Legislative Council Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2) 52 2 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Motions Fisheries Management Act FISHERIES MANAGEMENT ACT The Hon. J.S.L. DAWKINS Legislative Council The Hon. J.S.L. DAWKINS (16:55): I move: That the regulations under the Fisheries Management Act 2007 concerning prescribed quantities, made on 27 September 2012 and laid on the table of this council on 16 October 2012, be disallowed. As I said, in September this year the state government introduced recreational fishing possession limits in South Australia. The possession limits have been implemented as an amendment to the Fisheries Management General Regulations 2007. The introduced recreational fishing possession limits are as follows: for King George whiting, east of longitude 136°, the size limit is 31 centimetres, the bag limit is 12, the boat limit is 36 and the possession limit is six times the bag limit, that is, 72 fish or seven kilograms of fillets. West of longitude 136°, the size limit is 30 centimetres, the bag limit is 12 and the boat limit is 36 and about the same possession limit as the eastern section. For pipis or Goolwa cockles, east of longitude 136° east, the size limit is 3.5 centimetres, the bag limit is 300 and the possession limit is four times the bag limit, that is, 1,200 pipi. West longitude 136° east, the size limit is 3.5 centimetres, the bag limit is 100 and the possession limit is four times the bag limit, or 400 pipi. For razor fish, there is a bag limit of 25, a boat limit of 75 and the possession limit is four times the bag limit, or 100 fish. Before I go further into this motion, I must say that I am not someone who is educated in the fishing area; I know that there are many people in this chamber who are much more eloquent about fishing matters than I am. However, I know that even those people are significantly confused by the detail in those regulations, and the reason that I read them out is that I think it is not easy for anyone to remember the details of those. Having said that, the Liberal Party in this state does believe in recreational possession limits, but we believe in a more simplified policy. We support the introduction of possession limits in the vicinity of 20 kilograms, similar to Western Australia in the manner of 20 kilograms of fillets of finfish or 10 kilograms of fillets of fish and one day's bag limit of whole fish or fish trunks, or two days' bag limit of whole fish or fish trunks. Having said that, some species may have a specific possession limit. I must say, I pay tribute to the work that the member for Hammond in another place, the shadow minister for fisheries, has done in this area. He has worked very hard to get the views of people right across the board who are the amateur fishers who enjoy, in many cases, an annual fishing trip. Particularly at this time of year, many farmers enjoy such a trip at the end of harvest. I also note the contribution to our policy from Liberal members of the House of Assembly such as the member for Goyder, the member for Flinders—who has by far the greatest amount of coastline of any electorate in this state—and the member for Finniss, who shares the Fleurieu coastline with the member for Hammond, but also, of course, has all of Kangaroo Island. Those particular members do have a significant amount of the coastline that is in South Australia, but in particular is popular for recreational fishing trips. As I said earlier, many people who like to go away fishing mainly have an opportunity to do that on one occasion a year. We think that the government regulations bringing the limits down to seven kilograms of whiting are unacceptable. There is a general view that the amount is too low. The limits came about because we in South Australia were the only state not to have possession limits, and because they existed in other states it enticed some people to come to South Australia. We have all probably heard stories of people fishing, particularly on the far west coast, catching thousands of fillets and taking them away, whether it be to the Eastern States or Western Australia. While a lot of that is anecdotal, it certainly does upset the commercial fishermen and those who obviously are concerned about our fishing stocks being unnecessarily pillaged. We say we need to even up the way possession limits are managed. We think that we do need possession limits; however, we believe that 20 kilograms of fish, which could be something like 160 whiting, is quite sustainable. I should reiterate, I think, a point that I make quite often about farmers, who are generally the best conservationists because they believe in the sustainability of the land that they farm. Most fishers are the same. The recreational fishers are people who want to continue to do that, and so most of them do the right thing. We are not talking about people having the opportunity to take thousands of whiting. We want to see that controlled. We need to know the manner of policing the measures. I understand the method of policing in Western Australia is that if there is enough suspicion involved a warrant is sought to inspect a person's premises. You would think that the fishery officials would need to be very suspicious if someone has a freezer with many fillets in it. There has obviously been a lot of suggestions in South Australia during the months of debate since recreational fishing possession limits were first flagged. I think we should all understand that hundreds of thousands of people in South Australia love the opportunity to go for a fish, and there are many who do not get an opportunity to do a major fishing expedition more than once a year, so it is our view that these limits should be altered to adopt the Liberal policy area. One other matter I want to raise before concluding is the impact that these regulations have had and will continue to have on regional and rural communities because they are areas that benefit significantly from fishing tourism, from the people who go into those communities for their fishing adventures and then they shop, go to hotels, and so on, in those regional areas. As these regulations stand, they have significant potential to impact on those regional and rural communities, and that is another reason why the Liberal Party is moving to disallow the regulations. I commend the motion to the council. Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. G.A. Kandelaars.