Jump to content

MCZ Proposals


Leon Roskilly

Recommended Posts

That's what I mean,Worms. You just assume that no one is doing anything. People are entitled to moan if they are unhappy about something. That doesn't mean that they just sit on their arses while doing so, though. As a matter of fact, I would rather have a moaner than an appeaser any day of the week. It means they actually give a f*ck.

 

I'm doing my bit, Worms. I always have.

 

Yes, of course I'm still going.

Well obviously being relatively new the sea fishing side of things in that I don't know what's happening regarding anglers making their voice heard I judge the temperature of the water by what anglers say. If anglers moan about being banned from fishing I look for the relevant info and find nothing, if I ask I am just told to look it up. Nothing is volunteered and questions aren't answered so, I assume that it is either doom-mongering or there is an alternative agenda.

 

I take it from Elton's comment that you are going to a meeting regarding this topic or similar? Wouldn't more support be helpful? Wouldn't advertising your cause potentially bring more support and possibly help? If you are fighting your cause for a particular area wouldn't it be possible that your plans might help others, or indeed, others' plans could help yours?

 

The view that I get from this forum is that there are two groups of sea anglers. Those that used to belong to or supported an organisation that represented sea anglers and those that didn't agree with the first group. That is why I get the impression I do. Lots of people moan about things that haven't even been proposed. Yes people are entitled to moan if they don't like something but moaning about something that hasn't been proposed could make anglers collectively look stupid and selfish.

 

The problem for people like myself i.e. new or returned to the sport or, occasional sea anglers is that the politics is muddled and that there is serious dislike between certain factions. When any new proposals (The Marine Bill) is mentioned instant hostility and personal insults start flying.

 

Can you or anyone else explain why RSAs should not get together and discuss the future of the sport but at the same time explain the problems from the past or (probably better still) ignore them. I know that you are not a fan of the Angling Trust, who is? So why not involve as many anglers as possible to voice opinions on proposals. The MCS involved the Co-op for support. Why can't anglers do something similar? If it gets names on paper with individual areas supplying details of financial benefits, jobs, fish sustainability etc. then more power to the anglers' collective elbow.

 

Is there a group that I can get involved with regarding the MCS's proposed conservation area at Sarn Cynfelin or the Pembrokeshire sites? I want to get involved as an angler! ......not as a cloak and dagger expert.

Eating wild caught fish is good for my health, reduces food miles and keeps me fit trying to catch them........it's my choice to do it, not yours to stop me!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 171
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

As did I,

 

 

 

The constant referral to the MCS proposals as if they are cut and dried and that angling is going to be banned is frustrating however.

 

A good example of how consultation works is the recent proposals on the banning of taking coarse fish. The majority of anglers wanted to support the ban, a number of anglers who wished to use livebaits or eat the occasional fish made representation and, the proposals have been changed to allow for certain sizes and species of fish to be taken. Not set in stone yet but a move forwards.

 

For the last few years Worms the rsa have been inundated with this and that from defra, the eu, uncle tom cobbly. Loads and loads of consultations. And if you look at the situation at present, tell me what has been given to the rsa to enhance the angling scene. Anything positive been done to the stocks that anglers are interested in. Nothing has happend and thats what i recon the list will be unless you can think of something. The amount of consultations blady blah gone around with millions apon millions of man hours spent by defra and the suits regarding all of the fish stocks and the current state of the fishing industry. Would you consider has been acheived on their part?

 

In the mean time i have no doubt that there has been hundreds of anglers who have participated in these consultations and also bothered to reply to the likes of the eu regarding 47 even though it has fallen on deaf ears, that to me is what is so bloody frustrating, in particular where pages and pages of responce has been sent and to what effect? What has been acheived so far?please don't suggest apathy unless you know different.

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..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the last few years Worms the rsa have been inundated with this and that from defra, the eu, uncle tom cobbly. Loads and loads of consultations. And if you look at the situation at present, tell me what has been given to the rsa to enhance the angling scene. Anything positive been done to the stocks that anglers are interested in. Nothing has happend and thats what i recon the list will be unless you can think of something. The amount of consultations blady blah gone around with millions apon millions of man hours spent by defra and the suits regarding all of the fish stocks and the current state of the fishing industry. Would you consider has been acheived on their part?

