Its not a rule change, its a fee introduction. A fee introduction specifically aimed at pricing people out of going fishing. Thats the point. Naturally those people are going to be pretty annoyed and vocal.

I think 95% of people support measures to help the fishery, but just not ones that will price people out. I dont think they suggested any bag limit changes for example. I think most people would support that if required, or a license that wasnt so highly priced. 

People arent complaining that catches must be reduced, but how the government proposed they be reduced.

Admittedly, for a lot of people on here (myself included), another $180 a year is a fraction of their fishing spending a year, but remember not all people are in that boat (and thats the point of the rules)

having to pay hundreds of dollars to fish obviously isnt necassary. if bag limits were halved i would be happy but this is just bullshit and ure probably the only west australian that wouldnt agree.

the money from this wont even go to improving the fish but will be sucked up and put into other things like everything else in the government

The argument that this new fee structure is going to prevent, and should prevent, sanctuary zones is really tiresome.

The govt has admitted that its a financial disincentive to fishing, its not TOO pay for anything, although they have suggested that is where the money may be spent.

The real problem with the new fees structure is just that. I don't see how its really going to affect people that are serious about getting their bag limit on a regular basis. If its 20% of the fishers that get 80% of the catch, how is a pissy fee of $150 going to really affect that?

In fact now that they have paid their money, they're now going to be entitled!

I think your missn the big pic Stonka....They are going to lock up the coast anyway,

Its a way of getting the dollars now..Are you a fisherman???????Or a Farmer.

For some its not a lot of money,,but for the kids that want to target Pinkys from kayaks in sheltered waters such as Cockburn Sound for example,,4 months closure gives them 8 months,,take away a couple months for bad weather and you have 6 months,,their might be only able to get out on the weekends,some times for only either Sat or Sun,,,,thats only 4 times a month,,in reality it might be less than a dozen trips,,,

The younger folk on a $500 kayak pay the same fishing tax as someone fishing from a $500,000 launch .

But this will be the entry level fee,,in a couple years it will be a lot Moore i am sure.

some people need to stop crying like girls and face facts....

the fish stocks are being hammered....

Their behaviour of ripping out big numbers of fish and then bragging about it on websites like this and others ....with paving shots ....it has come back and slapped them in the face.....

and they dribble like babies that they will vote for labor next time.....if that will make any difference.....get real

you made your beds...now lay in em...

whats dhufish worth in the shops????? $40-50kg......so that one 7-8kg dhu is well worth the investment eh.......oh thats right we dont judge our fishing trip successes by the kilos we pull do we.......

I see what Stoinka is saying because in there study they were trying to make a certain distance off shore a whole sanctuary so no matter how much money you paid you basically couldn't fish until way offshore i don't agree with the fees they are going to charge and do agree that the money raised we will never see in the fishing community it just another way to get some off this countries money back!!. I know when i go fishing it could cost at least $100 so i miss one or two trips to pay for the license i just pity the families who have to pay but how many always get Dhu fish or snapper to bag out pay the $30 dollars for your kids and pay the lot for the adults between the adult license there is the boat limit who cares if the kids bring it up who knows?????????? At least we have fish to still fish for what they are doing wont stop over fishing but it could be a whole lot worse i think

Looks like a kid under 16 has to pay full fare on a kayak .

"children under 16 pay 50% if with a licenced fisher"

I will assumed that kayaks"vessels" are seperate fishing platforms.

 I will round up half a dozen kids with kayaks and put them on the front page of the Sunday Times "These kids pay $1000 to go fishing "

Should make a great headline

how often do 16 year old kids on kayaks clean up on dhu fish pink snapper and so on if it was that easy i would sell my petrol powered boat and just get a yak it would be a lot cheaper. I don't see parents crying to pay footy fees uniforms boots or say golf fees or any other sport fees and who said fishing was cheap?

But as i said b4 i don't agree with the fees but we have to live with them at the moment because the do what they want anyway they didn't ask us about these regs they told us there is a difference

Dhu fish are not commonly caught on kayaks.

Snapper are common,,most kayakers catch and release them.

Some kids save up to buy there own kayaks,,don't get a cent from the parents.

fair enough but if they are released surely they can't fine you how do they know you were targeting them or not prove it. as i said i don't agree but we need to keep an open mind it could of been worse.

