COVID-19 fishing rules for the NT

Talk about bungled boat ramps, net buybacks, marine no-go zones, mining disasters etc here.
slug
Jedi Seadog
Jedi Seadog
Posts: 997
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2007 8:01 am

Re: COVID-19 fishing rules for the NT

Post by slug »

NinjaFish wrote: From the horses mouth on the water yesterday.
‘Family members from the same address or housemates only’ - Water Police Sen.Sergeant.
Swoffa wrote:Friends got checked on the water by NT water police on the weekend. Had to prove they were all from the same address.
Also heard that NT water police were at Dundee on the weekend handing out infringement notices..
Seems contradictory to Ron's summation of the situation - I wonder what 'law' they're handing out infringements on?

There is certainly no mention in any of the NT Chief Health Officers directions about fishing/boating and cohabitation.

I wonder if they're following southern police practices and being 'overzealous' on interpretation??


bigwoody
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 97
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2012 2:03 pm
Location: Bee's Creek

Re: COVID-19 fishing rules for the NT

Post by bigwoody »

Don't know much if anything about "law"
But I do know that arguing with or going into battle against Police is a short lived career with a very low success rate.
Best not rely on armchair experts or second hand info, its time's like this that toeing the line is the smart option, unless of course you have lots of money...
Optimistic Pessimist
ronje
Jedi Seadog
Jedi Seadog
Posts: 2439
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 5:23 pm
Contact:

Re: COVID-19 fishing rules for the NT

Post by ronje »

There is certainly no mention in any of the NT Chief Health Officers directions about fishing/boating and cohabitation.

You're right, Slug.

Cohabitation requirements relate to numbers 5,6 and 8 but does not extend to a vessel (number 7).

It can be found here... Direction 14 ( The NT CMO has now made 7 Directions They're breeding).

https://coronavirus.nt.gov.au/__data/as ... erings.pdf

9 The following gatherings are exempt from directions 5, 6 and 8:
(a) a gathering of people who all live in the same residence;


which are:

5 An occupier of an outdoor place must not.....

6 An occupier of an indoor place must not.... and;

8 A person must not attend a gathering referred to in direction 5, 6 or 7.

Pretty straight forward.

Gatherings 5 and 6 are exempt if everybody lives at the same residence. If they don't, then the occupier (owner, renter or person controlling the indoor or outdoor place) has committed an offence by allowing it.

Dir 8 simply sweeps up whoever doesn't live at the residence as committing an offence as well.

We're taking about gatherings of people in a vessel which is No 7.

Definitions:

3 Indoor means an area, room, vehicle or place that is or are substantially enclosed by a
roof and walls"....etc
Outdoor means an area or premises that is not indoors.

So a vessel is an outdoor place and number 5 provision should apply but if it did then the vessel could have up to 10 pob if they cohabited.

Basically a vessel didn't fit into either of the defined places (indoor or outdoor)

So a special and different rule was introduced for vessels. That special rule contained the 4 sq m provision to limit the number involved in any gathering on a small boat. That special rule (number 7) was not included in the cohabitation exemption (number 9) as it would have meant that a vessel operator could ONLY take cohabiting people on the boat.

That meant only solo outings would have been allowed with its inherent dangers and would simply have been ignored by fishermen. A 5 metre tinnie is quite capable of safely taking up to 4 (depending on makers specs).

So having the 4 sq metre density rule( meaning 2 people in a 5m tinnie) does help to decrease the chances of infection (referred to as social distancing rules in other states).

Read the CHO's directions. Its your covid bible.

If still unsure, send a message in writing seeking clarification.

This whole thing is a mish mash of contradictions in trying to understand it all.

The idea of the Federal Govts response is to convince the States on the Fed's preferred courses of action. Not all States agree and that's why we have different rules in different States.

The whole idea of all of this is to prevent people from becoming infected with the virus and suffering (even dying).

So it really boils down to how much compromise each of us is prepared to make in our lifestyles to accomplish that (even if things are confusing at times).

I think I'm like everybody else in doing as much as I can BUT also wary of stuff that I consider unnecessary and especially if it impinges on some particular interest.

An infringement notice isn't the be-all and end-all. Issuing those things, threatening to or interpreting them simply to deter people from a course of action that means more work for the issuer is commonplace in enforcement circles.

Sometimes the ends justifies the means but I think everybody is doing their best.

What I don't like and won't go along with is Morrison's threats about this tracking app for mobile phones. Probably a good idea but there is no way that I'm going to voluntarily use it following the fed's deputy CMO saying it'll be voluntary AT FIRST. Which means compulsory if users don't agree.

Secondly was Morrison's announcement late yesterday afternoon that the easing of restrictions in a month's time will be dependent on how many voluntarily do it.

This particular covid initiative probably doesn't need the States to agree as the laws relating to telegraphic, telephonic and other like services are the exclusive perogative of the Fed govt.

The frustration of having to rely on the States has clouded the Govt's thinking.
Regards
Ronje
Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to “Fishing Politics”