 

In the mean time i have no doubt that there has been hundreds of anglers who have participated in these consultations and also bothered to reply to the likes of the eu regarding 47 even though it has fallen on deaf ears, that to me is what is so bloody frustrating, in particular where pages and pages of responce has been sent and to what effect? What has been acheived so far?please don't suggest apathy unless you know different.

As usual Barry the thread has gone from the original post of one group of stakeholders proposals to mumblings and grumblings about limitations to anglers (another major group of stakeholders). Facetious comments about going to a sealife centre or a supermarket if people want to see fish doesn't help.

 

If the MCS proposals were accepted and all of their proposed conservation areas were agreed as NTZs then the vast majority of my sea fishing would be seriously restricted. As a stakeholder, along with thousands of others I am prepared to get involved to have a say on the merits of keeping such areas open for angling. The fact that one of those areas has been fished for years by a number of charter boats and still produces good catches indicates that anglers have little or no effect on the area. Some of those same boats take dolphin watching trips as well so obviously one of the reasons for the MCS to conserve that particular area are already seeming unnecessary.

 

The Marine Bill is all encompassing, from planning to industrial, commercial and hobby users of the sea. By necessity this requires input from all interested parties and we as anglers now have the opportunity to do just that. Negative remarks/moaning might be seen by some as positive but to me they seem like apathy. If people who contribute to this forum are taking positive action to put the views of RSAs across why is there so much mystery, one line non-answers and general reluctance to get the 'average' RSA involved?

 

The Marine Bill is coming regardless. The mechanism is in place to put our case forward. If we say nothing or fight amongst ourselves then I'm sure we probably will find some of our current 'rights' limited. If people act together or at least let other anglers know what 'active' anglers are doing about the situation then perhaps these antagonistic posts wouldn't occur (at least it got some answers!). If any of the forum members are active in holding official discussions about the future of sea angling isn't it the right of other anglers to know how their 'rights' are being represented?

 

I can't tell you of any benefits that anglers have had from previous consultations. Have their been any restrictions? To my limited knowledge nothing has changed except the tackle and that the skippers are more ecologically minded (because their livelihoods depend on it).

 

Regarding 47 I thought that except for Cod in the North sea, the likelihood of any restrictions on anglers had been removed?

 

Do you know who I should be in contact with in my area to register my interest?

Eating wild caught fish is good for my health, reduces food miles and keeps me fit trying to catch them........it's my choice to do it, not yours to stop me!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes Worms, the only one i can think of is........................

 

ukip :D

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..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes Worms, the only one i can think of is........................

 

ukip :D

Just to be topical aren't there rules about insulting people like that on the forum? B)

Eating wild caught fish is good for my health, reduces food miles and keeps me fit trying to catch them........it's my choice to do it, not yours to stop me!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you know who I should be in contact with in my area to register my interest?

 

 

Worms, the process for identifying MCZs in Wales is still being considered.

 

see:

 

http://wales.gov.uk/publications/accessinf...3824413?lang=en

 

http://wales.gov.uk/consultations/environm...dareas/?lang=en

 

If you want to get involved in Welsh Angling issues, a good place to start is http://www.cpwf.co.uk/campaign/

Edited by Leon Roskilly

RNLI Shoreline Member

Member of the Angling Trust

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As usual Barry the thread has gone from the original post of one group of stakeholders proposals to mumblings and grumblings about limitations to anglers (another major group of stakeholders). Facetious comments about going to a sealife centre or a supermarket if people want to see fish doesn't help.

 

If the MCS proposals were accepted and all of their proposed conservation areas were agreed as NTZs then the vast majority of my sea fishing would be seriously restricted. As a stakeholder, along with thousands of others I am prepared to get involved to have a say on the merits of keeping such areas open for angling. The fact that one of those areas has been fished for years by a number of charter boats and still produces good catches indicates that anglers have little or no effect on the area. Some of those same boats take dolphin watching trips as well so obviously one of the reasons for the MCS to conserve that particular area are already seeming unnecessary.