I hope you're not including me in 'those that are winging'

1) The pivotal point for me is sustaining our fishery.

2) I don't have a problem with a fishing licence, but, like so many others, I think it should have been a broader licence, not just targetting people within the WCB that fish for (the tragetted) demersal scale fish.

3) I don't even fish in the WCB, but fish in the SCB, but am not stupid enough to think that 'measures' will not migrate to other bioregions.

4) Why limit the measures to the WCB when the targetted species exist outside the WCB (stock depletion is a concern within the SCB).

5) My concern (no doubt, alongside others) is that the $150.00 will result in a greater (not lesser) take.

6) Why aren't the DOF supporting release weights?

7) Unless we get some semblance of legislative enforcement, (the tought of) impunity will persist.

8) Why don't we look at a tagging system as a more equitable and 'ramp checkable' instrument?

My input hasn't been out of winging, it's about concern but not doing it the right way.

Everyone's entitled to an opinion guys, so please keep it civil or your post will be deleted.

we need to make sure the money raised is spend on rec fishing

How are we supposed to make sure the money raised is spent on rec fish when we didn't even get a say in theses fees?

That's MY concern. If we all take a deep breath and look at this complex issue pragmatically, I think we all (should) agree that stock sustainability is the number one objective.

Whilst I understand the passion and depth of feeling, abusing each other is not going to achieve anything.

Isn't it just a bit ironic that we all can appreciate the calm solitude of fishing - then jump on here and....

I just want to see DOF properly funded and some real effective enforcement with rational, workable, well thought out moves forward.

All recreational fishing for 2 years banned. 

Then open it back up with slightly tougher bag limits, itd be a hard 2 years of withdrawals but itd go quick enough and be much better for everyone when it was opened back up.

Of course the other affects this would have would be devistating to tackle shop owners etc, maybe not such a good idea....hmmm you can never please everyone it seems.

my other concern about these rules are the effect it will have on mens health....

fishing is a much needed release of day to day frustrations

work, women, money....all very stressfull stuff

I can see domestic violence increasing ....as the wifes and g/friends wont be able to get the man out of her hair.....blokes hanging around the house....making a mess....moaning about the weather...........husband bashings will go through the roof...

I will tell you right now that if the stocks of the ICONS go lower, rec fishing will be banned in increasing zones.

I used to organize some part in Rallying in WA. Environmental impact, water catchment etc etc. Soon no Rallying!

Get my point.

At some stage the people that feel passionate like me about fishing (for the future) have to cop it sweet.

And I am not talking $$$$.

We as a fishing community have to get serious, see our responsibility, offer what I would term extreme solutions and get on with the job of protecting our own fishery. If the fees are steep and they are in MHO, offer some other Xtreme solution, but it has got to cut to the chase or we will loose this race.

Neels

i agree colin you know in three years fishing offshore in bunbury i have only been checked by fisheries twice now i work shift and am out week days and weekends it would be great to see more fisheries officers out there just in Bunbury let alone everywhere else i believe thats half our problem. They aint going to listen until its election time then all parties start there lies like usual
and promise everything

LMAO! Man...what a mine field!

Dan - Yup! It's like anything, risk vs reward. If folks perceive no risk, then they will go for the reward. I'm a positive person, so I remain convinced that most of us fishos (want to) do the right thing. The problem remains that those that don't will always receive the attention of the media (and fair enough too), but that the overall broader population's perspective will be tainted by that.

I'd LOVE to see LOADS of DOF persons out there, checking EVERY boat. Obviously, given existing resources and WA's factors, that's NOT going to happen. But, to state the bleeding obvious, there's room for a HUGE improvement.

The emotion is there in many factions and forms, with all sorts of discordant objectives.

But! Really! I think we (all stakeholders, Govt, DOF, etc etc) are still fluffing around the edges. This is a VERY complex problem, affecting a LOT of people, and the issue is dire. A very difficult amalgum to say the least.

