Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Licenses, Bag Limits, MPAs, SFCs


  • Please log in to reply
114 replies to this topic

#11 Ken Davison South Wales

Ken Davison South Wales

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,153 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tycroes
  • Interests:sea angling

Posted 19 October 2006 - 05:17 PM

Recreational Sea Angling (RSA)
General
3.26 This issue received a large number of comments from environmental
NGOs, statutory advisors, government agencies, the commercial
fishing industry and recreational sea angling (RSA) organisations.
3.27 The majority of responses on this issue recognised that the angling
sector should have a role to play in the development of marine and
fisheries policy. Some of these respondents expressed that greater
consideration should be given to the management of stocks for RSA
purposes to reflect the numbers participating in the sport and the value
to the economy generated by RSA. There was also support in the
responses for an angling strategy provided that it’s development was
open and transparent.
3.28 However, not all respondents were convinced that the RSA sector
could make a relevant contribution to the management of most fish
stocks.
3.29 It was further suggested by respondents that if Marine Protected Areas
(MPAs) are introduced to protect commercial fish stocks, they should
also include protection of recreational species and therefore angling as
well as commercial fishing activity should be restricted or prohibited in
such areas. Other respondents however, were clear that MPAs
(whether introduced on their own or through a system of marine spatial
planning) should not ban angling, especially if catch and release
practices were adopted. It was also emphasised that there was a need
to identify areas of particular importance to RSA, for example the 1nm
belt around the coastline.
A chargeable licensing scheme and bag limits
3.30 There was support both from the angling sector and other respondents
for proposals in respect of “bag limits” and a chargeable licensing
scheme for angling. It was noted however, that revenue generated byഊSection 3: Managing Marine Fisheries
any charging scheme must be used for the benefit of the sport and
that before a charge was introduced there should be:
• a similar scheme to charge commercial fishermen;
• bans on destructive fishing practices;
• management measures (such as increased minimum landing
sizes) to re-build fish stocks around the shores for the benefit of
RSA; and
• a greater role for anglers in decision making on fisheries matters.
3.31 Suggestions for how a chargeable licensing scheme might benefit the
sport included:
• general enhancement and development of sea angling including
coaching and events, etc;
• better access to angling sites on the coast;
• the introduction of a Code of Conduct for anglers; and
• better data gathering from the angling sector.
3.32 A suggestion was made that any new chargeable licensing scheme for
recreational sea anglers could be integrated with the current rod
licence operated by the Environment Agency (EA) for freshwater
angling. This might save on administration costs and make it easier for
applicants given that many sea anglers will also hold a rod licence
issued by the EA.
3.33 The following suggestions were made regarding the introduction of
bag limits for anglers:
• bag limits are accompanied by reporting requirements to improve
enforcement;

the criteria for deciding which species should be subject to bag-limits
must be clearly defined based on sound ecological and
management objectives; and
• if licences and bag limits were introduced for anglers, the new
measures must also apply to all non-commercial fishing activities
including spear gunners, those using pots and nets etc.
3.34 However, a number of respondents from the angling sector made clear
their opposition to the establishment of new measures to restrict RSA
for the reasons listed below:
• they considered that angling has a lower impact on fish stocks
compared with other exploiters of the marine environment,
particularly as many anglers adopt a practice of catch and release,
and therefore the proposed restrictions are unjustifiable;
• it was considered that the effectiveness of bag limits would be
difficult to measure due to other pressures on fish stocks;
• that these proposals would unjustifiably interfere with the public
right to fish; and
21ഊ• the practicalities of enforcing and running such schemes was
questioned.
3.30 There was support both from the angling sector and other respondents
for proposals in respect of “bag limits” and a chargeable licensing
scheme for angling


Will those who said this wasnt going to happen now wake up ?


Hi Glen

Having now read through that section the bag limits part seemed to be fairly open ended, i.e. species and areas, the licence however was a for gone comclusion and its' layout pretty much as I thought they would go.


Hi Leon,

As this is a only proposals at this stage will there be an oportunity to have further comments and input ?
I fish, I catches a few, I lose a few, BUT I enjoys. Anglers Trust PM



http://www.petalsgardencenter.com

Petals Florist

#12 Leon Roskilly

Leon Roskilly

    Member

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

Posted 19 October 2006 - 05:52 PM

Hi Leon,

As this is a only proposals at this stage will there be an oportunity to have further comments and input ?



DEFRA are still researching implications, costs and attitudes to many of the proposals, including sending out consultants for meetings with stakeholder groups.

Eventually legislation will be drawn up in the shape of a bill to go in front of Parliament and to be voted upon.

If accepted by parliament it will merely provide the legislative framework for moving the proposals forwards (ie giving the government the necessary powers to implement measures).

