AG Report into DPIRD

Well, Well the Auditor General delivers a report stating that DPIRD has a serious conflict of interest issue and weakness regulating the commercial fishing sector!

After just shafting the recreational fishers /local small business up and down the coast with the current massive overreach.

No wonder the commercial sector isn't crying foul, once again the restrictions don't pass the pub test??? (The standard by which all political descision are measured).


Cheers John


“There's nothing more dangerous as a resourceful idiot”


Jackfrost80's picture

Posts: 7658

Date Joined: 07/05/12

I heard her on the radio

Thu, 2022-12-08 09:18

I heard her on the radio yesterday. it is nothing short of scathing!!!


If catching wrasse is cool, consider me Miles Davis

sealure's picture

Posts: 104

Date Joined: 19/05/12

 Thanks for posting the link

Thu, 2022-12-08 11:15

 Thanks for posting the link to the Auditor General's report on DPIRD.

Having read the report it leaves one in absolutely no doubt that we recreational fisherpeople are being shafted and there's nothing we can do about it.

DPIRD appears totally incapable or more likely unwilling to introduce any of the meaningful changes suggested by the Auditor General.

Any person who has any connection with recreational fishing should seriously consider putting the Labour Party of this State absolutely last on their ballot paper at the next State election.

In the long term it is only at the ballot box that we have any power at all.

Swompa's picture

Posts: 3477

Date Joined: 14/10/12

Some pretty deep cutting

Thu, 2022-12-08 12:50

Some pretty deep cutting comments in there!


"data collected isnt used to form decisions"

"no strategy to ensure the biggest threats are being targeted"


No doubt there was timing in the restrictions being locked in before the report was issued. 

Jackfrost80's picture

Posts: 7658

Date Joined: 07/05/12

"Fisheries officers in WA can

Thu, 2022-12-08 12:54

"Fisheries officers in WA can exercise significant law enforcement powers, but the auditor-general found they were not subject to any ongoing integrity checks."

"There is also a lack of guidance for fisheries officers on managing conflicts of interest in regional areas where officers may enjoy social relationships with the people they need to monitor for compliance and potentially sanction or prosecute,"


If catching wrasse is cool, consider me Miles Davis

sea-kem's picture

Posts: 14331

Date Joined: 30/11/09

 So basically no oversight.

Thu, 2022-12-08 13:45

 So basically no oversight. They have it for pretty well every other law enforcement agency, and I mean geez the cops have there own as well as the CCC. 


Love the West!

little johnny's picture

Posts: 5196

Date Joined: 04/12/11

Integrity checks

Thu, 2022-12-08 22:16

Seems you can commit offences ( as amature ). And still buy pro licence . Tag fish also . Integrity mmmm. Try do that in police force .1 speeding fine your done . Money talks

NORUN NOFUN's picture

Posts: 979

Date Joined: 15/08/11

Nice to see the auditor

Thu, 2022-12-08 13:37

Nice to see the auditor general calling out a total lack of transparency within a goverment organisation.

Posts: 410

Date Joined: 02/09/06

Stay Tuned

Thu, 2022-12-08 14:29

 ACCC getting involved as well as the Crime division!!!!!

The talk on the street amongst the Detectives.

Pete F's picture

Posts: 229

Date Joined: 07/01/18

Great to see it comming out

Thu, 2022-12-08 15:07

Great to see it comming out into the open, something certainly needs to happen. In my time as a pro fisher saw some bad things not just small town compliance officers too there is a lot of incompetence in head office. 

Fisheries officer wife employed by local corrupt fisher that used to go way over his quota's. Said fisheris officer also rumored to be on the payrole too. 

Fisheries licencing officer dishing out quota to family members outside of policy. 

Our fishing association was trying to make complaints about certain fishers going over quota, fisheries was doing nothing about it. So we got questions asked in parliment, that evening we all got phone calls tipping us off there was and investigation about to happen and that compliance officers would be weighing product at the airport the next day. They did not realise it was us that was behind the allegations. 

Only takes a few bad apples in a basket, certainly needs to be some checks and concequences not just transfer them on to another town when something goes down. I certainly know a lot of other things and details but can't say too much publicly. 



Posts: 122

Date Joined: 07/12/15

It appears most on here

Thu, 2022-12-08 21:54

It appears most on here realise this is about Fisheries incompetence and how they're managing the commercial sector, rather than a dig at commercial fishermen and the sector.  For those who are bagging the commercial fishermen/sector, you've read the report wrong.    For the vast majority of commercial fishermen, they provide excellent data to Fisheries research and are very compliant and want a sustainable fishery where they can put in less effort to catch more.  

It would be pretty reasonable to assume Fisheries are doing exactly the same crappy job with the recreational sector.  There's not a commercial and recreational division in Fisheries (DPIRD) - they're all the same people and processes.