Let's get away from the 'Value for Money' idium, and look at what is required, and apply the necessary (and imperative) resources.

we will never get a person in there who under stands fishing just somebody why understands numbers thats why there will be no fair out come in the long run look at these fees just more numbers trying to stop fishing

1. the fishery closed for 6 months
2. the fishery closed for 3 months and a limit of a hand full of fish for the whole year

To me Allrounder, that's a major point. Also, MUCH larger penalties.

This needs to be a 'saturation bombing raid' (but sustained). It needs to be about enforcement and about education. 

Making the public aware of all the issues AND turing the aberent minority around are both huge and difficult tasks. 

any1 who has read my proposal aswell as the other petitions on this site,will agree that theese new fees will price the average fisherman out of pocket,besides all the other expences e.g fuel,bait etc.these fees are surely going to line the goverments pockets instead of looking after the fishery.i say raise the size limit on dhufish from 500mm to 700mm,also raise the snapper limitfrom 450mm to 600 mm,and also lower the bag limit aswell,keep a log bookto keep an eye on fish stocks and have closed season during breeding season,and every couple of years have a complette ban on dhufish for at least a year in between followed by snapper a year later,aswell as the anual ban,this goes also for proffessionall fishermen aswell.this is another idea we can also work on,thanks guys.

im with you on that,well said.

also a great  proposal,well done

One thing with the licence is there maybe loss of boat licence ajdusted to the offence, second time, a bigger ajdustement to licence loss according to offence, three times, well, life ban is a possibility?

Id like to see more investment in impoundment fisheries despite DECs no-stocking culture.  Impoundments are doable with minimal impact. Its the only way forward unless state revenues want to see their tax and tourist reveneue head interstate or overseas.

Places like Golden ponds have potential. While there is the pellet fed ponds, there is others where stock has dropped.  Introduction of Murry Cod etc to lure and release only sections where anglers can catch bigger fish might see a growing attendance.

Possibly a double in the entry fee too.  Would you pay $20 to fish 6 hours with ya mates in the chance of catching native species on lures?

Its already a good laugh to go and have a bit of a competition on lures or fly. 

Options have to be provided.  Fishermen dont stop fishing.  They will travel to get their fix taking the tourist dollars with them.

The sooner the DEC hippies get over it the better. They may lack the funds in the future to oversea their delapitated parks otherwise. 

mate its bastards like you that screw it up for everyone else, fishing is an away time for people on there boats to get away from society and relax catching fish and now we are going to have to pay for that to , it seems every luxury the small man has in his world the big HOB NOBS have to come along and fark it up, we have enough shit to pay for already. introducing hefty fihsing fee's on boats and fishers , is not going to reduce numbers in catch or preserve fish species. there are other alternatives to preserving fish species then to just charge more money.

dhuboi no disrespect but we need to start somewhere we keep going the way we are yeah you can go fishing but you wont catch anything and how fun will that be wen we tell our kids of these great fish we USED to catch

mate there are other alternatives then to start charging everyone bulk money,  Buy commercial licences back , section of parts of ocean which are not permitted to be fished for a few years similiar to a sanctuary , size is negotiable , example look at shark bay after a few years.  Another ban all types of trawlers, australian, japenese trawlers indonesian fisherman and patrol more for illegal fishers .

85000 rec boat in WA and we don't do our fair share of damage

also certian size fishes should be returned to the ocean , just like pink snapper in , inner gulfs.  Taking out all the HUGE fish ALLROUNDER aint helping either.. they are the primary breeders and are needed to re-generate stock .

Just out of interest to the original thread starter what do you do for a living ?

It seems a couple of years back you working on Bass Strait,,some of your work mates (divers) earning $2300-$2500 a days wages ($70,000 a ,month),,someone mentioned you were making lotto winner salary,,,

Personally i know if i was wealthy people complaining about $180 would give me the chits as well

For some battlers/kids and familys $180 is worth making a noise about so i am fairly tolerate of whingers and complainers,,knowing that the result they are after could be reached with lower bag limits and more modest fees.

yes there are alot of rec boaties in our state but not everyone uses there boat to catch fish.

collected from rec anglers with the intro of this license used to buy out commercial licenses is a great idea that would kill two birds with the one well funded stone it would be better than spending it on a paper from someone that dismisses data from a previous tagging program because we where too good at releasing fish.So i am happy to say that im am one of a few people that are too good at putting fish back alive and well and that the money that i will hand over for my license will go back into my past time that i enjoy.

buying commercial licences would be a great idea , but also like i said , setting up santuaries less then 1 % of australia's coastline has marine sanctuaries. Even is the sanctuaries are set up rotate them every few years ,it is a massive ocean .

