An Alternative to Bag Limits?

[barry luxton]

Not all of it is illegally sold!

Rod and Liners not fishing from an unpowered vessel (or a vessel under 10metres in length) can legally sell their catch, and so can unlicensed seine netters and gill-netters etc.

Yes, the real beef is with unlicensed sales taking away the market of licensed local fishermen.

In theory, those selling fish illegally should be covered by existing rules and regulations, particularly the buyers and sellers legislation, but enforcement and conviction and level of fines is a problem.

So the idea of bag-limits to protect the market of licensed fishermen, and to plug the loophole of currently perfectly legal but unlicensed sales appeals to the supporters of the licensed catching sector.

 

No matter that the legal and legitmate rights of bone fida Recreational Sea Anglers will be trampled underfoot.

All the fish belong to the catching sector, and you can have one or two for tradition's sake.

 

The crumbs from the table, but never a slice of the cake!

But the fish do not belong to the catching sector alone.

 

They belong to the people of the UK.

And Recreational Sea Anglers in particular depend on access to those fish, not only supporting thousands of livelihoods and businesses, but for enhancement of their quality of life, and the feel good factors that make life worth living.

 

As well as introducing hundreds of thousands, young and old, abled and disabled, to the mysteries of the marine environment that surrounds us, and the creatures that live there.

But whilst the majority are content to sit back and let it happen, blaming the unpaid and under-resourced few (relatively - actually far more than most realise) who try their damndest, for any failures to make a real difference, that's the way things are definately headed.

But hey! We can always take up golf!

 

 

The law is an ass. what is the difficulty in closing the loopholes in making it illegal to sell any fish what so ever if you do not have a licence, rod and line, netting or from a fishing boat, whatever kind. Why won,t commercials press for that as the logical answer as apposed to restricting all rsa's as the choice.

 

As for enforcement and conviction, you have to be tough on crime and the causes of crime. Someone else said that i beleive. Who voted them in? I hate golf.

 

regards barry

[Steve Coppolo]

Unlicenced commercial fishermen could still sell bass through the back door. All the restuarant would need to do is buy a certain amount of legal bass, and keep the old tags ready for when they might, (or more likely, might not), be visited by someone from the marine agency.

 

The difference between anglers and unlicenced commercial fishermen seems to be causing all sorts of confusion at the moment, and as a result anglers could end up being penalised for the wrong doing of others. I think they should classify recreational and hobby netters as unlicenced commercial fishermen, as well as those who use other commercial methods as a hobby. This should include anyone who uses strings of feathers to catch bass with rod and line. To lump anglers in with these groups is unfair to say the least. It's a bit like dishing out speeding fines to all motorists, just to catch those that actually do break the speed limit.

[Ronessex]

The law is an ass. what is the difficulty in closing the loopholes in making it illegal to sell any fish what so ever if you do not have a licence, rod and line, netting or from a fishing boat, whatever kind. Why won,t commercials press for that as the logical answer as apposed to restricting all rsa's as the choice.

 

As for enforcement and conviction, you have to be tough on crime and the causes of crime. Someone else said that i beleive. Who voted them in? I hate golf.

 

regards barry

It will never happen mate as everyone is entitled to get a living from the sea.The only way is to licence everyone and ALL boats and have a cut off period.You will then have the cycle start again where licences change hands for vast sums so really you achieve nothing.I used to be commercial,Iceland,Barrents Sea and owned my own boats inshore and have always been an angler so I see the arguing from both sides but I can only see this going one way and that is with all the pushing and arguing it will be anglers that will lose and I see some sort of ban or at least a very restricted form of angling in the future.Councils now are starting to ban anglers from piers and harbours up and down the country and are now looking at a ban on beaches from April until November due to them being terrified of the public claiming against them in the event of an injury caused by anglers,this infact suits the powers that be because it takes a few anglers out of the equasion.Angling is in a period of change and we need to change with it and stop all the bickering or IMHO Im afraid we will lose it for good.

[Leon Roskilly]

The law is an ass. what is the difficulty in closing the loopholes in making it illegal to sell any fish what so ever if you do not have a licence, rod and line, netting or from a fishing boat, whatever kind. Why won,t commercials press for that as the logical answer as apposed to restricting all rsa's as the choice.

 

As for enforcement and conviction, you have to be tough on crime and the causes of crime. Someone else said that i beleive. Who voted them in? I hate golf.

 

regards barry

 

 

The problem goes down to the fundamental roots of common law and guaranteed rights that predate, but are assured by Magna Carta.

 

- There is a public right to fish (there is no such thing as a fishing licence, the licence is on the actual equipment you use, a fishing vessel or a rod, not on the act of fishing itself).

