has anyone seen the front page of todays paper it's saying that the minister of fisheries wants to inturduce a fishing licence wanting all recreational anglers to pay $25 fee to fish and ban us from huge swaths of the state's coast and rivers as part of a overhaul of wa fishing laws. This fee would earn the government $20 million estimated a year which I have no problem about paying a licence fee as long as they can insure me that all, of the money i spend is going into breeding fish and going to fishing related things not in there pocket for another annual holiday at tax payers expense. But on  banning us from fishing in some areas I think that is wrong why don't we have catch and release areas where anything caught in these areas size all not has to be put back as I think it is wrong to take our own coast line from us!!! I don't know what anyone else thinks about this but I don't think they will use the money for fish stocks and etc. and we will be no better off for paying a licence fee.

jimbo1's picture

Posts: 333

Date Joined: 22/12/06

Catch and release

Wed, 2007-09-19 19:13

Catch and release sounds good as a option, only thing depends on how much area they plan to ban us fishing. And I dont know how many fish survive the release part, never been one to read all the statistics on released fish bit slack i know.

But lets face it $25 fee at the end of the day is a crock of shit! I am sure enough money is made of the pro's let alone worrying about the recreational fisho's.


milsey's picture

Posts: 1462

Date Joined: 22/08/07

i havent read the artical, i

Wed, 2007-09-19 19:29

i havent read the artical, i dont mind paying $25 and i recon that will stop a whole heap of amature fishos who dont get out much, which could increase fish stocks and i agree with ya on sayin banning fishing in some areas is wrong.

jimbo1's picture

Posts: 333

Date Joined: 22/12/06

Problem being

Wed, 2007-09-19 19:33

Problem being the ones that dont have a fish due to paying a annual $25 fee arent the ones you need to worry about Milsey. I dont think it will stop those people who get out there and push the envelope a few times a week.


milsey's picture

Posts: 1462

Date Joined: 22/08/07

yer true,

Wed, 2007-09-19 21:40

yer true,

SPESS's picture

Posts: 3356

Date Joined: 29/12/06


Thu, 2007-09-20 06:24

SAME SHIT DIFFERENT THREAD! no offence to you italiano intended. All in all let them do what ever the f@#*k they want and let me know when its all finished! Then ill pay whatever because in reality whatever is said over and over aint going to change anyones decition and all i want to do is.........GO FISHING!

Keep it tight, reeeeeeel tight!

Rodrat's picture

Posts: 1672

Date Joined: 13/01/07

Good Idea

Thu, 2007-09-20 12:50

I think a licence is a great idea, providing the money is put back into officers policing the rules and future stocking of fish



tailor marc's picture

Posts: 2979

Date Joined: 27/09/06

I agree , as long as the

Thu, 2007-09-20 12:59

I agree , as long as the money goes back into the fisheries like getting more officers out there etc.

Also it would sort out the keen fisherman from the once in a while fisherman
( yay more room at northmole ) hahaha


My photography pictures...



ody's picture

Posts: 581

Date Joined: 30/12/06

Hi Ya,Other than revenue

Thu, 2007-09-20 13:14

Hi Ya,

Other than revenue raising, can't see any benefit.  I am not naive enough to think the Govt will put all the revenue back into fishing.  Nor and I naive enough to think that needing a license will mean all people fishing have one.  Just go to any rock wall any day of the week and you'll find plenty of people disregarding the current laws.

What really cheeses me off is that I pay my taxes and that is supposed to allow me to go fishing, enter natioonal parks etc, but now I have to pay to enjoy both.  I defy any of you to head south and find a useable gravel road into a national park.  When I was in Augusta earlier theis year, the road into Cosey Corner was so bad I couldn't travel at more than 10k/h or destroy my car.  No thanks.  So where is the money going that is raised from people entering national parks?  Not into road maintenance that's for sure.

I suppose time will tell.


Posts: 459

Date Joined: 09/11/06

How the heck

Thu, 2007-09-20 13:31

How the heck are they going to police such a thing ( and the RST ) on a coastline as big as WA. Most of the time I fish weekdays and in the past 20 years I have only seen one fisheries inspector at the ramp on my return. I would suggest that it would be imposible to police . Maybee the money would have to be spent on policing or new boats or whatever and therefore nothing left over for anything else.
To take my boy out for a fish a couple of times a year ( not that keen on fishing) and have to spend $25 is a joke. What about the battlers with Mum Dad and 5 kids who go fishing a couple of times a year as a day out for the family --  $175 ???? - get real !
What next $5 to take the dog for a walk .
 I think we all agree that fish stocks need to be conserved but if everyone that fishes at the moment buys a licence and continues to catch what they do now , what has changed ? How would this help protect the fish stocks. Same number of anglers and same number of fish beeing caught .
Sorry Milsey - but why would we want to " stop a whole heap of amature fishos who dont get out much" most sports are trying to attract people and my kids are in that " dont get out much" catagory as we all once were.

