going out decimating the local pinky population near on daily / sometimes twice daily but thats ok. do they have a quota they need to abide by? they should. Im still upset about the metro pinky bullcrap we had slapped on us if you hadnt guessed. This smells of something similar reagarding wreckfish and fisheries

 Bypass the fish bins and feed the frames to the sharks. Then the sharks will become front and centre and the mayor will need to make his waters safer and start killing the sharks  bins will be empty so limit should stay.

 It does sound like the poor garbage truck driver was upset that his cushy little job from the past changed over afew weeks maybe he didn't get to the pub until 4. We all know that these country town people don't like people from Perth unfortunately with the way things are going to be for the next few years they are going to have to learn to deal with us, there will not be international travellers so their only income will be from us. As stated before they may end up biting the hand that feeds them. 

 Maybe they should just remove the fish bins. Stop the whole problem. 

 Hello All

I've been a silent fan on FW for years but this recent swipe at recreational fisherman and yet another limit reduction has, again, proved our lifestyle is being eroded by the politicians, fisheries and OUR lobby groups. If the number of licences, the number of West Australians and the measured biomass of OUR resource was calculated to arrive at the 20kg trip limit, how can a 50% reduction in catch limit be justified?

Nothing has changed since COVID - the numbers are the same.

Secondly - to the fine people of Shark Bay, the Mayor, all Norwest country towns and whoever else believes that local fish stocks are theirs - apologies, they're not. The fishing resources of Western Australia are owned by the people of Western Australia - not the pollies, the fisheries etc. - the People OWN the Resource and the guardians are there to manage it - FOR US!

Where is the evidence? Where is the empirical data? Where are the data sets to justify a 50% reduction in catch limits? If you can't measure the problem - you can't control the outcome. Period. This decision is based on OPINIONS - not FACTS.

This "thin end of the wedge" law that will be passed will NEVER be repealed - our rights to fish OUR resource will be taken based on three wheely bins of fish frames that responsible fisherman paid $10k per year, to abide and comply with the laws of their state. They are not freezer fillers - they're good people who head North once per year to responsibly respect and farm the resource that they OWN.

RFW are compromised having to bow to the pollies in order to access capital. Totally understand their position, however, wouldn't a reduction to 15kg + 5kg of pelagics been a much fairer outcome with a sunset clause built into the law??? 

We do the right thing - most uf us anyway - and yet, our bag has been gutted again. The local two fish limit is ridiculous and should be doubled, One dhuie per person is more than fair with a boat limit of four but does that happen? Nope. 

Thirdly. Sharks.

Bigger sharks, breeding more, in plague proportion, gutting fish stocks and placing people at risk. They need to be farmed as a protein resource and MANAGED RESPONSIBLY. You wouldn't overstock a cattlestation. The downstream impact would be catastrophic and yet, that is exactly what is happening with the shark population along our coast. Take, not one more shark than necessary, to control the biomass and create a safe and healthy ecosystem for all.

Fourthly - Follow the money.

Why, if stocks are so depleted, is the money generated from the fishery not going back into stocking programs for Dhuies, Reds, Goldband, Snapper, Kingies. Where are the boatramps being built to world class standards. All I see is $400k Naiads and compliance officers - whom i personally respect greatly and thank. Why is money being syphoned off to other departments from OUR collective licences?

NOT ONE DHUIE FARMED AND RELEASED SINCE LICENCES WERE INTRODUCED - NOT ONE!!!

I hope the decision makers are watching this forum because we're watching you. One day, not too far away, you'll be accountable to the fishing folk of WA - Don't forget, there's a million of us. I'm almost ready to pick the fight and know well, you're shit scared of us uniting as one group. One year of licence money is a lot. One miillion votes will put you in Centrelink.

Leave our bag limits alone and DO YOUR JOB to manage it wisely or we'll get someone who will do it right. Be fair. Spend the money where it should be spent. Re-stock our fishery. Manage the sharks catastrophy. Build infrastructure, Stop pissing our money into other departments.