 

- A fish is the propery of whoever catches it.

 

- You have the right to sell your own property, whether a fish or a car etc.

 

 

To attack those fundamental rights you would need to change the basis of common law, not impossible but incredibly expensive, and likely to lead to all kinds of unexpected and unwelcome precedents when applied to similar aspects with the same fundamental basis within our legal system.

[Leon Roskilly]

Unlicenced commercial fishermen could still sell bass through the back door. All the restuarant would need to do is buy a certain amount of legal bass, and keep the old tags ready for when they might, (or more likely, might not), be visited by someone from the marine agency.

 

er, the tags have to be in the fish (they are similar to cable ties -see http://www.linecaught.org.uk/tags.htm )

 

 

If removed from a fish either the fish or tag is damaged and, if used but undamaged, the tag cannot be inserted into another fish.

 

So a pile of 50 tags, and a freezer full of untagged bass.

 

I think that the MFA can work that out.

 

Plus each tag is numbered and the number can be traced back to the fisherman it was issued to who will have records showing when that fish was caught and to whom it was sold, tying in with the buyers and sellers reciepts.

 

A pile of old tags and fresh fish isn't going to fool anyone.

 

One thing that tags will do is to cap the number of bass that a fisherman can sell, so he has a choice of attaching a tag to small fish not worth much, or let the little ones go, and use his tags on the better more valuable fish, which should help to get the average size of the stock up.

 

Once he has used up all of his tags, if the fishery can sustain it, he will be able to purchase more tags perhaps, so each tag becomes an investment that he wants to make the most of.

[Jim Roper]

Sounds like a lot more jobs for the ex school prefects who were too thick to get in the police force.

[Steve Coppolo]

er, the tags have to be in the fish (they are similar to cable ties -see http://www.linecaught.org.uk/tags.htm )

 

 

If removed from a fish either the fish or tag is damaged and, if used but undamaged, the tag cannot be inserted into another fish.

 

So a pile of 50 tags, and a freezer full of untagged bass.

 

I think that the MFA can work that out.

 

Plus each tag is numbered and the number can be traced back to the fisherman it was issued to who will have records showing when that fish was caught and to whom it was sold, tying in with the buyers and sellers reciepts.

 

A pile of old tags and fresh fish isn't going to fool anyone.

 

One thing that tags will do is to cap the number of bass that a fisherman can sell, so he has a choice of attaching a tag to small fish not worth much, or let the little ones go, and use his tags on the better more valuable fish, which should help to get the average size of the stock up.

 

Once he has used up all of his tags, if the fishery can sustain it, he will be able to purchase more tags perhaps, so each tag becomes an investment that he wants to make the most of.

 

You said the tags have to remain in the fish until it is prepared for eating. So some old tags and fresh bass ready for cooking would be O.K, as would some old tags and fresh bass fillets. I doubt that the places that buy through the back door have freezers full of bass.

 

Carcass tags are a good idea under the right circumstances, but to prevent this sort of thing they would be a waste of time. The buyers and sellers charter has proved to be ineffective for combating the sale of bass through the back doors of pubs and restaurants simply due to the nature of the business. It would be naive to think that carcass tags would be any more effective.

[Leon Roskilly]

You said the tags have to remain in the fish until it is prepared for eating. So some old tags and fresh bass ready for cooking would be O.K, as would some old tags and fresh bass fillets. I doubt that the places that buy through the back door have freezers full of bass.

 

Carcass tags are a good idea under the right circumstances, but to prevent this sort of thing they would be a waste of time. The buyers and sellers charter has proved to be ineffective for combating the sale of bass through the back doors of pubs and restaurants simply due to the nature of the business. It would be naive to think that carcass tags would be any more effective.

 

 

But it's not a new untried idea Steve.

 

It works in other fisheries.

 

Maybe not 100% (nothing ever is), but it does work, and it makes a very real difference.

[wurzel]

But it's not a new untried idea Steve.

 

It works in other fisheries.

 

Maybe not 100% (nothing ever is), but it does work, and it makes a very real difference.

 

 

 

What, where, other fisheries?? It might work for a small time line fisherman supplementing his potting income.

But a full time bass fisherman catching up to 10 tons of bass a season is a hell of a lot lf tags, with the number of tags floating about it would not be difficult for an angler or hobby fishermen to obtain a few

.

[Leon Roskilly]

with the number of tags floating about it would not be difficult for an angler or hobby fishermen to obtain a few

 

 

The tags are numbered and registered to a particular fishermen who keeps records of when the tag was used and who the fish was sold to.

 

If a restuarant is found to have tagged fish, or anyone is found in possession of tags that are not tracebale back to the fisherman that they were issued to, then they would have better to be found in possession of untagged fish.