Recreational Fishers Set To Benefit From Changes T

[Ken A]

Fishers in NSW will continue to benefit from a range of important projects thanks to a boost in funding for the state’s two independent recreational fishing trusts.

The additional funding for the trusts will come from a small increase in the cost of recreational fishing licences.

From July 1, the cost of a recreational fishing licence will increase from between $1 and $5, depending on the type of licence people choose to buy.

This is the first increase to the NSW recreational fishing licence in four years.

Monies raised from the sale of the licence are put into one of two trusts - the saltwater trust or the freshwater trust.

Expert anglers sit on both trusts and decide how to reinvest the funds across a number of important recreational fishing projects.

Sales of the recreational fishing licence over the past year have raised $10 million, and those funds will be spent on a range of improvements to both saltwater and freshwater fishing.

In fact, since the recreational fishing licence was introduced in 1998, more than $36 million has been raised to support ongoing projects.

These include the highly successful fish re-stocking programs, habitat restoration, and services such as fish cleaning tables and fishing platforms.

Another $135,000 will be spent on this year on installing extra Fish Attracting Devices along the coast, and more than half a million dollars will be spent on re-stocking both saltwater and freshwater species.

The additional funding will build on the success of these programs, with the money going straight into projects chosen by expert anglers.

Recreational fishers have also been calling for a durable, waterproof licence and an efficient sales system.

The Department of Primary Industries will soon call for tenders for a new state of the art electronic licence system and expect to have it piloted by 100 agents later this year. For the first time plastic, waterproof licences will be available to fishers.

The licence fees also go towards funding the 30 highly successful recreational fishing havens across the state.

Fishing continues to improve in the havens, and the State Government is working with industry to develop the further buyout of commercial fishing licences.

From July 1, a 3-year licence will increase from $70 to $75, a one-year from $25 to $30, a one-month licence will rise from $10 to $12 and a three-day licence will now cost $6, up a dollar.

Recreational fishing licenses can be purchased from most fishing tackle shops, service stations, K-Mart stores, caravan parks and on the NSW Fisheries website.

Past projects funded by the recreational trusts include:

A record level of fish stocking in 2003/2004, with 8.5 million fish released into NSW waterways.

A $120,000 project to improve fish habitats in the Clarence River over the past two years. This included removing restoring fish habitats, removing barriers to native fish movements, planting native trees and removing exotic vegetation

A gamefish tagging program which sees recreational fishers tag gamefish caught and released in NSW waters. The tagging program records valuable information on fish migration, growth and behaviour. Last year the project received $120,000 from the saltwater trust

The installation of 15 fish attracting devices (FADs) along the NSW coastline. These buoy-like devices have been successful at attracting significant numbers of fish and have proven very popular with recreational anglers

[Whitto]

Dammit

now the licence that many people don't have will cost more the next time they don't buy one.

Does the $200.00 fine for not having a licence go into the trusts?

[Whitto]

Iain,

One question ...

Now that all Fishraiders have a couple of mobile phone numbers to contact fisheries officers can we report ANYTHING illegal

$200.00 would buy 8 years worth of licence

Edited June 15, 2005 by Whitto

[Grantm]

Iain,

You know I have supported your views, but I just dont get it. I know you are concerned about how these funds are used and other miss management issues, but surley you can see how these fees are helping rec fishing.

Whats the story ?

[Grantm]

Fair enough but,

Maybe it just isnt that easy to buy out the pros. Buying them all out in a very short timeframe would surely affect other businesses and have a follow on effect on many people. Maybe having an expectation that the goverment is just going to wipe out an industry in one foul swoop is just a bit much.

Maybe they are trying to show the 'average voter' that these funds are going to be used for a variety of things and not just to wipe out an industry. Most people dont have the same knowledge or insight as we do, and rule No .1 in goverment is to protect thy own ass.

It was my belief that with the Hawkesbury and Sydney Harbour that the pro's simply outvoted everyone to keep it open and there was no public push to make it a RFH. I definately agree that these two should have been the first to go regardless of opinion being the main systems. That was a bad call.