 "Ëveryone has a plan - Till you punch them in the face" Mike Tyson.

 Looking forward to what other fisheries rules will be charged on the advice of a local council decision  damn why dtop at fisheries regulations I'm pretty sure most people in my electret would vote in favor of increasing the maximum speed limit .no need for fisheries research anymore we will just go on what the bloke emptying the bins reckons. 

 Personally, I think its good to see a Shire adressing an issue before it becomes a problem and not spending a fortune on a study to state the obvious.

Who better to keep an eye on the fish stocks than the locals?

If the locals are seeing twice the tourists, with twice the boats catching twice the fish, I reckon reducing the catch limit might stop further restrictions later when it later becomes a real problem.

Id much prefer the option of 10kg (which is still a shit load!) of fish than going back to the lottery system!

Takeing 40kg of fish for a family of 4 plus what you eat while in the area is plenty in my eyes and f you were doing it for the money value youd be better off buying fish.

Good to see a comunity with a proactive approach.

 Personally, I think its good to see a Shire adressing an issue before it becomes a problem and not spending a fortune on a study to state the obvious.

Who better to keep an eye on the fish stocks than the locals?

If the locals are seeing twice the tourists, with twice the boats catching twice the fish, I reckon reducing the catch limit might stop further restrictions later when it later becomes a real problem.

Id much prefer the option of 10kg (which is still a shit load!) of fish than going back to the lottery system!

Takeing 40kg of fish for a family of 4 plus what you eat while in the area is plenty in my eyes and f you were doing it for the money value youd be better off buying fish.

Good to see a comunity with a proactive approach.

 If fish were filleted at sea or the frames were kept and returned to the sea on the next outing, the  bins would remain empty and local emotions kept under control. Personally I've never been interested in bringing home the max allowed by possession limits when fishing further north, despite opportunity. Have been more than happy to eat the daily fish or two while away and have enough for 3-4 family feeds frozen to bring home. While a big pile of frames in the local bin will get the gossip going, I think a bit of hard evidence of the total take and impact is needed before changing the rules . 

I can't believe anyone quantifies their enjoyment of the annual NW fishing trip to the fish they bring home, unless they have a missus at home that they have to justify the trip to through $ spent/kg of the return. 

Fish, drink and take the piss out of your mates for a week. Fresh fish all week and bring home 10kg. Dunno bout you but it won't stop me!

The biggest issue is the constant erosion of rights, bit by bit. It's a bit like the constant erosion of firearm and hunting rights.

Some people agree, some people disagree, shit keeps sliding through.

Bag limits decrease (constantly), rarely increase.

Marine Parks keep happening, rec access rarely ever improves.

Licence fees keep increasing, never decreasing for less bag limit or access.

Always shrinking.

Always.

 Read today on Stalk book that the Mc Clown Gov have put a proposal to the fishers and shooters party ahead of the greens( Must be Worried)

Do your research before you Tick that box..

 Please don't think I'm squealing about the bag limit reduction. That's not the key point.

The issue of the reduction is the erosion of our rights and the lack of accountability from the people who make these decision and pass the laws.

How can RFW act on our behalf when their paychecks come from government? Really!!!

The point is - where is the evidence to justify the decision - real data, calculated from unbiased subject experts working independantly? If OUR fishery is in trouble then i'm personally all for a justified reduction. This is, most definately, not the case here. This idea has been parked for years in hard drives of fisheries - which COVID created.

Dig a little deeper on number of sharks to be taken as well - and the conditions placed on the fishermen - it may be a joke as well. I may be cynical thinking the shark inclusion in the proposal is just a reacharouind but if we're serious about our stocks being truly protected, then a reduction in the shark biomass MUST be the first step towards protection - not a 50% reduction in our bag.

