| Backyard Aquaponics http://byap.backyardmagazines.com/forum/ |
|
| Fish Possession Limits in WA http://byap.backyardmagazines.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=19594 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | mattyoga [ Nov 19th, '13, 08:47 ] |
| Post subject: | Fish Possession Limits in WA |
Current WA fisheries possesion limits state: "The maximum quantity of finfish (includes scalefish, sharks and rays) you may have in your possession – either whole or in pieces – is: • 20 kg of fish fillets; or • 10 kg of fish fillets and one day’s bag limit of whole fish or fish trunks; or • two days’ bag limit of whole fish or fish trunks. At the Abrolhos Islands the possession limit is: • 10 kg of fish fillets; or • one day’s bag limit of whole fish or fish trunks. “Fillet” means any particular piece of a finfish, other than a whole fish, fish trunk, head, tail or fin. “Trunk” means a fish that has had its head and tail removed. For more information see our Abrolhos Islands Information Guide available from Department of Fisheries offices or the website. These limits now apply throughout WA, including permanent and temporary places of residence. The following baitfish are not included in the finfish possession limit: hardyhead (Atherinidae), sardines/ pilchards (Clupeidae), whitebait (Engraulidae), garfish (Hemirhamphidae) and mullet (Mugilida). Commercially purchased fish are not included, but you may be asked for proof of purchase. Some species have a specific possession limit (see bag and size limit tables on pages 6 – 29). Note: Unless it can be proven otherwise, you are assumed to be in possession/control of the fish if you are using/in control of a vessel, vehicle, refrigerator, freezer, icebox or other storage device in which fish are found. Labelling stored fish If the quantity of fish stored in a single container/freezer exceeds one person’s possession limit, the fish must be clearly labelled with the name of the owner(s).Finfish possession limits 33 Labels, of at least 75 mm long and 25 mm wide, must be securely attached to each container or package of fish. The full name of the owner must be legibly written on the label and be clearly visible for inspection." Just wondering what the situation is if say you had over 40kg of trout that you grew in your AP system in your freezer and fisheries came knocking on your door? There would be no receipts so should we be keeping receipts for our fingerling purchases. |
|
| Author: | Charlie [ Nov 19th, '13, 09:03 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fish Possession Limits in WA |
I think because we are growing them ourselves in AP and not caught in waterways, the rules wouldnt apply. Not sure.. |
|
| Author: | Stuart Chignell [ Nov 19th, '13, 09:17 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fish Possession Limits in WA |
But if they decided to be difficult you would have to demonstrate that. I got pinged for something recently and it was a pain in the bum because how do you prove you didn't do something? I didn't get a fine or anything but I had to try and demonstrate that the meat I had in my possession was from a feral pig and not a domestic pig. Also in my investigation I've found that the rules governing the hunting of game are in conflict with the rules for the consumption of game even for your own personal use. |
|
| Author: | mattyoga [ Nov 19th, '13, 09:23 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fish Possession Limits in WA |
Its our civil liberty - guilty until proven innocent  I know that these rules do not apply to AP grown stuff, BUT as Stuart says what if they are assholes and ask you for proof with the presumption of guilt until you prove otherwise, will they happily say - 'OK thanks I believe that you grew them all yourself, no receipt required, as you were soldier". |
|
| Author: | Charlie [ Nov 19th, '13, 09:32 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fish Possession Limits in WA |
Yeah, interesting thoughts Matty. Fisheries being difficult? No waaay
|
|
| Author: | earthbound [ Nov 19th, '13, 09:34 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fish Possession Limits in WA |
mattyoga wrote: Just wondering what the situation is if say you had over 40kg of trout that you grew in your AP system in your freezer and fisheries came knocking on your door? There would be no receipts so should we be keeping receipts for our fingerling purchases. You'll have your translocation paperwork as proof that you got in the fingerlings... 
|
|
| Author: | mattyoga [ Nov 19th, '13, 10:16 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fish Possession Limits in WA |
Lucky I've not got 40kg of trout - better eat the remaining evidence!
|
|
| Author: | Charlie [ Nov 19th, '13, 15:48 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fish Possession Limits in WA |
Another note is that the fisheries watch this forum so if they hadnt thought of it before.... they will have now lol |
|
| Author: | Bodgy [ Nov 19th, '13, 16:00 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fish Possession Limits in WA |
If that's the case Charlie, it'd be nice if they would register an account and clarify the regulations for interested parties. Rather than skulk in the dark corners searching for violations... Being proactive about education would be just as important as enforcement. But I guess they just don't think the same way that I do. 
|
|
| Author: | RupertofOZ [ Nov 19th, '13, 16:01 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fish Possession Limits in WA |
The was a translocation officier that had a login at one stage... |
|
| Author: | mattyoga [ Nov 19th, '13, 16:04 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fish Possession Limits in WA |
Did he move on
|
|
| Author: | Sleepe [ Nov 19th, '13, 16:35 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fish Possession Limits in WA |
Hello  Get real people; fisheries officers will catch you on a beach on a road, usually from a fishing spot. Entering your home is another matter, unless they can prove you are a really really naughty boy. Fisheries officers are Public Servants, they have enough to do without the headache of putting themselves up as total dickheads. There are of course the exceptions (eg the idiots who took the crayfisherman to the High Court and cost the State millions). |
|
| Author: | Charlie [ Nov 19th, '13, 16:53 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fish Possession Limits in WA |
Sleepe wrote: Entering your home is another matter Couldnt disagree with you more sleepe. If they have reason or suspicion... they will visit you at home. Im living proof, and I live 400km from a waterway. |
|
| Author: | mattyoga [ Nov 19th, '13, 16:55 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fish Possession Limits in WA |
I think its still valid - the discussion is regarding possession, which may not be at home and could be while transporting. Most of the busts I've heard of lately have been at service stations. edit - sounds like Charlie may have had a visit at home anyhow! Its a concern to me as a fisherman as I could easily get close to 20kg of fillets with a few good fish caught from the ocean and any AP stocks could put me over. |
|
| Author: | Marc d W [ Nov 19th, '13, 17:07 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fish Possession Limits in WA |
+1 Sleepe Under the Fish Resources Management Act Section 185 it states Quote: 185. Powers to enter and search residential premises A fisheries officer may, for the purposes of this Act, enter and search any premises used as a residence — (a) under a warrant issued under section 187; or (b) with the consent of the occupier of the premises; or (c) if the fisheries officer — (i) suspects on reasonable grounds that a person has committed an offence against this Act; and (ii) has pursued the person without interruption from the place, or near the place, where the offence was suspected to have been committed to the premises. There is heaps of case law on what constitutes reasonable suspicion and it needs to be grounded in facts. In my experience most access to residences is with the consent (informed or otherwise) of the occupier. They can of course enter under a warrant under section 187 for the purpose of ascertaining whether a person has contravened or is contravening a provision of this Act. However they must convince a JP of the basis for the warrant. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC + 8 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|