North Australian FISH FINDER TM forums

My two-bob's worth even though I'm not that much of a regular to the Daly any more...

Priority 1: Preserve the environment in the catchment. Stop all future unsustainable land clearing and start rehabilitating the upper regions (go for a fly from above Katherine to the ocean one day and see the devastation) This seems common sense for every Australian river though doesn't it?

Priority 2: Reduce the commercial effort in the mouth of the river. Trade it off with a buy-back scheme and perhaps incentives to divert industry participants into acquaculture so the punters don't buy Vietnamese barra at woolies any more

Priority 3: Regulate the recreational catch with a wholistic approach. Like - slot limit 60 - 80cm, limit on cherabin of some sort, barbless hooks for lures compulsory, circle hooks for live bait compulsory, training, licensing and survellience for charter operators, realistic survellience activity from a properly funded and resourced Police MFEU, education and promotion of conservation of resources to all users, etc. etc.

On rules and reglations:

In every pursuit, non-regulation works only so long until someone or something gets hurt. I recall hang gliding in it's infancy. Great fun and a terrific thrill. Unfortunately often fatal. The result was a push for regulation but fortunately a strong user group managed to keep the Government (CASA) away from making the rules. They (HGFA) made their own rules and enforced them. Problem reduced. Self-regulation works.

In the NT we have few regulations and little enforcement on fishing. It's likely something's getting hurt (barra and cherabin stocks in the Daly). We have two options:
- Wait until there aren't any more - or
- Self regulate and push for reduction in commercial effort as well.

Sorry for long post. I'll be submitting a more cogently worded response and suggestions to Kon and the AFANT. It's good to see some interest in the big picture on the forum.

Cheers

Biggles

Matt Flynn wrote:Too right flicker, it's the impressive visitor numbers that give us some leverage on Daly land clearing and management of the catchment, because the dollar rules.

Sadly though, I think grey nomads are considered "low yield" tourists by the tourism authorities because they don't fly in and stay at expensive hotels and eat at expensive restaurants.

Fair point Matt.

There are alot of other stake holders pressuring Govt on policy regarding there individual applications on tghe Daly resource. Amature fishermen need to stop Bickering within and unite to presurve strength within the Daly Managment argument. In the bigger picture, "grey nomads" are an ally and fit in the catagory of amature fishermen. The issue of their fishing practices needs to be controlled through fisheries enforcement. Camp sites need to be checked as well as boats on the water as the bag limit states "in possesion".

One question for the locals down the Daly. The burdon of fisheries enforcement, does that lay on the shoulders of the local police. If so I can see them being under recourced to handle this work load. Please correct me if I am wrong on this. Maybe It is time for a specialised fisheries enforcement office to be established down there as the river is so heavily fished all year round.

The aggro between Locals (I use the term loosely as Darwin people arn't realy locals either) and grey nomads needs to stop. I can see alot of river rage stemming from this issue, creating an unpleasent environment for us all.

Cheers
Rug

With direct emails to me and the material in this part of FFF I so have 24 pages of comments. We've never had such a response before and I wish I could get it on all the issues we have to deal with. If I haven't responded directly to any of your posts, don't worry. All are being collated and will be used in the consideration of where we go from here. I guess at some stage I could post the full set of responses here or email them direct (without identifying individulas). Let me konw if you are intersted in seeing them all and I'll try to figure how to best get them out.

Regards

Chris

matt wrote
"The aggro between Locals (I use the term loosely as Darwin people arn't realy locals either) and grey nomads needs to stop. I can see alot of river rage stemming from this issue, creating an unpleasent environment for us all. "

Perhaps if boating regulations (similar to interstate) were introduced a lot of local n.t. boats owners would learn the 'rules of the road/ water '& be a lot more considerate to others. Some just don't care & being remote they think it's a free for all. Someone will get killed the way some boats roar up & down the river.
'courtesy is catching'... why not try it?

kingfisher

Ive just seen the exchange between Matt and Rug on the issue of "Gray Nomads" and I want to make a few things clear about our position.

1. We recognise the importance of tourist fishers and want to see further development of fishing tourism including on the Daly. Matt's right that they do significantly help to emphasise the importance of rec fishing in the Territory and AFANT isn't going to do anything to jeapordise that. They also make a contribution to our economy (I won't buy into the argument of how much they spend or the fact that one of them allegedly stole 2Rod's soap) and, at the end of the day, rec fishing will get support from Government if is is making an economic contribution - which we are and every vistor's dollar helps.

2. We have made recommendations about restricting cherabin fishing and using bait below the Crossing not to get rid of tourist fishers but because we believe action is necessary to ensure long term sustainability of the fishery - particularly as vistor number increase. The two fish bag limit is part of this and most everyone seems to support that although it is unlikely to be particularly popular with many visitors.

3. We recognised that some of the things we proposed might not suit some visiting fishers and we did not want to create a situation where they might not continue to visit. That's why we also suggested opening up new fishing areas near Daly River and making them more user friendly for visitors - particularly the small tinnie brigade.

4. We share Rug's concern about enforcement and we made specific mention of it in our submission. On the issue of enforcing the possession limits in camps - I understand that Police have been doing that and it has not gone down well with some of the people down the Daly. I have even heard that some visitors are getting themselves on the NT electoral roll so they can claim that their camp on the Daly is their permanent place of residence and is thus exempt from the possession limit. We are dealing with this and a number of other regulation issues with Fisheries.