We take one trip per year which costs about $10K after all ins. We farm our grounds and take 2-3 fish, on electrics, to prevent the sharks setting in. We fish our lumps every 2-3 years. We value the fish we catch and treat it with respect. We do not take our extended family, and load up a freezer with 80kg's for a family of four (really!!!). I head back with 20kgs - often less - and feed my family for 6 months. I am fully compliant with the laws of WA.

What was once a 60km/hr driving zone is now a 30km/hr limit - yet - not one single proposal has been put forward to justify the decision. It's a Fkn whitewash.

Big John - 100%

15kg's + 5kgs Pelagics is fair for 12 months. Thin out the shark problem, the re-assess.

 Regarding Dhufish stocking and research.

It can be done - it's just the desire to do it and the money required to make it a reality. China landed a probe on Mars yesterday but we can't farm our own iconic Western Australian demersal. Gimme a break. Follow the money and see how much is pissed up the wall for other departments.

The really stupid part in all of this is that a Dhufarm would be such an economic asset to the state. Best fish in the world!

Rant over - I'm going to rig up and get ready for 10kg's of frozen Spaniard and soggy frozen Longtail..... Might even bring home a few Gold Spot Trev's as well for the inlaws.

 It's a real shame when these threads degenerate into name calling and slurs, it detracts from what was actually a good thread so far. Like the shark thread that just spiralled into a farce.

We don't all agree on everything, that would be boring and unproductive so let's try and keep it measured and civil. I've been guilty of it in the past no doubt but when called on it always an apology via PM

Lots of shouting going on. A long read, some cracker points and some misses. All things considered I think the 10KG limits are OK, would prefer they stayed at 20KG's

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/a-The-Shark-Bay-area-showing-the-boundaries-of-the-Beach-Seine-and-Mesh-Net-Fishery-the_fig5_268355193

This is the SharkBay boundary for the Marine Park.

Steep Point is NOT in the Marine Park, unless this has changed.

    I have no idea whether the reduction in posession limits was premature on not. However I believe  the reduction  sooner rather than later will be  more sustainable for longer. The goverment has a big australia policy hence  the high imigration rates pre covid. This has many benefits but of concern to the boating fishing lifestyle it also introduces more boating participates and  increased demand for fish at the retail level.

Inevitably the rech fish limits are constantly changing and  trending down so if you believe the fish stocks are not increasing in line  with the population growth and the explosion in larger and better equiped boats that are roaming further and wider then the fish stocks will have to be shared out amongst the boating and retail fish buying community.

You really are share fishing; The  current rules around Fishing for the future  will be under review and pressure  while the boating community both expands and becomes better equiped,

You could view yourself as privliged to  have been able to access 20kgs of fillets and still fortunate to have access to 10kgs. Boating may well  slowly transition away from the focus on fishing. You could possibly  end up in the future Eco Fishing, buying a tag to catch a fish and these tags could even be expensive or limited by a ballot and should that happen the 10KG limit will be remebered fondly.

If the regulators have it all wrong and the fish stocks are standing up well to the increasing population and  fleet of large well equiped boats then we can look forward to a healthy fishery  in the future where getting 10kgs of fish fillets  will be easy

 This limit reduction doesn't bother me one bit. I catch enough fish in Esperance to keep my family in fillets. When I tow my boat up north every year  it's to have fun, see cool places and wildlife with the family and hopefully tick a few boxes by catching something we don't get on the south coast. If we get a feed it's a bonus and is usually eaten up there. 

 You can look at it lots of ways. Most of us spend a shit load of money to get up north, not just what we spend in the towns. In my view, the towns do deserve what they get if visitiation drops by pushing this, but also have every right to protect their interest. my frustrations and points are simply;

- commercial catch a hugely greater disproportional catch so they should be "penalised". ultimately the oceans belong to veryone not jst them / the gvernment.

- the survey is clearly not wide enough and my bias tells me it was directed to certain persons

- has the closure "no catch" period been considered?! 

 What is this implemented from?

 What is this implemented from?

