tomorrows meeting!

[Guest muttley]

Like to wish good luck to all the people that are giving up their free time and money (lost wages etc) to go to the meeting tomorrow. Its people like YOU that will hopefully carry angling into the future. You know who you are. Respect.

[wurzel]

Like to wish good luck to all the people that are giving up their free time and money (lost wages etc) to go to the meeting tomorrow. Its people like YOU that will hopefully carry angling into the future. You know who you are. Respect.

 

 

 

Thanks Muttly

[frankthebass]

devils prridge?

[Steve Coppolo]

I've just got back from the meeting about an hour ago. I hope Leon posts a proper report up about what went on because I'm more confused now than I was before I went in! It was in a big function suite, and I really struggled to hear what was going on most of the the time, (being half deaf doesn't help!), but here's what I think happened.

 

Mr Gilson started off by giving everyone a little sob story about how his life has been affected since his proposal was made public. Not sure if I heard a few people weeping, or whether it was stiffled laughter, as I said, I had trouble hearing what was going on most of the time. I thought I heard him say that he'd made the proposal "tongue in cheek", but I'm sure I must have been mistaken. Surely no one would do that sort of thing as a joke, would they?

 

Anyway, on with the meeting. I heard this bit quite clearly. SFC's don't have the powers to create a bye law to prohibit bait digging, so we can all still dig our worms.

 

I think the part of Gilson's proposal where he wanted collecting peeler crab and using livebait banned is going to be heard at what they call a technical panel meeting now. The technical panel meeting will be held behind closed doors, and won't be open to the public. The Kent and essex SFC obviously felt they couldn't discuss banning collecting peeler crab and using livebait in front of a public gallery containing anglers, bait diggers, charter boat skippers and tackle manufacturers. I wonder why?

 

Oh yes, and I heard this bit O.K. The Kent and Essex SFC kicked out the proposed Tope Bye law that has already been agreed by the NESFC and the ESFJC, (North east and East SFC's.) 12 votes to 4 if I remember correctly. They also kicked out Leon's proposals for an additional sea angling rep be appointed to the K&ESFC, and that a sea angling sub committee, (like the one just formed by the ESFJC), be formed on the K&ESFC. No voting was necessary on these proposals, the committee just dismissed them. In fact, I don't even think anyone seconded Leon's proposals?

 

On the DEFRA lead drive for SFC's to impose bag limits on anglers through bye laws, again the committee agreed to put this off and discuss it in private at a technical panel meeting.

 

So, all in all a typical SFC meeting. Lots of talking, mostly by a few loud members with strong views, and nothing much achieved.

 

On a positive note, the lots of talking bit wouldn't have even happened if it hadn't been for the anglers, bait diggers, charter boat skipper and tackle maufacturer who turned up. I think had RSA not had any supporters there on the day, perhaps the technical panel might not even have been planned for the future?

It's likely the committee would have voted against the anglers on every matter, there and then. There were people there from as far away as Norfolk, so big well done and thank you to them.

 

Sometimes, reading and hearing about what goes on at SFC's doesn't do them justice. You have to go along and see it for yourself to really believe it! I'd recommend that every angler, at some point, go along to one of their local SFC meetings, just to see where your money is going, how it's being spent and how your SFC are representing you................or not!

Edited November 20, 2006 by Steve Coppolo

[stavey]

I've just got back from the meeting about an hour ago. I hope Leon posts a proper report up about what went on because I'm more confused now than I was before I went in! It was in a big function suite, and I really struggled to hear what was going on most of the the time, (being half deaf doesn't help!), but here's what I think happened.

 

Mr Gilson started off by giving everyone a little sob story about how his life has been affected since his proposal was made public. Not sure if I heard a few people weeping, or whether it was stiffled laughter, as I said, I had trouble hearing what was going on most of the time. I thought I heard him say that he'd made the proposal "tongue in cheek", but I'm sure I must have been mistaken. Surely no one would do that sort of thing as a joke, would they?

 

Anyway, on with the meeting. I heard this bit quite clearly. SFC's don't have the powers to create a bye law to prohibit bait digging, so we can all still dig our worms.

 

I think the part of Gilson's proposal where he wanted collecting peeler crab and using livebait banned is going to be heard at what they call a technical panel meeting now. The technical panel meeting will be held behind closed doors, and won't be open to the public. The Kent and essex SFC obviously felt they couldn't discuss banning collecting peeler crab and using livebait in front of a public gallery containing anglers, bait diggers, charter boat skippers and tackle manufacturers. I wonder why?

 

Oh yes, and I heard this bit O.K. The Kent and Essex SFC kicked out the proposed Tope Bye law that has already been agreed by the NESFC and the ESFJC, (North east and East SFC's.) 12 votes to 4 if I remember correctly. They also kicked out Leon's proposals for an additional sea angling rep be appointed to the K&ESFC, and that a sea angling sub committee, (like the one just formed by the ESFJC), be formed on the K&ESFC. No voting was necessary on these proposals, the committee just dismissed them. In fact, I don't even think anyone seconded Leon's proposals?

 

On the DEFRA lead drive for SFC's to impose bag limits on anglers through bye laws, again the committee agreed to put this off and discuss it in private at a technical panel meeting.

 

So, all in all a typical SFC meeting. Lots of talking, mostly by a few loud members with strong views, and nothing much achieved.