If they need more money for whatever - another study , research ,  etc and it will directly help future fish stocks then count me in but there must be a better way.
Why not something like an extra 1% gst on all fishing gear that would be a fairer way of user pays system. The more you fish the more gear you lose/buy etc.

Only my 2 cents worth but maybe someone in office on knob hill needs to think outside the box.


Any day fishing is a great day !!

Bill's picture

Posts: 437

Date Joined: 24/03/07

They can do what they want

Thu, 2007-09-20 14:04

They can do what they want because they will anyway so no use crying  over it .it's all a crock of S%$T anyway just  let me know what the new rules are when they have decided .Till then fishing as usual.

There's a fine line between fishing and just standing on the shore like an idiot

SPESS's picture

Posts: 3356

Date Joined: 29/12/06

Same as me Bill..... Keep it

Thu, 2007-09-20 14:45

Same as me Bill.....

Keep it tight, reeeeeeel tight!

Andy Mac's picture

Posts: 4779

Date Joined: 03/02/06

Chicken and the Egg

Thu, 2007-09-20 22:31

Its a classic case of Chicken and the egg.

If they employ a heap of fisheries guys, we can see the money has been spent in the area we want it spent, enforcing the bag limits and gathering more scientific date to better manage our fisheries. Once that's in place the majority won't feel any umbrage at forking out $25 or even $50 per boat for a license (remember this is currently aimed at demersal species that you can really only catch from a boat).

However they won;t spend any money on this until they know they can raise the money from us in the form of a license.  Chicken and Egg!

I reckon they need say 30 part time weekend fisheries guys, 2 at each metro ramp and 10 full time floating around at the moles and beaches and doing a random spot search midweek. Increase the fines by 10x for undersize or overbag and promote the bloody thing aggressively through tackle stores and every fishing show and magazine in the country.

Why not get the bait supply companies to put "Be Warned" notices on every plastic bait bag wit hregards to th eregs and penalties for breaching them, just like they kind of do with cigarettes. No escaping the images then, no excuse...even write them in a few languages if they have to.  


Andy Mac



Andy Mac (Fishwrecked Reeltime Editor & Forum Moderator)

Youngest member of the Fishwrecked Old Farts Club

Dean's picture

Posts: 1943

Date Joined: 23/02/07

IMOandy you hit the nail on

Thu, 2007-09-20 23:18

IMOandy you hit the nail on the head in what needs to be done.

Andy Mac's picture

Posts: 4779

Date Joined: 03/02/06

How could they do it?

Fri, 2007-09-21 09:14

I think the $50 per boat would easily be administered by an annual levy on your boat rego. Just like you do with say a Club Marine, where they give you the option to "deselect" the magazine and hence lower your premium, you could "deselect" the fishing license from the boat and pay a lower registration. When you get your sticker the fishing ones will have some special (easily identifiable) symbol like a fish on them so the fisheries guys can know if you are a fisherman or not. Doesn't stop them searching a boat that comes in with fishing rods in its rocket launchers and no fish symbol on their sticker, or any other boat for that matter.

First twelve months they use it to educate the public and allow all boats to be re-registered under the new system and after that its big fines if caught doing the wrong thing. (That way the govt can show the public that they have committed to it before raising the revenue....good public relations exercise)

If you choose not to pay and run the gauntlet thats up to you, but it will be akin to driving home pissed and betting that you won't see a booze bus....only you can be guaranteed that at some time in the day or night there will be a fisheries guy waiting for you to return. Much higher odds of getting caught.

A boat fee avoids the kids coping a fee for fishing the pier or only going out on the boat every once in a blue moon. It also keeps the funding in the area where the management needs to be focussed.

I would then expect a charter boat to charge a small $5 levy on each passenger, on each trip, so that they too are contributing to the licensing and the passengers are being charged in line with usage. 

Say of the 85000 recreational boats in WA there are say 60000 ocean going vessels and of which say 40000 are fishermen (being very conservative here) then that's about $2m if $50 per boat or $1m if 25 perboat.

They get 30 retired guys or young guys to do the weekend part time gigs at boat ramps at say $20 per hour (generous I know) for say 6 hours (though not the same start and finish times each weekend) which would cost $374k per year. (obviously with bad weather thrown in you could reduce this significantly by about 40% so lets say it costs $225k. Add the full time guys at say $40k pa = $400k thats now $625k with over $375k or $1.375m depending on how you price it, to fund more research and cover admin costs etc.