My View

I spoke with a bloke down at a local boating store who is from Melbourne.

He was saying the fishing licenses were brought into vic about 15 years ago. The money raised was used to buy out all net fishermen in the zones declared recreational.

Since these fishermen were removed, the numbers of snapper, KG whiting, and flathead within port phillip, and surrounding inshore water bodies have recovered. and it apparently thriving!!

They have one license for fresh and salt, boat and land. Its now up at about $60 per person, and started around $18 per person.

How can the WA government justify starting off a license only for boat fishermen, and people chasing the demersal species of the deep?

Whats the funds going to be used for? this is the million dolalr question.

I dont know anything about these rules, but apparently SA has the best fishing license / fishery in Australia. Does anyone know what the regulations are in SA?

as everyone else has said, no one is objecting a license, no one is objecting change, its just the cost has started off very high.

Its stated they will re-assess in 12 months, another good chance to increase the cost???

Thanks for everyone who has had a say, all good constructive comments except for a few!!!!!!!!

But at the end of the day we are hear to look after our fish stocks for further generations. By going putting up with a bit of pain will be a great gain for us all.

A more positive approach towards the whole subject is the answer.

By paying this money will make the government accountable and hopefully it is put towards the preservation of our marine enviroment.

At the end of the day when you look at your children or grand children, dont you wish that they can have the same experiences of what fishing, diving, etc. has given to you.

And to the purile way some people get personal towards other people take a chill pill or do us a favour, keep it to yourself please.

Long live the fish

It is about the FISH, not about OUR right to go and get them.

We have a resposibility to look after our sport, our fun and pastime. It is OURS. Governments have seen (lib and lab together) that we as rec fishos have not done this, and both have threatened to act or have acted.

We have to work together, forget the fights etc and come up with a plan as a UNITED rec fisho and face the fact, it is not going to be like the old days.

It IS OUR RESONSIBILITY NOW to help sustain our sport.

Everyone on here think about what it would be like if there was no "FISHING".

We are out there, lets get some solutions aired instead of this eternal bitching.

Neels

Stionka/ Neels ,,Good points. 

yes a licence is due to happen $30 or $40 p/p no probs, yes to a closure of 2 months you can chase other species , but the extra $150 is a lot of money to find if you fish as a family like we do , all up cost for us would be $720. i just think its a little bit harsh concidering the other costs we all have recently had to pay out on like the new EPIRB. as i said go for the closure and a small licence fee i can take that on the chin but the extra hits where it realy hurts

If the Liberal Government where genuine in their endeavors to protect these 5 Vulnerable species, instead of a tax grab ($150) to cut the Recreational catch by 50% they should put a complete Blanket fishing ban for 4 months over the main spawning periods between 15 October-November-December- 15 January for at least two years and then do a study into fish numbers. This complete fishing ban to cover the Professionals with their murdering nets and long linens, Charter Boat Operators and Recreational fisherman alike. Also cut bag limits of these 5 species to 1 of each species per day and introduce a boat limit of 2 of each species when there are more than 2 people aboard. When it comes to the Charter sector a limit of 4 fish fer day and a limit of 1 of each species.
This type of blanket ban has worked with the Pink Snapper in Shark Bay and the lowering of the bag limits in the Ningaloo-Exmouth area has work very well over the past 6-8 years.
When are greedy Politicians going to learn, the EXTRA TAX GRAB WILL NOT STOP PEOPLE FROM FISHING. Every one I have spoken to said they would just fish more and fish longer to get their bag limits, so this stupid idea will not reduce the over all catch by 50% as the Pollies think !!