 

The Marine Bill is all encompassing, from planning to industrial, commercial and hobby users of the sea. By necessity this requires input from all interested parties and we as anglers now have the opportunity to do just that. Negative remarks/moaning might be seen by some as positive but to me they seem like apathy. If people who contribute to this forum are taking positive action to put the views of RSAs across why is there so much mystery, one line non-answers and general reluctance to get the 'average' RSA involved?

 

The Marine Bill is coming regardless. The mechanism is in place to put our case forward. If we say nothing or fight amongst ourselves then I'm sure we probably will find some of our current 'rights' limited. If people act together or at least let other anglers know what 'active' anglers are doing about the situation then perhaps these antagonistic posts wouldn't occur (at least it got some answers!). If any of the forum members are active in holding official discussions about the future of sea angling isn't it the right of other anglers to know how their 'rights' are being represented?

 

I can't tell you of any benefits that anglers have had from previous consultations. Have their been any restrictions? To my limited knowledge nothing has changed except the tackle and that the skippers are more ecologically minded (because their livelihoods depend on it).

 

Regarding 47 I thought that except for Cod in the North sea, the likelihood of any restrictions on anglers had been removed?

 

Do you know who I should be in contact with in my area to register my interest?

 

Worms. Don't keep telling everyone what you are prepared to do, just get on and do it. Or do you really need an audience to impress, or a pat on the head? If you were as interested as you say you are, you wouldn't need to ask Barry, or anyone else, who you get in touch with - you'd know.

 

And I bet you still haven't bothered to read the pages and pages of information available on the internet about the subjects you claim are being kept from you. Are you really in a position to call anyone else apathetic?

DRUNK DRIVERS WRECK LIVES.

 

Don't drink and drive.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Worms. Don't keep telling everyone what you are prepared to do, just get on and do it. Or do you really need an audience to impress, or a pat on the head? If you were as interested as you say you are, you wouldn't need to ask Barry, or anyone else, who you get in touch with - you'd know.

 

And I bet you still haven't bothered to read the pages and pages of information available on the internet about the subjects you claim are being kept from you. Are you really in a position to call anyone else apathetic?

Your usual non response then!

 

No chance I suppose of assistance in getting to the right place? I could quite easily go ahead and formulate my own response. The whole point, something which you are insistent on ignoring is cooperation. That means joining together to create and present a response.

 

Any chance of a response to my questions?

Eating wild caught fish is good for my health, reduces food miles and keeps me fit trying to catch them........it's my choice to do it, not yours to stop me!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Worms, the process for identifying MCZs in Wales is still being considered.

 

see:

 

http://wales.gov.uk/publications/accessinf...3824413?lang=en

 

http://wales.gov.uk/consultations/environm...dareas/?lang=en

 

If you want to get involved in Welsh Angling issues, a good place to start is http://www.cpwf.co.uk/campaign/

Thanks Leon.

Eating wild caught fish is good for my health, reduces food miles and keeps me fit trying to catch them........it's my choice to do it, not yours to stop me!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your usual non response then!

 

No chance I suppose of assistance in getting to the right place? I could quite easily go ahead and formulate my own response. The whole point, something which you are insistent on ignoring is cooperation. That means joining together to create and present a response.

 

Any chance of a response to my questions?

 

You've had a response, Worms. But, if you don't understand, I'll be blunt. You are lazy, you want everything put in your lap, and a lot of what you post/preach is complete nonsense. I know we live in a nanny state now, but you take the p*ss. You admit to being a newcomer, (when it suits), but think you know more than people who aren't. Your ideals are well outdated and mean nothing. I haven't been able to work out whether you actually mean well, or are just intent on stirring things up at every opportunity. You are quick to criticise others, but where were you when all the things you are preaching about now were being dealt with?

 

Sorry if this appears to be a bit too blunt, but I haven't got the patience required to keep you happy.

DRUNK DRIVERS WRECK LIVES.

 

Don't drink and drive.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We and our partners use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences, repeat visits and to show you personalised advertisements. By clicking “I Agree”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies. However, you may visit Cookie Settings to provide a controlled consent.