CEO
Development
Hero Member
 Offline
Posts: 2138
|
 |
« on: March 08, 2009, 06:44:21 PM » |
|
Current regulations and rules, pertaining to NSW recreational pipi harvesting, are ridiculous and should be changed forthwith! What is your experience and what are your views?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
kingpro
|
|
« Reply #1 on: March 09, 2009, 09:21:04 AM » |
|
The current regulations were introduced in response to a significant number of people falling seriously ill due to diarhettic shellfish poisoning (DSP) in 1998. There were twenty odd cases reported to the health dept relating to Pipis harvested from Stockton Beach and consequently consumed and many more reported relating to Pipis from Ballina Beach. This is why Pipis are not recommended for human consumption and why removal from the beach is illegal. A bag limit of 50 seems reasonable and helps to prevent the large scale harvesting especially by persons of asian extraction which has been a relatively recent occurance.
Stockton Beach in NSW in particular had a problem with "Pipi tours" and significant amounts of Pipis removed for human consumption by tourists.
Apparently part of the reason was also the DPI being exposed to litigation if they did not legislate to prevent people from becoming seriously ill (DSP has been known to be fatal)
Kingpro
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ACTAngler
|
|
« Reply #2 on: March 09, 2009, 04:16:02 PM » |
|
I don't have a problem with the current regulations on pipis. CEO, why do you think they are ridiculous and what changes would you propose?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
No more fishing bans please.
|
|
|
CEO
Development
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 2138
|
|
« Reply #3 on: March 10, 2009, 11:54:00 AM » |
|
Again ACT Anger, our CEO doesn't necessarily think they are ridiculous! We are just reflecting what many recreational fishers continually complain about when they collect pipis for BAIT and aren't allowed to remove them from the beach! (No more than 50m from the high tide mark) These are NOT molluscs destined for human consumption! these are organisms that preserve and keep well and are a very useful bait. The price of pipis lately, has been nudging $20 a kilo, and many recreational fishers, who prefer and use them for bait, find that price exhorbitant!
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: March 10, 2009, 12:01:40 PM by CEO »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
CEO
Development
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 2138
|
|
« Reply #4 on: March 10, 2009, 12:00:17 PM » |
|
Again ACT Anger, our CEO doesn't necessarily think they are ridiculous! We are just reflecting what many recreational fishers continually complain about, when they collect pipis for BAIT and aren't allowed to remove them from the beach! (No more than 50m from the high tide mark) These are NOT molluscs destined for human consumption! These are organisms that preserve and keep well and are a very useful bait. The price of pipis lately, has been nudging $20 a kilo, and many recreational fishers, who prefer and use them for bait, find that price exhorbitant! (Especially those champion NSW recreational and ECOfishers currently travelling to the Australian Recreational Fishing Championships in South Australia. Lots of ECOfishers are taking part and representing NSW recreational fishers - fair dinkum, grass roots NSW fishers!)
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
kingpro
|
|
« Reply #5 on: March 10, 2009, 01:15:20 PM » |
|
"Current regulations and rules, pertaining to NSW recreational pipi harvesting, are ridiculous and should be changed forthwith! - CEO
I beg to differ, CEO, you did say they are ridiculous. The reasons Pipis cannot be removed from the beach is to address the black market problem and significant health issue associated with consumption especially when as you say the Pipi price is so high.
'kingpro
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ACTAngler
|
|
« Reply #6 on: March 10, 2009, 09:35:52 PM » |
|
Again ACT Anger, our CEO doesn't necessarily think they are ridiculous! We are just reflecting what many recreational fishers continually complain about when they collect pipis for BAIT and aren't allowed to remove them from the beach! (No more than 50m from the high tide mark) These are NOT molluscs destined for human consumption! these are organisms that preserve and keep well and are a very useful bait. The price of pipis lately, has been nudging $20 a kilo, and many recreational fishers, who prefer and use them for bait, find that price exhorbitant!
My apologies. Perhaps the misunderstanding could have been avoided if the question were worded that way in the first instance. Nevertheless, I would have to agree with kingpro's reasoning. As you would know, the rules aren't there for the law abiding anglers. It's a bit hard to apply different rules depending on the intensions of the person involved, so everyone gets the same rule. I can live with that. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
No more fishing bans please.
|
|
|
CEO
Development
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 2138
|
|
« Reply #7 on: March 11, 2009, 07:42:59 PM » |
|
The humble olde pipi 'aye - Plebidonax deltoides from memory. I don't think I've had occasion to use that scientific name since my university days! Interestingly, our aboriginal brothers and sisters are not bound by any such restrictions. They are able to harvest what they like, when they like, under Permit, and do so regularly, for so called ceremonial occasions. No U.V treatment for those pipis! And they aren't harvested for bait!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ACTAngler
|
|
« Reply #8 on: March 11, 2009, 08:30:13 PM » |
|
So is the issue the inequitable treatment of us "whiteys"? I'm not sure where this is going.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
No more fishing bans please.
|
|
|
|
clive
|
|
« Reply #9 on: March 12, 2009, 08:13:30 AM » |
|
So is the issue the inequitable treatment of us "whiteys"? I'm not sure where this is going.
We're all Aussies. One rule for all. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
kingpro
|
|
« Reply #10 on: March 12, 2009, 08:33:07 AM » |
|
By law pipis can only be harvested professionally from beaches by which are monitored for potential biotoxins and pollutant contamination according to the food authority shellfish operations manual and are subject to the same depuration procedures as oysters. When Pipis are required for indigenous ceremonies / occassions the proponents are careful to take Pipis from a monitored harvest area and although there may be some dispensation to indigenous persons for traditional purposes they cannot take them for sale unless appropriately licensed - just like everyone else.
'kinpro
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
CEO
Development
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 2138
|
|
« Reply #11 on: March 12, 2009, 11:48:51 AM » |
|
Sooooo, why can't the same "dispensation," be extended to recreational fishers harvesting pipis for bait?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ACTAngler
|
|
« Reply #12 on: March 12, 2009, 05:09:05 PM » |
|
Because that is for a different purpose alltogether than the indigenous "dispensation" and would pretty much be a dispensation for what the law is there to stop in the first place (black market trade and for food safety reasons, as explained by kingpro). You can't have a "dispensation" based on "intentions", that in itself is ridiculous to even suggest.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
No more fishing bans please.
|
|
|
|
kingpro
|
|
« Reply #13 on: March 12, 2009, 11:49:13 PM » |
|
CEO
The dispensation is for indigenous cultural events where traditional foods are eaten.
It occurs on rare occasions, the amounts are minimal & for a designated purpose. Permission is required from NPA & DPI so it is well controlled and I have not heard of any occasions of the privilege being abused. I suppose if bait collection was subject to the same conditions maybe that would not be abused.
'kingpro
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
clive
|
|
« Reply #14 on: March 16, 2009, 09:14:47 AM » |
|
The point is (and it's clear to anyone with half a brain), why is the cultural importance of fishing amongst one group of Australians not recognised while it is acknowledged amongst another group.
Clive
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