I didn't say that a tag system would fix the problem I stated a blanket ban has improved the stocks of Pink snapper in Shark Bay. If you go to Shark Bay to fish the Denham side you will notice the juvenile Pink Snapper are a pest in some areas, which is a very good sign the blanket fishing ban over the Pros, Charter Boats and Recessional is working. If this fishery is managed properly these bans and the tag system could be lifted, if the Government use what little common sense it has. So the same blanket Ban with out the tag system will work on these 5 Vulnerable species if the Government are really serious about saving our very special fishery here in the West, 4 months without Pros, Charter Boats and Recreational fishing over the spawning period. This makes more sense than an EXTRA MONEY GRABBING TAX.

I am very surprized we have not heard from Terry on this subject.

As they represent some of you guys on this sight.

I reckon in their crystal ball they see long closures and sanctuaries just around the corner.

Can they comment on this please.

Lifting the Pink Snapper tag system is entirely up to our illustrious Pollies, and the way they are performing at the moment, it is anyone guess ????????? All I know is there seems to be an abundance of Juvenile Pinkies in Shark Bay but that probable won't register with our Pollies as they seem to have a problem with actually giving us anything back unless it means they need more votes for an upcoming election.
This lot of Politicians are a prime example of this with the new fishing rules, what they promised before the last election doesn't quite add-up, again more taxes, uncertainty and going back on their word ?????? Who can we trust in the future to do the right things for us the Recreational fisherman as well as the FISH stocks themselves ????????

have a 5 year ban on the critical 5 as they call them for everyone charters commercial everyone

then bring in bag limmit of 1 of each per person 1 month hear a couple there why bother goin to do f all remember just my opinion i can afford new fee dosnt bother me i just get pissed when everything gets priced out of peoples reach

if its realy an issue of saving stockes 5 year ban then 1 of each per person how shark bay goin now didnt they have a flat out ban on pinkies for a few years 

look at port jackson sharks they had a ban for years there like blowies now

i dont understand what the comment they will lock up the coast and i hope they do ? where is a comment like this coming from reasons behind it. i fish from a boat if i have to pay to do this i dont care but i would rather see a ban in the spawning season and if different fish spawn at different times why dont they ban fishing for a certain species at certain times not just 2 months of a ban because you should not be able to take any spawning fish ,they dont all spawn in those 2 months, maybe spawning times should be made more publically aware so that everybody knows what is spawning and when so that we can choose not to take or target the spawning species,a lot of the time ppl get the piss taken out of them for catching a fish fullstop whether the photo is on pavers or the grass or a boat is irrelevent. this piss taking and infighting between so called fishermen for having an opinion is not going to help fish just make newcomers to the site think twice

we are the custodians of this planet

you and me!!!!

evolution prevails by making one small change which will ripple through time and space........

so go ahead and make that one small change individually

reduce your own bag limit(s) make your own changes......... reduce the stress......

sad day in the conscious evolution of man when the government must dictate to you on how to do things....... yes the proposal is irrational and harsh and apathetic but......something is needed to spark "change", as our resource is FINITE

let prescience prevail and as an individual collective let us change the West Coast and save our fish stocks!!

fish for the future!!

the govt was aware that fish stocks were being hammered 10 yrs ago..........they just let the pros who have a lge comm interest just keep smashing fish stocks and now ever1 has to pay for it

even the small greedy minority cant do damage like a pro fishing net can in one single outing.....bag reductions should have been done long time ago.......dumb arsrse pollies with no stomach for descions early on have made conditions far worse now for all

a complete ban wont work....why..........it will put many out of work, tackle stores will shut shop and all u will have is some 16 yr old at anaconda selling crap gear..it has far reaching implications both politically and locally.

problem is every tom deeck and harry wants pinkies duies and baldies....they sit mostly in a couple of locations and once some fisho with his bling gps unit works out where they are, they smash the area, kill the lge breeders and thats the end of the stock......

maybe its the best option to bunch of bad options, but i think the govt have got this wrong....it wont be 1st time the pollies come up with a compromised descicion that acheives nothing..they r good at that, actually experts

The earth is over populated what else more is there to say ? ?

well if the planet is overpopulated, maybe, there should be a culling event starting with politicians.

Jim.

well we get a licence to fish and drive. i guess breeding is the next step then is it

the other thing no one considers is there are natural breeding cycles where we have good and bad seasons,,,there are natural variations in breeding paterns/cycles as nothing is stagnant and constant is it