I was just having a read through this thread and was amazed at the lack of understanding of the numbers/data involved with this discussion.
It took me just a few minutes to check out the last three available annual reports from the WA fisheries to see (as I suspected) that the amounts of demersals taken by recreational boat fishers in the Gascoyne Inner Shark Bay region is a small percentage compared to that taken by the Commercial fishermen.
In 2019, Pink Snapper catches were 176tonnes commercial and 22tonnes recreational.
In 2018, the stats shown are for all demersals and it was 277t vs 95-110t.
In 2017, Pink Snapper catches were 178t vs 15-20t.

And in all three of those years the catch rates were given a status of Acceptable.

(Once again this election I'll be voting for the Shooters, Fishers, Farmers party.)
 

 Lots of good points raised here....

Finally by some posts above it sounds as though the sharks might get looked at....

A great outcome would be halt the commercial demersal fishing up there and let em go ham on the sharks...

I also agree Formula about the Dhu breeding.... They can land shit on mars, They doing a full human head transplant soon!! Surely they can get fish to jizz in the right places...

Is anyone here good at getting some sort of petition going? Somewhere we here can get the ball rolling and at least get a few hundred emails heading in the right direction highlighting our concern for no scientific data and also the impact the sharks are having first hand when trying to get a feed....

lots of comments

for all those bagging rec fishwest id ask you

do you understand how they operate at all ?

have you ever read their financials ?or yearly statements ?

have you ever attended a meeting ?/

have you ever put your hand up to be on the board ??

did you fill in the any of the surveys ??

back in the day about a decade ago , the board argued for a got the ability to add the emails of all punters who bought a fishing licence so they could be asked for input and sent news updates etc , such things as surveys for example re this demersal push by the minister ,, given there are well over a 100 000 + licence holders is a sad reflection that less that a 1000 can be fked to fill one in and respond ...

highly likely the fisheries dept and minister gave recfish west a very short time line to respond to their proposed change in limits .as that is what they often do ,,,just put changes forward with min time frames to respond ... so they did the best they could for rec fishers with a poor input base to use as the result shows ....

imo rec fishers should be a little ashamed of there own apathy to lobby and participate ......if you want to look in a mirror ,,just ask your self individually how have you got involved with them ,,easy to blame , much harder to get involved and committ to making change happen

and yes i was on the board and iv seen how this works ,,,,,,,i got into it back around 2007 as like a lot of you guys i felt the same and expressed some of the same sentiment until i got involved ... everyone is busy nowdays ,,,but if you care you committ ,,,,,,,,,,

board meeting where monthly ,,at 5pm weeknights ,,,i drove from bunbury to waterman every month , attended a 2 hour plus meeting and then drove back home often getting home at midnight .

lots of proposals are stopped long before you guys ever hear of them ,

many of those making comments live in metro , ask yourself how much have you given to fully understand how this body works or advocate to stop the erosion of change as for being a QUANGO ..far from it ime

dhuifish farming ?? read up on their biology , understand how dam difficult and expensive that is even today ,,,its not your run of the mill aquaculture , if it where viable it would be happening ,, same as abalone or crab etc

id also ask people to think about how the ramps look nowdays ??? the boats you see when your there ? most have gps , big sounders , and access to weather forecasts etc etc ...... protecting the future is a massive issue .we always need to keep sustainability in the mind set ....sometimes even when we dont like it im not afan of this change ,,, but it shows mr tinley will do it as he has everyone in wa thinking labour are gods ,,,,,,winning with mr 91% no wonder it will pass through and be done ..... it does not need science ,as there is min to no voter backlash against it ...why ,,, the gov looks at that piss poor survey input and says well most recs dont care enough to respond let alone cause a ripple or backlash to it

feel free to fire away ,, but before you do ,,think about it and be honest if you have really done you bit to stop it happening

no excuses

hezzy

An update on the State-wide possession limit review
February 10, 2021
share

tweet
During 2020, COVID-19 interstate and international travel restrictions saw many regional town centres experience an influx of domestic tourism which promoted many local fishers to contact Recfishwest concerned about the potential impact on local fish populations.

