Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

MCZ Proposals


  • Please log in to reply
171 replies to this topic

#11 Elton

Elton

    Site Owner

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 36,429 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Grundisburgh, Suffolk
  • Interests:fishing, internet, cars, my dog

Posted 10 November 2009 - 01:07 PM

Any ideas what areas the Angling Trust has proposed, Leon?

Anglers' Net Shopping Partners - Please Support Your Forum

CLICK HERE for Dragon Carp Direct, one of the cheapest tackle shops anywhere.

CLICK HERE for all your Amazon purchases - books, photography equipment, DVD's and more!

CLICK HERE for Go Outdoors. HUGE discounts!


 

FOLLOW ANGLERS' NET ON TWITTER- CLICK HERE - @anglersnet
 
PLEASE 'LIKE' US ON FACEBOOK - CLICK HERE


#12 Brian Carragher

Brian Carragher

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,792 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Redcar Cleveland
  • Interests:fishing , politics ,sport

Posted 10 November 2009 - 01:07 PM

It's there where you can question the case for any particular proposal, or put forward your own ideas to be considered by everyone involved in the decision-making.

And if you don't, others certainly will.


That much is certainly true, you can ignore the consultation if you don't like the process but you'll have absolutley no influence over the outcome

#13 Leon Roskilly

Leon Roskilly

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,436 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Rainham, Kent
  • Interests:Fishing (Coarse, Sea & Game), Conservation & Cycling

Posted 10 November 2009 - 01:40 PM

Any ideas what areas the Angling Trust has proposed, Leon?


Sorry, I don't :(

Leon

RNLI Shoreline Member

Member of the Angling Trust


#14 barry luxton

barry luxton

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,518 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:rochester
  • Interests:Boat fishing and more boat fishing. Some times i have to go to work so it does interfere with my boat fishing, but not much.

Posted 10 November 2009 - 08:47 PM

These are areas proposed by the Marine Conservation Society, mostly put forward by their members (who are mostly divers), and 'researched' by them over the last six years or so.



(I've seen a list of areas proposed in my area by commercial fishermen!)

Each list of proposed areas will be skewed towards the interests of those doing the proposing ('tis only natural!).


Leon,
Perhaps you can be kind enough to put up the list of the commercial fishermen have proposed, that would be more relevant to the rsa than the dived ones given today.

 Free to choose apart from the ones where the trust poked their nose in. Common eel. tope. Bass and sea bream. All restricted.

 
New for 2016 TAT are the main instigators for the demise of the u k bass charter boat industry, where they went screaming off to parliament and for the first time assisting so called angling gurus set up bass take bans with the e u using rubbish exaggerated info collected by ices from anglers, they must be very proud.

Upgrade, the door has been closed with regards to anglers being linked to the e u superstate and the failed c f p. So TAT will no longer need to pay monies to the EAA anymore as that org is no longer relevant to the u k . Goodbye to the europeon anglers alliance and pathetic restrictions from the e u.

Angling is better than politics, ban politics from angling.
 
Consumer of bass. where is the evidence that the u k bass stock need angling trust protection. Why won't you work with your peers instead of castigating them. They have the answer.

Recipie's for mullet stew more than welcomed.
 
Angling sanitation trust and kent and sussex sea anglers org delete's and blocks rsa's alternative opinion on their face book site. Although they claim to rep all.
 
new for 2014. where is the evidence that the south coast bream stock need the angling trust? Your campaign has no evidence. Why won't you work with your peers, the inshore under tens? As opposed to alienating them? Angling trust failed big time re bait digging, even fish legal attempted to intervene and failed, all for what, nothing.
 
Looks like the sea angling reps have been coerced by the ifca's to compose sea angling strategy's that the ifca's at some stage will look at drafting into legislation to manage the rsa, because  they like wasting tax payers money. That's without asking the rsa btw. You know who you are.. 


#15 Leon Roskilly

Leon Roskilly

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,436 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Rainham, Kent
  • Interests:Fishing (Coarse, Sea & Game), Conservation & Cycling

Posted 10 November 2009 - 09:46 PM

Leon,
Perhaps you can be kind enough to put up the list of the commercial fishermen have proposed, that would be more relevant to the rsa than the dived ones given today.


I'll see if I can get a copy at one of the meetings later this month Barry (see: http://www.balanceds..._your_diary.pdf ).

Will you be getting along to one of the meetings?