Having sat on both sides of the fence - commercial and recreational sector - it really annoys me all this commercial bashing that goes on and these totally uniformed hysterics as soon as there's something negative associated with the commercial sector.  This report is aimed at Fisheries, not the commercial fishermen.  If you want to bash the commercial fishermen, just consider:

- Commercial sector contributes double the access/lincense fees (approx $20m vs $9m)

- Fisheries manage a few thousand commercial operations (i'm taking an educated guess there would actually be less than 1,000 commercial operators across the state now), vs, 750,000 recreational fishermen (according to Recfishwest)

- Commercial fishermen contribute research data to fisheries research vs Rec sector who report nothing (fisheries phone survey which relies on recalling your catch provides crap data - i don't care what anyone says)

- There's more compliance infringements in the rec sector

- The compliance officers socialise with rec and commerical fishermen 

So the rec sector contributes less $$, consumes more of the fisheries department resources, is less compliant, offers no reseach data back to fisheries, and they're managed by exactly the same incompetent department and people who manage the commercial sector.  

Sorry for turning it into a Commercial vs Rec debate, but it just grates on me so bad these cheap digs at the commercial sector, especially when the report is about Fisheries incompetence.

For the record, i've been a rec fisherman for last 18 years, 12 years prior commercial - don't know if that helps, but hey.



Jackfrost80's picture

Posts: 7658

Date Joined: 07/05/12

"The rec sector contributes

Fri, 2022-12-09 06:55

"The rec sector contributes less $$"

This is exactly the reason why recs know they are getting shafted.

You havent accounted for the flow on effect of local tourism dollars. How many coffees from the Green Head Gallery Cafe do you think the Occy pro there buys per day? My guess is not enough to pay for an hour's electricity costs....


If catching wrasse is cool, consider me Miles Davis

Posts: 138

Date Joined: 04/08/22

 Recs contribute about $ 330

Fri, 2022-12-09 07:25

 Recs contribute about $ 330 million a annually just on the salmon season alone so over the whole rec sector fresh water,marron,boating,diving ect the $$ add up pretty quick.and guess what ? The rec catch stays right fucking here for us to freed ourselves and enjoy at an affordable price

Pete F's picture

Posts: 229

Date Joined: 07/01/18

The standard rate for

Fri, 2022-12-09 07:32

The standard rate for comercial access is 5% GVP. 250t x $20kg = about 5mil so about $250,000 in licence fees. 

They say there is 40,000 rec fishers licenced to fish demersals in the WCBR so $40 x 40,000 = $160,000. 

Neither contribute a lot in the form of access rights, the vaule is in the flow on jobs etc.

For the pro's it is a % of that 5 mil, sure they have big boats etc but they are mainly funded by their main fishery, most wetlining is a side line. Rec its what they spend tackle stores boats etc. Recfishwest has it at 2.4 billion spent on our hobby. 



Posts: 138

Date Joined: 04/08/22

 That's right for the general

Fri, 2022-12-09 08:08

 That's right for the general public it's recreation or a hobby,most of us work and pay taxes.Recs don't financially profit from the resource so we shouldn't have to pay huge licensing fees and our spend does go straight into the bricks & mortar businesses.I think the Recs contribution is excellent 

Pete F's picture

Posts: 229

Date Joined: 07/01/18

And if your just talking

Fri, 2022-12-09 07:53

And if your just talking about state wide fisheries rec proportionaly pay a hell of a lot more in regard to the share of the rescource we have. 

"Commercial sector contributes double the access/lincense fees (approx $20m vs $9m)"

We only have a 5% share of the rock loster. 33% of the west coast demerals. less than 1% prawns, scallops, octopus north west deepsea trawl etc etc. 0% deap sea crab, patagonian tooth fish even the take of live corals for the qaquarium trade is worth more than the west coast demersal fishery and we have a 0% take there too. 



tangles's picture

Posts: 1367

Date Joined: 17/12/06


Fri, 2022-12-09 12:00

 Once again I feel the urge to get on only to just tell you ppl to do yr bloody research before you go off cocked on the commercial and charter sector.

Avg Co.mercial days will be cut to 20 days a year. Now if you've been on a wetliner working especially in the Northern area you will know that to be able to find 3-4 day trips out throughout the year consistently is rare. Wetlands out of here travel between 46-80nm to go get their fish but you all know that right!

Now for charters, worse case is 71 fish allocated per charter if evenly distributed between the 100 FTOLs.

Now 45 of those 100 FTOLs are active the rest are sitting in draws not being used but the owners are still wanting their piece of the pie regardless! This horseshit! If it's not being used it's void! So the 71 fish worse case allotment gets a bit better. Now out of 45 FTOLs active there are some that hve minimal active history compared to some that hve history from a long way back! There is one boat that is owned by a crayfishing family here that found a grey area and operate 2 FTOLs ontheir one charter vessel which is a joke as they hve only operated since dec2019 yet act like they hve been there for 30yrs!

So if you all think charters are getting a cushy look in dream on!

They aren't! Days allowable w wx conditions being safe for customers reduces days at sea to fish!

Do yr research ppl b4 you feel your resource is being given to commercial and charter more than you.

Pete F's picture

Posts: 229

Date Joined: 07/01/18

 Did I miss something? Where

Sun, 2022-12-11 15:21

 Did I miss something? Where was it said the resource was given more to commercial? The discussion started about fisheries management and seems to be disappearing down some side tunnel that wasn't mentioned. 



Posts: 410

Date Joined: 02/09/06

Well Said!!!!!

Sat, 2022-12-10 10:47

 I have a charter fishing boat and you have nailed that pefectly.