Anglers Should Be Licensed And their Catches Restricted.

[glennk]

Quote taken from today's Whitby Gazette.

 

A Limit on catches by anglers and the imposition of rod licences could cause serious problems for the local charter boat leisure industry, claim local boat owners.

A long running dispute about the possibility of government action to restrict sea anglers catches to preserve fish stocks has flared up again.

It followed from a recent report in a national newspaper Fishing News of record catches from a Whitby charter boat .

The report claimed that on a 70 hour trip anglers on a Whitby charter boat caught 80 stones of cod.

The boat was fishing 155 miles east of Whitby visiting 5 wrecks a day and over 1 wreck 65 stones were caught in only 3 hours - The biggest fish weighing over 23 pounds.

Local charter boat owners believe such reports could support government moves to restrict catches and impose rod licences, claiming that such record catches happen very rarely and the leisure industry has little or no effect on fish stocks.

And imposing rod licences would damage their businesses.

They claim that many of their customers who are not regular anglers but visitors to the town taking the the opportunity for an occasional fishing trip would not do so if they had to buy a licence.

And if their businesses suffer it would effect the local economy which benefits to as much as a million pounds annually from sea angling.

But Whitby Commercial trawler owner Arnold Locker believes that all boats that take out anglers should be licensed. They are commercial businesses just as I am and anglers overall probably take more cod than the commercial boats do. I have to pay and I am limited by quota's so they should be as well.

Whitby trawler owner Dave Winspear has a different slant on the issue. "Angling is the most popular sport in the UK and although the government will impose rod licences and bag limits on anglers it will be totally pointless"

"A Limit on catches would be impossible to police and a complete waste of time. I would only support it if anglers were having a marked effect on fish stocks but there is little if any evidence for that."

"The good news is there is now a considerable upturn in cod catches and trawlers are now having to turn to prawns as they are running out of white fish quota."

[Guest challenge]

Are you surprised at these comments Glen?

[glennk]

No to most yes to Dave Winspear.

 

Not sure which charter skippers were asked but I wasn't surprised by their reply.

 

Arnold Locker - As the head of the NFFO what else could he say - no surprise there.

 

I would have expected Dave Winspear to tow the party line Good on him for not doing so - that surprised me..

[Steve Coppolo]

If they want licence anglers, fine. Give us a licence free of charge, the same as they did for the commercials. It would be discriminatory to charge us for a licence after giving commercials theirs for free. As for quotas, set them the same as those the set for the commercials. Why should a commercial bass fisherman be able to land as much bass as he likes, but anglers have a bag limit? Again, it's discrimination against anglers. In fact anglers who fish for cod should be allowed more quota than a trawler because they have no discards and are therefore fishing more sustainable.

[Guest challenge]

If they want licence anglers, fine. Give us a licence free of charge, the same as they did for the commercials. It would be discriminatory to charge us for a licence after giving commercials theirs for free. As for quotas, set them the same as those the set for the commercials. Why should a commercial bass fisherman be able to land as much bass as he likes, but anglers have a bag limit? Again, it's discrimination against anglers. In fact anglers who fish for cod should be allowed more quota than a trawler because they have no discards and are therefore fishing more sustainable.

Steve would you agree on this then? If say bass (recreational) fishermen where given so many units of cod they where allowed to catch (including there units of bass) should they then be allowed to swap (or sell) those cod units?

A bass charter boat is given so many units of cod, which he is unlikely to need but does not have the amount of units (of bass) to last him and his anglers half the season.

He then try’s to barter for more units of bass. These units where given out free of charge but have suddenly become valuable.

[glennk]

Steve would you agree on this then? If say bass (recreational) fishermen where given so many units of cod they where allowed to catch (including there units of bass) should they then be allowed to swap (or sell) those cod units?

A bass charter boat is given so many units of cod, which he is unlikely to need but does not have the amount of units (of bass) to last him and his anglers half the season.

He then try’s to barter for more units of bass. These units where given out free of charge but have suddenly become valuable.

 

Would 10 units of bass not be of tha same value to a bass angler as 10 units of cod are to a cod angler ? A straight swap perhaps.

 

No I don't want anyone's rockling quota thank you.

 

Some maybe would be greedy though and want 10 units of each then it creates value.

Edited December 1, 2006 by glennk

[Guest challenge]

Would 10 units of bass not be of tha same value to a bass angler as 10 units of cod are to a cod angler ? A straight swap perhaps.

 

No I don't want anyone's rockling quota thank you.

 

Some maybe would be greedy though and want 10 units of each then it creates value.

Yes I believe they would become valuable. Maybe even more so if they where given to you free.

 

Do you agree what the charter boat skippers where saying, regarding this sort of reporting is negative?

Edited December 1, 2006 by challenge

[Steve Coppolo]

Steve would you agree on this then? If say bass (recreational) fishermen where given so many units of cod they where allowed to catch (including there units of bass) should they then be allowed to swap (or sell) those cod units?

A bass charter boat is given so many units of cod, which he is unlikely to need but does not have the amount of units (of bass) to last him and his anglers half the season.

He then try’s to barter for more units of bass. These units where given out free of charge but have suddenly become valuable.

 

No definately not, we would end up in the same situation as the commercial fishermen have if we did that! If they made it illegal to sell the quotas when they gave them out, the only way fishermen could change quotas would be to swap. Then you wouldn't end up with the "fat cats" owning all the quota, and the fishermen not having enough money to buy what they need.

 

I know it's easy to say that now in hindsight, but the only reason the quotas are causing so many problems now is because they were sold in the first place.

[big_cod]

I wonder if you got the same response from arnold locker if we got our quota from the po s same as what the commercial fishermen do anglers sharing commercial fishemen quotas that would mean less for commercial fishermen like **** it all comes out of one pot if thats the case lets see if they want to with share us there quota i dont think so somehow.

Edited December 1, 2006 by big_cod

[Guest challenge]

I wonder if you got the same response from arnold locker if we got our quota from the po s same as what the commercial fishermen do anglers sharing commercial fishemen quotas that would mean less for commercial fishermen like **** it all comes out of one pot if thats the case lets see if they want to with share us there quota i dont think so somehow.

But to get your quota from the same producer’s organisation as they did, you would have to produce?

I believe that commercial fishermen would welcome anglers into there organisations with open arms, as long as we then became as accountable as them and also contributed a percentage of our earnings to there organisations.