Having also been contacted by concerned community members, Fisheries Minister Peter Tinley asked Recfishwest in September last year for advice about the appropriateness of the current State-wide possession limit.

Recfishwest’s fishing possession limit submission to Minister Tinley reflected the fishing community’s feedback.
To inform our submission to the Minister, Recfishwest carried out a survey of our members and spoke to various leaders within the recreational fishing community.

“Our survey was accessed by 875 people and had a 92 per cent completion rate demonstrating the importance of this issue and I would like to thank all of you who took the time to fill out the survey for your well-articulated responses,” Recfishwest CEO Dr Andrew Rowland said.

Recfishwest provided advice to Minister Tinley in December, which can be found by clicking the link below.

Subsequently, Recfishwest has recently received correspondence from the Minister regarding its submission with Dr Rowland writing to members to provide an update.

Dr Rowland said Recfishwest’s submission to Minister Tinley reflected the feedback Recfishwest had received from the fishing community.

“The clear message from fishers was that protection of our fish stocks is best undertaken by implementing a range of measures rather than just changing the possession limit,” he said.

“These measures include addressing shark bite-offs, regional education and compliance presence and addressing the high level of latent effort within the charter sector.”

CLICK HERE TO SEE THE FULL LIST OF RECOMMENDATIONS IN OUR SUBMISSION TO THE MINISTER AND THE SUMMARY OF THE SURVEY RESULTS

Recfishwest’s key recommendations to Minister Tinley included:

Maintaining the current possession limit at a person’s principal place of residence and establish a “trip limit” to cap the amount of demersal fillets that can be brought home from a fishing holiday. Recfishwest advised the Minister we would support a trip limit of;
20kg of fillets where no more than 10kg can comprise demersal fish, or
10kg of fillets plus one day’s bag limit of whole fish, or
Two days’ bag limit of whole fish.
This “trip limit” arrangement should be temporary and reviewed after 12 months or when WA’s current border restrictions are relaxed.
Prioritising action and resources to address the current shark bite-off problem – start by allowing commercial fishers in the Gascoyne, Pilbara and Kimberley to retain shark catches each fishing trip;
Reversing the recent decision to close some regional fisheries offices to the public and continue to improve on-ground presence of fisheries compliance officers;
Action to address the high level of latent effort within the charter sector through licence reform to protect existing genuine charter operators;
Any changes to the current State-wide possession limit should not apply to extended live
aboard charter trip clients.
Amending existing fishing regulations including;
Removing the rules related to filleting at sea – which includes a minimum fillet length of 30cm applying to all fish with a minimum size limit – and also ensuring large fish cut into pieces for easier storage are regarded as a single fish rather than two separate fish.
Applying the release weight provisions State-wide.

It’s important to have a long-term view and make sure current border restrictions, resulting in more people holidaying at home and enjoying fishing, do not adversely impact on our fishing experiences in the future.
Making sure demersal fish stocks are protected

“In relation to the trip limit recommendations, it’s crucial to take a far-sighted view and make sure current border restrictions, resulting in more people holidaying at home and enjoying fishing, do not adversely impact on our fishing experiences in the future,” said Dr Rowland.

Given the lack of quantitative data around potential recent changes in recreational catches, Recfishwest recommended to the Minister that the 10kg demersal trip limit should only apply for a period of 12 months before being reviewed, or while COVID-19 restrictions remain in place.

“These proposed arrangements will give increased protection to the more vulnerable slower growing demersal species while allowing fishers to make up their 20kg possession limit with other species such as Spanish mackerel, cobia and yellowtail kingfish,” Dr Rowland said.

“We informed the Minister our recommendations were not supported in isolation and should be implemented as a package.”

The proposed arrangements will give increased protection to the more vulnerable slower growing demersal species.
The Minister’s response and next steps

Minister Tinley has recently advised Recfishwest that he is broadly supportive of our recommendations and that he has directed DPIRD to begin drafting amendments to the Fish Resources Management Regulations.