I know what you are thinking "what about us guys up north, why should we subsidise the metro problems?" simple, you get all the currently employed fisheries guys to work in your area and focus on the freezer filler brigade. Those guys are already funded in other ways so there should be no issue there.

That's how I see it being fair and equitable. However I am sure there are holes in my argument that someone will kindly point out.

If you read the context of the reports Terry posted you will see that they are after ideas, so at this stage there are no 'bad" ideas... its a time for brain storming until something workable pops out that they can use.

I encourage you all to thow any ideas into the melting pot.


Andy Mac



Andy Mac (Fishwrecked Reeltime Editor & Forum Moderator)

Youngest member of the Fishwrecked Old Farts Club

Under the Hammer's picture

Posts: 60

Date Joined: 19/05/07

Ha hah....$5-00 / dogshit tax! Funny!!

Sat, 2007-09-22 08:39

This Carpenter Govt is manure-shyte! Along with every other gumbie govt in the past within this state!

50% of this government's "total yearly" revenue comes from stamp duty on real estate transactions! When the market shyte's itself (like it pretty well has for the minute), they're going to go....Duh, we need more money, let's get on to things like dogs that shit when they go for a walk, a fisho's tax and so on...

The fact is that this was only a matter of time, like having a RST.... damn revenue raising and a form of control.

The fact is that probably 95% of people who fish are responsible. In fact 95% of people in general are responsible!! It again is the minority group that lets it down..... and the govt knows that! That's why you never, ever see a fisheries officer at the boat ramp or yacht clubs checking catches when you return from a dive or a fish!

I'm sure the money raised will go into a flogging competition amongst Govt cabinet!!

It's pointless having rules if they can't be regulated!

Firk, I could go on and on about shyte, but it's pointless-just got to go with the flow!

Better days ahead:)

Might be alright to get out tomorrow!!



rickets's picture

Posts: 995

Date Joined: 03/06/07

easy way to fix it italiano,

Sat, 2007-09-22 08:45

easy way to fix it italiano, is to be a member of recfishwest... if you aint one and get terry to fight it for ya with that case... chances are theyve already thought that.

rickets's picture

Posts: 995

Date Joined: 03/06/07

oh yeah thats a funny figure

Sat, 2007-09-22 08:50

oh yeah thats a funny figure too... from $25 to create 20 million a year for the govt....

Dude, thats  like 800,000 people.... THATS NEARLY THE WHOLE POPULATION OF PERTH (well a few hundred thousand shy) but I find it funny of those figures, that would be assuming that well over 50% of perth is going to buy a license because they are all fisherman!

(give or take tourists of course but thats only minute compared to how the figures stack up lol)

LOL i cant imagine every second person you see in society owning a fishing license. I can even imagine every third person I see owning one lol

deepwater's picture

Posts: 1921

Date Joined: 09/05/07

stop the licences

Sat, 2007-09-22 09:42

  licences where do they all stop,im a crayfisherman that carnt take any fish off a boat at all,small or large,we pay a licence($69)a year not to take a fish from work,i got out and buy a boat and all the fruit that goes with it and they still arnot happy with getting more money ,we ALL pay GST on ever thing,where getting the blunt end of the stick i thing no matter how you look at it

   licences i think they now where they can put that and not on us i hope


Italiano's picture

Posts: 244

Date Joined: 29/07/07

Rickets those figures come

Sat, 2007-09-22 11:07

Rickets those figures come straight out of the west australian paper i think they may of worked out over the whole state im not shore i am just stating what was writen in the paper. but i agree with andy mac you make some good coments mate.

rickets's picture

Posts: 995

Date Joined: 03/06/07

yeah i know, wasnt doubting

Sat, 2007-09-22 12:00

yeah i know, wasnt doubting them but coulda been hyped up... papers always are.. cos you think about it, thats 800,000 licenses a year....

perth has 1.5m people in it and theres prolly only a hundred thousand more people in rural areas in wa... far less actually living on the coast and far less actually fishermen...

its just funny to know that 800k a year is estimated when the population is like double that...

i dont really care about licenses to tell you the truth, id pay the money.. even if its a money grab and it doesnt go into fishing as much as we'd like....

what will piss me off is if they limit areas and make coastal restrictions which are bloody stupid.. thatll piss me right off.

