See http://www.anglers-net.co.uk/sacn/latest/i...ex.php?view=330

TL - leon

[ 28. June 2005, 11:12 AM: Message edited by: Leon Roskilly ]

Having read the summary of that report, I can't wait until July when the bit about inshore fisheries comes out.

If the first report is anything to go on, by July they may have discovered that there are some very naughty people who set gillnets inshore and sell the fish they catch, even though they don't have licences! If we are very lucky, they might reveal another strategy, or a plan to come up with another strategy, or a strategy to make a plan, or even some research to plan a strategy, so that they can then look into ways to make plans, or strategies, to stop these naughty gill netters.

Who knows, now that the ball is rolling, they might come up with a plan for a strategy by as early as 2012! Mind you, that might be pushing things a bit because they have to do the research first, and then they are going to have to study the research, then they are going to have to come up with a plan, then they'll have to........... ............. ZZZZZZZZ ZZZZZZZZZ zzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[ 28. June 2005, 12:49 PM: Message edited by: Steve Coppolo ]

Hi All,

I have read it through, thought I had made a post more or less echoing Steves' thoughts.

There are so many facets it makes you wonder where the buck will stop.

And by the time they have chewed on it I will probably be pushing up the daisies.

Surely one central body, half a dozen regional bodies, science as technical support.

Each region represented by two RSA, two commercials, two other types of stake holders, four local council members, one science officer and a legal man.

Head office deals out guide lines and laws covering coastal waters within 6 miles of shore.

Second body covering waters outside this area.

Ban on gill nets, I will go with the £1000 licence for boats under 10m.

I spent half my time trying to connect the hundreds of bits and pieces.

All of these committies, sub-committies and committies advising the committies and so on.

Keep it simple and it will work and we will know where the buck stops.

:cool: My thoughts exactly, why can't they make it short and simple? Probably because they've never worked that way and can't adjust.

No offence Leon, but when I read these things I just want to close my eyes and go to sleep.

I'd like to know how many bloody trees get slaughtered to provide the perpetrators of this endless paperchase with their raw materials. Probably more tons of wood harvested in a year than all the fish being stolen from the seas.

Once again Leon, my comments have nothing to do with your highlighting of these articles, as they say knowledge is power and the more people that log on to forums and get educated the better.

The problem is that in a democracy everyone has to have the chance to have their say.

Fishing Organisations, Angling Organisations, Conservation NGOs, Fishermen's Wives Associations (find and read the list of consultees, it does go on!)

Only the views of those who effectively take part in the consultations have any effect.

Individuals putting the world to rights on internet forums are a long long way from influencing much at all.

That's why we really need organisations that can train negotiators, employ barristers, manage media etc.

Things will change, and change as a result of this process. In fact some of the issues are a long way down the path of implementation.

But as sea anglers, we will only get the consideration that we are prepared to work for, and to fund.

And remember that those other interests, some of which conflict with our own, tend to have woken up to the need to do a professional job of all of this.

Mind you considering the amount of support that the sea angling organisations get, no one can say that we have done a bad job, even if we could be doing a lot better with proper support and funding from over 1 million anglers.

Tight Lines - leon

phew, just finished reading it, leon you done well to highlight anything out of that mate, i almost fainted off while trying to make sence of any of it. what a waste of time.

thousands of words of nothing, i cant think of any thing to comment about, its about as useful as a condom to a catholic, what a big steaming pile of camels dung....

I've heard that the commercials a sh**ing themselves! Or was it p***ing themselves?

Anyway, the report is like that by design. It's kept plenty of people in high paid jobs for a couple of years, and with all the research, consultation, strategies and plans, it'll keep them in those cushy high paid jobs for another few years yet.

If they solved the problem quickly, which they could, they would all be looking for other jobs.

Yet more new labour bowlocks. So many words, so little action.

individuals putting the world to rights on internet forums are a long long way from influencing much at all.

yeh thats right leon, but it makes one feel a bit better (sort of get it out of your system so to speak) the type of financial backing your are talking about to make a difference is "huge" and i do believe it could be raised by "sea anglers" but by saying its got to be done by a mandatory licence aint gonna work (sorry for bringing it up again) ie, forcing people to comply with something they might not like or want.

the other way of raising the finance you advise is through pm membership or, voluntarily donations to your conservation committee, there is only one problem with that and thats the name "nfsa" of which no one on this forum seems to want to enlighten me about.

what about the sacn side of all this leon why not try and build the the financial side of this up i am sure their would be no problems with respect.

anyway back to raising money Hmmmm let me think? what about getting most anglers to sell something! like one of those many expensive rods that is now out of fashion that should be worth a few quid on ebay or even auction it on here elton. then theres raffles,organised matches, scratch cards etc, then almost forgot! what about the tackle industry had'nt they better put their hands in their pockets now they must be worth a few grand.

what ever method is settled on to generate the dosh its got to be done with people not feeling pressured in to doing it, then we might get somewhere. after reading defra's report today it seems we have plenty of time unlike are fish to set things up.........

For SACN to become a fund holding organisation would mean that it would also have to have a constitution, hold an agm, elect officers, appoint a treasurer and auditors, and set up a bank account.

That might (would!) introduce some internal politics, which might be a distraction.

Nothing wrong with that, if some of the membership want to get together and start putting that in place!

Tight Lines