5. Rug's river rage concern is real and, according to reports, it happens frequently on the Daly. We belive it mostly stems from conflict between lure trollers and bait fishers at various spots along the river and from what many people see as the incompatibility between big, fast barra boats (often the lure trollers) and smaller low-powered tinnies (often the vistors and bait fishers). Both visitors and Territory fishos have been put off the Daly because of it. There is some push to put speed limits in place for the Daly but, recognising that fishing there often involves long distance boat travel, that may not be practicle. We do have to deal with the issue some how though. Having some part of the river accessible and limited to smaller boats was one way we thought we could do something to reduce the problem.

Regards

Chris

Thankyou for your response Chris.

I have just comlpeted my response to to the proposed managment plan document and emailed it to AFANT.

in my resonse I have suggested the idea of a second boat ramp on the Daly. "Recommendation 7. That the NT Government takes urgent action to secure access to larger fishable billabongs in the Daly River area such as those on Elizabeth Downs
I fully support this recommendation. The more fishing spots open the better. I would also support the establishment of a second boat ramp further down stream past Elizabeth Creek to disperse boat traffic. The river widens out from there and is easier to navigate without close quarter boating situations. I believe the boating safety issue arises through everybody on the water having to navigate the narrower sections of the river above Elizabeth Creek, whether they are heading back to the tourist parks or to the public boat ramp. This is causing a bottle neck situation with boat traffic. I believe this suggestion would be of value being added as a proposal to the document".

The issue you brought to our attention of people enrolling to vote to circumnavigate bag limits is of great concearn to all Territorians. I hope the electrol act is tightend to stop this happening. That compromises more than fishing in the Territory. I as most people determan how I cast my vote on issues other than ammature fishing, issues that soley effect territorians such as health and education. All territorians wether they fish or not should be concearned with this.

I have tried to be fair in my response to all parties in this issue, though anybody who refuses to obay our laws should p#ss off.

Chris, The main concern with most fishos is boats speeding past either very close & /or causing too much wash.. if you slow down passing moored or trolling boats especially in the narrow sections of the river ('no wash zones' , like every other big river interstate ) so what if it adds 15 or 20 minutes to a trip to Elizaberth Creek or beyond. Get out of bed earlier. Boating regulations will come in eventually wether you like it or not. The government can't afford to be sued through inaction when we all know the problem.
it's only good manners to respect other users on the river.!let's get some action on this problem included in your submission.

kingfisher

Thanks Rug

I agree, I agree and I agree.

The downstream boat ramp has been on our agenda for a while now and we have told Gov that they should be planning for it because the Crossing to Charly's Creek section of the Daly is silting up rapidly and it may soon become very difficult to get down river through there. We haven't raised it for baot safety reasons but I take your point and we will add it to our justification.

We're working on the electoral role issue and hope we can nip it in the bud before it gets out of hand. Police aren't happy with people trying it so they will be allies with us in this.

Fishing law breakers should definitely p@#s off and more and more of them will be doing it without boats and gear if we can make sure there are enough coppers to do the job. There is a neat little section in the Fisheries Act which goes:
46. Forfeiture of property on finding of guilt
(1) On the finding of guilt of any person for any offence against this Act any vessel, vehicle or other conveyance, fishing gear, implement, appliance, material, container, goods, or equipment used in respect of the commission of the offence and any fish or aquatic life in respect of which the offence has been committed, whether or not they have been seized, taken possession of, detained, or released under a surety under section 33(3), and any proceeds from the sale of such property pursuant to section 33(4) shall –
(a) where the vessel is a foreign boat – be forfeit to the Crown; and
(b) in any other case – be forfeit to the Crown unless the court, for special reasons relating to the offence, thinks fit to order otherwise,
and disposed of as the Director thinks fit.

Regards

Chris

Yes Kingfisher I know...but there is little chance of getting new boating regulations as they will be opposed by so many people so we need to get the message about safe and courteous boating out to Jo Fisherman. We've been waiting on a sfae boating campaign from the NT Gov for some time now and they say they are going to do it but we aren't getting any details yet. Hope we'll see something soon.

Regards

Chris

It makes a lot of sence to put another boatramp down stream further, but why Elizabeth, and not Litchfield Station.

Litchfield Station is on the right side of the river. There fore making the trip shorter to most Locals.

Also you are not relying on the crossing at Daly River Township being passable.

I would be interested to know the reason. I am thinking it might have something to do with low lying ground that stays boggy for longer periods or perhaps Aboriginal Land issues.

Jeff

jpb15 wrote:It makes a lot of sence to put another boatramp down stream further, but why Elizabeth, and not Litchfield Station.

Litchfield Station is on the right side of the river. There fore making the trip shorter to most Locals.

Also you are not relying on the crossing at Daly River Township being passable.

I would be interested to know the reason. I am thinking it might have something to do with low lying ground that stays boggy for longer periods or perhaps Aboriginal Land issues.

Jeff

Jeff. I was more so refering to Elizabeth as the section of river where the river widens as a general area, not so much putting the ramp at Elizabeth. The suggestion was aimed at the ramp being on the Darwin side as that is just common sense.