Dont get me wrong, I hate the pros as much as you do and want them gone and want it to happen sooner than later, but I still think the licence system is good and helping out our fishery albeit in the wrong order and still should get all of our support. Im just playing the devils advocate here and throwing another angle on it.

My feelings are that the more people who get a licence the quicker the pro's will dissapear, and im happy to pay a little extra to speed it along as well. The only chance we have got to get rid of them at all is to buy them out, and not contributing to the fund that will do this in time, aint helping. It was my licence fee that helped get rid of them from Lake Macquarie and without this licence fee they would still be there wouldnt they ?

Perhaps we will agree to disaggree on this one. The main thing is we all want the same thing, and although you wont buy a licence you put a huge amount of effort into trying to make a difference.

[Wayne_D]

Iain Good onya for standing up for the kingtrap issue, although I wonder if you/we may have got a better response if the letter had come from a licensed Rec fisho?

Maybe they looked up the database and found you weren't a paid up member. I hope I'm wrong...

Wayne

[Grantm]

No probs were on the same wavelenght anyway.

Do you know if there is any plans to create more RFH's.The waterways booklet refers to them and says there will be more but that doesnt mean much.

Like you, id like to know there is at least a plan to create more, cause thats what im counting on.

Oh, ill probably put some shit on you just for fun by adding the odd

" buy a licence Iain " at the end of a few posts.

Cheers

[Grantm]

It is important to me that there is at least a chance our main waterways become protected (and i dont mean marine parks ! ) from the pro's, with this licence money.

I do think the fish restocking programs are good, but ill be holding my breath over future havens. Just hope I dont suffocate.

Ive also made a few inquiries into the havens future.

Cheers

[Whitto]

Ah Iain,

I wondered about your reasoning ... I couldn't understand how you could be so comitted to doing all you can for the betterment of fisho's and then refuse to buy a licence.

Now that you have supplied your reasons, I will happily get off your case.

... a little anyway

[Grantm]

Iain, I also contacted Jim Harnwell in regards to the future of RFH scheme and this is what he wrote.

******************

"The current Fisheries Minister won't commit to any more RFH unless it is a negotiated proccess between the rec and pro fisherman.

Your right he is pro biased and it is a joke.

The licence fees do other things like FADS, research ,restocking etc,etc - but im with you in that the money should be used to buy out the pro's and return our estuary systems to a sustainable level.

Ill do my best to push these points in the mag and try and influence the minister to become more rec friendly. But im not holding my breath"

Regards

Jim

******************

So it seems this is perhaps the next step. How does this negotiation proccess become a reality ? Is there someone trying to make this negotiation ? Id sure like to know.

I think it is good to contact people like Jim, as Iain did re Kingfish traps, and try to stir up some activity. People like him seem to have some pull and if we get these type of issues published in a highly regarded mag it has to help.

Cheers.

Oh yeah - Buy a licence Iain.

[Grantm]

Spot on there, thats exactly what it is. But surely the committees of expert anglers that Ken refered to in the original post who control the trusts can do this negotiation or at least work on something. Can we contact these people and see what their stance is ?

[basic_fisho]

Hi Guys. I cant go past what Iain says regarding the importance of using the licence mony to buy out the pros. Especially in systems like the Hawksbury.We did without all these other things they are doing with the money,i think more people would have got behind the licence deal, had they tackeled the hard jobs first.(The Pros.) I am definetly with Iain on this,although being a pensioner i dont have to buy a licence anyway. Ben.

[mattyt]

My name is Matt,

I just registered with this site - I have been running the stocking programs in Botany Bay/Georges River over the past 3 years.

We need to monitor the contribution of the catch to the recreational fishery. All stocked fish have been marked interanlly, its is necessary for us to obtain a piece of bone or cartilage to detect this mark. The most ideal is the otolith, however we can still visualise the mark by analysing the fin spines (see attached pick of mark).