I would expect that before the government uses it's new powers to bring in licences, bag limits, MPAs etc, there will be further consultations on the detail, and for each MPA proposed etc.

RNLI Shoreline Member

Member of the Angling Trust


#13 Steve Coppolo

Steve Coppolo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,110 posts

Posted 19 October 2006 - 07:03 PM

Right, people shouldn't be blamed for 'having their own point of view and expressing it' but people's choice of time and place for expressing own points of view sometimes need to be blamed imo. If you can't require a minimum of respect for the party line and strategy ('loyalty' is the name) then you won't get even close to power or influence.


Fine, unless you think that the party line might drop you in deep 5h1t, then you have to scream and shout as loud as you can!

DEFRA are still researching implications, costs and attitudes to many of the proposals, including sending out consultants for meetings with stakeholder groups.

Eventually legislation will be drawn up in the shape of a bill to go in front of Parliament and to be voted upon.

If accepted by parliament it will merely provide the legislative framework for moving the proposals forwards (ie giving the government the necessary powers to implement measures).

I would expect that before the government uses it's new powers to bring in licences, bag limits, MPAs etc, there will be further consultations on the detail, and for each MPA proposed etc.



That will take a long time, and with a bit of luck this shambles of a government will be gone before then.
DRUNK DRIVERS WRECK LIVES.

Don't drink and drive.

#14 wurzel

wurzel

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,730 posts
  • Interests:fishing and more fishing

Posted 19 October 2006 - 07:05 PM

Right, people shouldn't be blamed for 'having their own point of view and expressing it' but people's choice of time and place for expressing own points of view sometimes need to be blamed imo. If you can't require a minimum of respect for the party line and strategy ('loyalty' is the name) then you won't get even close to power or influence. This is where angling has failed terrible over the years imo.



Fishingsfine are you the nominated party whip?
I fish to live and live to fish.

#15 Ian Burrett

Ian Burrett

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,679 posts

Posted 19 October 2006 - 07:11 PM

Fishingsfine are you the nominated party whip?


Hi Wurzel

I thought of you today. I had a farmer out fishing with me and he said "For every farmer there are 10 xxxxxxx Defra officials"

I thought I have heard that story somewhere before :yeah: :yeah:
www.ssacn.org

www.tagsharks.com

www.onyermarks.co.uk

#16 wurzel

wurzel

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,730 posts
  • Interests:fishing and more fishing

Posted 19 October 2006 - 07:27 PM

Hello Steve

Quote
That will take a long time, and with a bit of luck this shambles of a government will be gone before then.

It won't make any difference; the same civil servants will be running defra, but pulling the strings of a different politician
I fish to live and live to fish.

#17 Steve Coppolo

Steve Coppolo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,110 posts

Posted 19 October 2006 - 07:29 PM

The important thing is that unity can move mountains - even make politicians to believe that their is no problem with fish stocks.


And can even make politicians think that anglers want bag limits, no go areas, licences and compulsory catch and release for nothing more than a few false promises. I think I'll pass on that one if you don't mind.
DRUNK DRIVERS WRECK LIVES.

Don't drink and drive.

#18 slackline

slackline

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 165 posts
  • Interests:beer and fish

Posted 19 October 2006 - 08:02 PM

Hi Leon I dont like the term enableing legislation
It simply means they dont have to discuss any more and can impliment as and when they want
As for number s of responses what about the hunting lobby the anti Iraq war lobby and watch for the results of the 4 million name petition on rural post offices Tony and his cronies wil do what they want when they want :angry: :angry: :angry:

Edited by slackline, 19 October 2006 - 08:03 PM.


#19 glennk

glennk

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,237 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 19 October 2006 - 10:15 PM

And what about our own response Glenn (from Yalasa);
Bet you a pound to a penny a certain person will be jumping up and down accusing us of selling anglers down the river!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

cheers
Doc.


Yes Nigel it is a good response. I never thought it would be anything else though m8. Living locally, fishing the matches, pleasure fishing the rock marks and taking charter trips from Brid and Whitby the lads in Yalasa know about the north east because they are north east anglers through to the core.

Congrats on your premier league cod mate :)

premier league

1st. mike coulman ................2lb 13oz (1 cod , 2 whiting)
2nd. gareth wright .................1lb 11oz (3 flounders)
3rd. nige proctor ...................1lb 6oz (1 cod)

Edited by glennk, 19 October 2006 - 10:18 PM.


#20 glennk

glennk

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,237 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 19 October 2006 - 10:26 PM

No, what I am is of no importance. The important thing is that unity can move mountains - even make politicians to believe that their is no problem with fish stocks.


The consultation was for people to express their views not just for people with the same point of view as you to be allowed to comment - otherwise whats the point ?