DPIRD has confirmed this drafting will involve input from Recfishwest to ensure any regulation changes are introduced efficiently, effectively and fairly – ultimately benefitting all of our future fishing experiences.

“It is expected these regulations will be implemented towards the end of March or early April and reviewed after 12 months,” Dr Rowland said.

“These are positive outcomes obtained through a positive consultation process and I would like to thank Minister Tinley for providing Recfishwest time to properly consult and consider the wide views of our sector in providing him with advice.

“We are pleased the Minister did not act unilaterally based on the concerns of individuals or single points of view, but rather took the time to listen to and support the views of the recreational fishing community.”

Under the recommendations, fishers will be able to make up their 20kg possession with popular pelagic species like Spanish mackerel. Picture: Western Angler

I do appreciate your efforts Hezzy for trying to get involved with Recfishwest to make a change and also your posts regarding this.
BUT, the reason why I have little time for Recfishwest is because of what you have just posted.

From what I understand (from reading above posts), these proposed changes in limits have been created by Covid19, "anecdotal" evidence and seemingly whinging from locals about their fishing stocks.
I'm a numbers man and don't care much for emotive and subjective reasons behind new law changes ... so where are the numbers to justify these changes?
I see none other than anecdotal reports of almost a tonne of fish scraps during peak time at a fish cleaning location in Shark Bay.
How that can be used as a primary justification for a rule change is beyond me.

If there was good evidence showing Recreational boat fishers were now putting an extra 20% (even 10%) pressure on our fish stocks, then I too would be concerned. But the official data, as provided by our WA Fisheries departments tells me that is simply not happening.
Let's use my previously stated 2019 numbers for Shark Bay;
 - Commercial fishers took 176t for the year and Recreational took 22t of Pinkies.
 - Let's assume that in 2020, due to Covid19 and increased fishing pressures by the Recreational boat fishers that went from 22t up to 33t (a whopping 50% increase by the Recs).
That equates to just a ((176t + 33t) / (176t + 22t)) = 5.6% overall increase.

That is, once again, Recfishwest totally ignore the impact of the commercial fishermen when addressing a rule change.
And that is what has peeved me off with Recfishwest for decades.
 

Hi All, I’m enjoying the discussion. I think most fishers would happily accept a reduction in carry or catch limits if it is scientifically proven that the reduction was required for a sustainable fishery into the future.  But, with no scientific measure any reduction is going to be hard to swallow.

And if there is no valid measure how do you land at a 50% reduction?  Why not 75% or 25%? Then at the end of the reduction period (if there is an end) what measure is to be used to justify keeping or relaxing the restrictions?

I’ll declare I’m one of those fishers that do an annual trip up north for a week with mates. Have been doing it for 20 years and it’s just as much about escaping the daily grind and enjoying my mates company as it is coming back with a decent feed of quality fish.  Reducing the demersal limit to 10kg is not going ruin our trip as we struggle to get more than 13-14kg on most trips anyway. It just means we’ll be more diligent filleting by removing rib cages resulting in lighter fillets and maybe target pelagic fish a bit more.

All up, the amount of fish we catch and keep is not going to change much, and our catch still going to be dwarfed by the tubs full of fish by charter operators who aren’t going to be impacted much by this as most of their customers only head out once are happy with their 5kg - good luck to them.

It just seems this is more about oiling the squeaky wheel than any real impact on sustainable fishing.  The fishers that have the time and the gear (& the skill) to catch & carry more than the proposed 10kg limit would be such a small percentage of the total rec fishers out there. Which means if this gets implemented there will be negligible reduction in fish caught in the whole scheme of things IMO. Therefore, what’s the point?

Cheers.

 Hi does anyone know when these changes come into effect im at steep point from 19 th march then upto coral bay from 27th march and home around 7 th april cheers in advance

 Got an election happening so I wouldn't expect changes until the bullshit settles, but who knows....