I am interested in hearing from any jewie fishers in the Sydney area that would be willing to help with the project. This would basically involve one of two things:

1. If you retain your catch, i would need you to save the freshly frozen head and snip off the first and second anal fin spine, and take a note of the length. Give me a call and i'll pick it up within a couple of days of hearing from you (if you collect the jewels, we only need one if you would be willing to donate it).

2. If you are a catch ans release fisher, i would like to meet up with you and pass on a set of vials, cutters and a sample sheet. The idea is that you take a note of the legth of the fish, and snip of the first and second anal fin spines before returning the fish to the water.

We need to monitor the stockings for at least the next 5 years, so although i'm not asking for a concrete commitment, if you were in it for the long haul you would really be helping us to get some real information from this work, which in turn would mean support for similar programs in the future.

We are also kicking off a mulloway stocking project in the Tweed and Richmond Rivers next year-

Hope to hear from you soon (mattytaylor@unsw.edu.au)

[Wayne_D]

Do you see the irony in having a stocking project in a river that gets hammered by the pros. I couldn't confirm the other thread here abouts that 2500kg of jew were netted there recently. Does the money for stocking of this species come from the recreational licences? It's funny how this arguement has been circular - I was kind of thinking that the jew post in here by Matt should be in it's own thread, but in a way it highlights the problem with spending our money.

Sorry Hooky, just noticed your reply in the Jewfish slaughter thread

Edited June 20, 2005 by Wayne_D

[Grantm]

There definatley something wrong here. After reading Rockworms post about the jewie slauther in the Richmond River, then this one about restocking it next year, really adds weight to getting rid of the pro's as the highest priority. There is clearly no point restocking this river until they are gone for good.

Almost sounds like a plan that was meant to be that way.

Mattyt, whats your thoughts on the river you are going to restock being emptied just as quicky ?

Cheers

[mattyt]

Grantm:

At the moment the project is in its very early planning stages. You have to understand that at the moment we are trying to develop strategies for stocking effectively, and seeing how the fish grow and survive when different strategies are used. This information will most probably be used in the future to plan and assess larger stocking projects.

At the moment we consider ours to be pilot work. At the bottom line we need to get back as many samples as possible to ensure we get the required information from our work, as a lot of fish get caught by the pro's that is a real efficient avenue to get samples back, and we need to get back large numbers of both wild and stocked fish to determine any contribution stocking is making. For this reason, the partial recreational fishing havens in the tweed and richmond serves the perfect purpose for the research. Although we have no confirmation of anything yet, i want to continue my work in the Georges, and the Hastings River which are complete RFH's. This will enable us also to compare the success of stocking both types of RFH (complete vs partial), whilst ensuring we get enough samples to obtain growth and survival information. We also intend to apply for funding from other sources to support this work.

All stocking will be undertaken inside the RFH's, it is very low-level stocking and will be aimed at specific habitats within the RFH's, at different times of year. As i mentioned before it is very early days, adn there is a lot of planning, surveying and assessment to be undertaken before final decisions are made.

CHeers,

Matt

There definatley something wrong here. After reading Rockworms post about the jewie slauther in the Richmond River, then this one about restocking it next year, really adds weight to getting rid of the pro's as the highest priority. There is clearly no point restocking  this river until they are gone for good.

Almost sounds like a plan that was meant to be that way.

Mattyt, whats your thoughts on the river you are going to restock being emptied just as quicky ?

Cheers

53682[/snapback]

[Grantm]

Thanks Matt good answer.

You have to understand that there is a lot of people out there like us who are very passionate about this topic and getting straight answers is very difficult. All any of us are looking for is a sustainable fishery to enjoy without it being raped by pro's. All we can see at times is trawlers scooping up everything in sight with no regard for the future which is very troubleing.

Although you may need the pro's catch for research I still think it stinks. If the pro's dissappeared there be plenty of fish to study while returning our waterways back to normal.

Any info you give is very much appreciated, thanks for giving us another viewpoint.