ROCKPOM's picture

Posts: 620

Date Joined: 23/04/07

I dont mind paying a small

Sat, 2007-09-22 23:48

I dont mind paying a small amount of $ but when friends who work with in the fisheries(research) tell me of constant budget cuts this drive me nuts!!!
I want a receipt for for where this money is going not for the amount!!
These buget restraints cause huge problems in regards to hard working individuals trying to get the the right information to the people who are making these new rules.
These people work on a pitance and for in some instance for love,good on em.
A little bit of work to help these people out is what I enjoy to do, hopefully for the benefit of my kids and the future of your fishery!
More public help and more $ in the right areas might help I hope but lets see where the money flows??

Posts: 489

Date Joined: 11/08/05

Information on recreational

Sun, 2007-09-23 07:44

Information on recreational fishing licences. has a suggested "List of Conditions for agreeing to a Saltwater Recreational Fishing Licence"

That post was specifically to answer all of the "only if..." "not if..." "must...." comments seen over many years of discussion, and seems to answer all of the questions/comments in this thread.

It also has some links to NSW and Victorian recreational licence fee conditions and where/how the money is used.

These show real working examples of the application of some of those conditions and where/how their recreational fishing licenses are spent.

It's all well worth a read so that comments are based on real possibilities and real working examples.

Beavering away in the background......

Recfishwest - looking after YOUR recreational fishing future.

You need Recfishwest to look after your recreational fishing interests. Who else has the time, the knowledge, the professional approach, the realistic alternatives, the willingness and the contacts?

Recfishwest needs YOUR support. We would really like you to become a member, get involved and help us.

For $20, you can join by post, by phone 9246 3366, by email , in person, or fill in a website form. See

Tell us what you think and ask us to explain anything you don't agree with - you may give new details which will change Recfishwest's decision.

You are the ones who benefit when Recfishwest succeeds, or you will lose out when Recfishwest is ignored.

Adam Gallash's picture

Posts: 15460

Date Joined: 29/11/05


Sun, 2007-09-23 08:38

A license is an essential tool that needs to be implemented to effectively count the number of recreational anglers in Western Australia.
We know how many professionals are out there, what their catch is and where they are located and generally placing their fishing pressure. The recreational sector is an unknown, information gathered by surveys and log books which with good mathematics can roughly determine catch statistics, who's out there and where they come from, but is no where near as accurate as a license. This will give the closest representation of how many recreational anglers are out there, not just a ball park guess from the Bureau of Statistics.
The commercial fishing industry funds its own activities and research. The recreational sector, apart from money generated by the tackle industry and government allocations, has pathetic funds to utilise for restocking rivers, research on indicator species, aquaculture development, studies on catch statistics and activites which will benefit us, the people. I think the license should be initially implemented at $5 and should only allow exemptions of children under 10 years of age. This money if placed in a recreational fishing trust that can be used by the Fisheries Research Department to provide the science that ultimately increases our knowledge and awareness of our fish stocks, their behaviour, movement, spawning and overall sustainability.
We need to know what size a fish needs to be, how many times it has spawned before becoming legal to catch and its spawning numbers, which is what good research provides. This is the base information a fisheries officer uses when enforcing the law. The amount it costs for one fisheries officer to process one person for taking one fish over there bag limit, to sit at a ramp for hours checking the 98% of people who do the right thing is really a waste of resources in my opinion. I sit at the Exmouth boat ramps and there is only a minority of people who do the wrong thing and its mainly a result of ignorance, than outright disregard for the law. Fisheries fines should be increased exponentially so that people realise via the hip pocket that breaking the law isn't worth it for those few that still think that its a worth while exercise.
If the money from the license was to go into consolidated revenue, then I'd fight against it as well. i think for a small price, it is an effective tool of determining the actual size of the recreational sector and has the additional benefit of funding projects and research that will ultimately benefit us as anglers.


Site Admin - Just ask if you need assistance

deepwater's picture

Posts: 1921

Date Joined: 09/05/07

License no go pls

Sun, 2007-09-23 10:03

   hi Adam i c what you mean but there is all way ignorance no matter where you go i have seen the same thing at the cleaing table there as well (exmouth), but with all this paying a lience does this give my son a rec crayfishing ,netting ,abolone,trout etc on top of what we pay all ready,where will it all stop,

    log books :pros use then all day everday we know where ,when ,day,week,how many hooks,catch so on and so on . That is how the fisheries know what to take off then and what areas each 1 of there targeting on a given day,as a annature fisherman my self i keep all my own records for my own us and sons when they get old enought to us 1 day no one else ,y should i tell the fisheriers what i caught so they can take that away as well ,i dont thing so

   i have been in exmouth for 9 weeks now and(I)have never seen an officer at the ramps at all,i have had 7 fishing trips out in my little tinny , the money is going some where