RNLI Shoreline Member

Member of the Angling Trust


#16 Dick Dastardly

Dick Dastardly

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,060 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ashford,Kent
  • Interests:Fishing,Photography,Internet

Posted 11 November 2009 - 03:36 AM

Surely the way ahead for anglers is to support these conservation measures (even if it is debatable that the proposed areas will be the best to benifit or not) and ensure that angling isnt regarded as a threat to such areas? By the mere fact that anglers are there it would help the policing of such areas (ie eyes to see any breechs) Once we have been able to get non angling bodies to accept us we may then have a chance of any of our input being listened to.If we simply are against (or seem to be against) such conseveration measures we will indeed just be bringing dowen problems/restrictions on ourselves.

Im still very worried about the AT being seen/thought to represent us though.Only recently that they seem to have taken much interest in sea angling.
And thats my "non indicative opinion"!

#17 Elton

Elton

    Site Owner

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 36,429 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Grundisburgh, Suffolk
  • Interests:fishing, internet, cars, my dog

Posted 11 November 2009 - 06:29 AM

Surely the way ahead for anglers is to support these conservation measures (even if it is debatable that the proposed areas will be the best to benifit or not) and ensure that angling isnt regarded as a threat to such areas? By the mere fact that anglers are there it would help the policing of such areas (ie eyes to see any breechs) Once we have been able to get non angling bodies to accept us we may then have a chance of any of our input being listened to.If we simply are against (or seem to be against) such conseveration measures we will indeed just be bringing dowen problems/restrictions on ourselves.

Im still very worried about the AT being seen/thought to represent us though.Only recently that they seem to have taken much interest in sea angling.


As far as I can see, Budgie, the best we can do is make the best of a bad situation that is going to be imposed upon us. At the moment, we're pretty free to go where we want, fish how we want and, should we choose to, take some fish home to eat.

Anglers do not have a significant impact on fish stocks, or the marine environment; it's as simple as that and the sooner anglers realise that and stop apologising for things we haven't done, the better. It seems to be happening across all disciplines.

I swear the anti's have got in by the back door, I really do.

One major irony in all this is that a lot of sea anglers like to eat fish. Make it difficult for them to catch fish and what alternative is there? A trip to Tescos to catch trawled fish. How 'environmentally beneficial' is that?

Anglers' Net Shopping Partners - Please Support Your Forum

CLICK HERE for Dragon Carp Direct, one of the cheapest tackle shops anywhere.

CLICK HERE for all your Amazon purchases - books, photography equipment, DVD's and more!

CLICK HERE for Go Outdoors. HUGE discounts!


 

FOLLOW ANGLERS' NET ON TWITTER- CLICK HERE - @anglersnet
 
PLEASE 'LIKE' US ON FACEBOOK - CLICK HERE


#18 Brian Carragher

Brian Carragher

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,792 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Redcar Cleveland
  • Interests:fishing , politics ,sport

Posted 11 November 2009 - 09:39 AM

It seems on the face of it that divers want certain areas free of any sort of boating activity other than their own dive boats, I might be wrong but I think I'm pretty close to the mark. Trouble is there is no difference to an anchor from a dive boat or an anchor off an angling boat , they both do the same thing and grab hold of whatever ground there is, thats how they work and when angling boats are anchored up all they take is fish that are in that particular area at that particular time, there is no lost gear or line down there as the anchoring technique means that tackle loss's are restricted to the odd hook now and again

I still can't fathom out how restricting angling activity to certain areas will be of benefit to anglers without a whole host of additional raft of new restrictive measures that are intended to be introduced at some stage in the not too distant future

#19 Dick Dastardly

Dick Dastardly

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,060 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ashford,Kent
  • Interests:Fishing,Photography,Internet

Posted 11 November 2009 - 10:25 AM

Anglers do not have a significant impact on fish stocks, or the marine environment; it's as simple as that and the sooner anglers realise that and stop apologising for things we haven't done, the better. It seems to be happening across all disciplines.



So true.Like often said on here anglers will be/are more of a threat to angling than any anti group.
And thats my "non indicative opinion"!

#20 Steve Coppolo

Steve Coppolo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,110 posts

Posted 11 November 2009 - 10:48 AM

So true.Like often said on here anglers will be/are more of a threat to angling than any anti group.


Plastic anglers, Budgie. Or environmongers and eco bullies masquerading as anglers.
DRUNK DRIVERS WRECK LIVES.

Don't drink and drive.