 

On a positive note, the lots of talking bit wouldn't have even happened if it hadn't been for the anglers, bait diggers, charter boat skipper and tackle maufacturer who turned up. I think had RSA not had any supporters there on the day, perhaps the technical panel might not even have been planned for the future?

It's likely the committee would have voted against the anglers on every matter, there and then. There were people there from as far away as Norfolk, so big well done and thank you to them.

 

Sometimes, reading and hearing about what goes on at SFC's doesn't do them justice. You have to go along and see it for yourself to really believe it! I'd recommend that every angler, at some point, go along to one of their local SFC meetings, just to see where your money is going, how it's being spent and how your SFC are representing you................or not!

 

Very interesting!!!

 

Steve is it possible to get the info for whats on the next agenda of sfc's meetings a few weeks before? or remind me would that info be in the minutes of the last one? my brain is fading with age

 

Oh and a big well done to everyone on the rsa side of things for turning up

 

Cheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeers

Edited November 20, 2006 by stavey

[frankthebass]

Basically Steve has out lined the meeting, to be honest I was quite shocked at how dysfunctional the committee seemed.

 

It started with lots of waffle about the chairman and vice chairmen’s expenses allowance, at this point both gentle men concerned had to leave the room.

 

As Steve said it was a big function suit and hearing what was being said was fairly hard work.

 

Mr Paul Gilson did complain about someone allegedly tampering with his car and how the letter to the committee was meant with a curtain amount of tong in cheek ( I expect the bait diggers that attended were grateful to him for wasting their valuable digging time). The first thing that the chairman had to say was that he must point out that sea fisheries committees do not have the power to bad or licence bait digging and that it was a matter for local council.

 

Leon Roskilly put forward a proposal to start a sub committee to follow suit with the Essex and Sulfolk Sea Fisheries Committee. He also made suggestions that another RSA rep should sit on the committee to even up the balance between commercials sitting and RSAs. But both were dismissed, apparently the technical committee (which is a closed committee) can handle the above, and there is not enough room on the committee at present for another RSA rep.

 

Again as Steve has already said it was hard work to hear exactly what people were saying especially softly spoken members like Leon.

 

The tope proposals were dismissed apparently to be bough in when the blanket law comes into play, and again to be discussed further by the technical committee (a closed meeting).

 

Dave Stevens from The Dengie Bait Diggers Alliance was permitted to voice his objections to Mr Gilsons letter to the committee. There really didn’t seem much point to this as the chairmen had already pointed out at the start that the committee did not have the powers to deal with bait digging.

 

Bob Cox (from Bobsbites in TSF mag) was also permitted to speak briefly, he basically outlined that SFC are not worth the money they cost to run, at this point one of the senior members said that in the five years he had sat on the committee they had only achieved a hand full of objectives. He said the committee lacked teeth to get anything done and was basically fairly powerless. This just backed Bob Cox,es statement to the committee.

 

To be honest it was like a scene from Monty Python, I half expected John Clease to walk through the double doors one foot high aloof. Believe me he wouldn’t of been out of place.

 

I do feel sorry for Leon Roskilly, he is one quietly spoken man who sits alone among those who are mostly from the dark side.

 

These meeting are only 8 times a year. For those of us in Essex we need to attend the Essex and Sulfolk and Kent and Essex. I feel us anglers should attend all of these meetings if only to back Leon up and help make his quiet voice heard.

 

I also think that those anglers who tried to make this meeting out to be something much bigger and that said we all should attend were loudly absent from this meeting.

I think they should put their head straight back in the sand regarding angling conservation.

[Steve Coppolo]

Hi Stavey

You could keep in touch with your Local Chief clerk fisheries officer to find out what items are going on the agenda for up and coming meetings. Phone him once a week, and while you're on the phone to him ask him what your SFC are doing to improve your sea angling experience. Copies of the agenda item notes are only sent out to committee members a matter of days before the actual meeting. There's nothing stopping you from getting something put on the agenda for future meetings. Again, just phone your local Chief clerk and fisheries officer, express your concerns and ask him to get it brought up at the next meeting. A bit of support from other local anglers will make it easier.

 

Each Committee has four meetings a year. They can call sub committee meetings in between the statutary quarterly meetings if anything crops up, or put together a technical panel if they want to keep things private

 

(With regard to todays meeting, I have to say that what the bigger picture that Ron of essex was talking about remains a mystery, and as he wasn't at the meeting I couldn't ask him what it was he was talking about.)

Edited November 20, 2006 by Steve Coppolo

[Leon Roskilly]

As a member of the committee I can't add to or comment on what has been said above.

 

 

Oh! None of the proposals of bait collection is going ahead - worms or crustaceans.

 

The only item going to the technical committee will be the subject of bag limits on bass.

 

 

I understand that Tom Pinborough will be posting a full report when he gets some time.

 

It was nice to have some anglers and bait diggers to observe the business of the SFC taking place and I hope that has opened a few eyes on both sides which can only help (at least I didn't feel as alone as I normally do).

 

Hopefully it has stirred some interest in the SFCs and the importance that they have for the management of inshore waters, and the access that anglers largely take for granted to fish and bait.

 

Plenty more of that kind of thing in the pipeline!

[frankthebass]

Kinda quiet in hear regarding last weeks big talker.

[Captain Sensible]

Kinda quiet in hear regarding last weeks big talker.

 

I thought you were last weeks big talker

Cheap shot I know but I couldn't resist it

Sorry Sam