Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Anglers Should Be Licensed And their Catches Restricted.


  • Please log in to reply
146 replies to this topic

#21 Jim Roper

Jim Roper

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,351 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Dorset
  • Interests:Shooting, Fishing, Local History, Preservation of English Culture.

Posted 01 December 2006 - 11:01 PM

Out of 1.2(or is it 1-2) million sea anglers, how many are catching excessive amounts in your eyes, 'you' being any reader of this post.

http://www.d-das.com/

Lower South Buckland Farm Campsite DT3 4BQ
http://www.campingan...uthbucklandfarm
Pisces mortui solum cum flumine natant

You get more bites on Anglers Net

 

http://www.fishingtails.co.uk


#22 Guest_challenge_*

Guest_challenge_*
  • Guests

Posted 02 December 2006 - 08:39 AM

and lots of commercial fishermen who want to see bag limits and licences for anglers. This gives them a little more momentum, another little piece of ammunition to support their case. The less ammunition we give this group of ill informed individuals the better - IMO.

Bit of the, Kettle calling the pot black, I think Glenn.

I don't think commercial fishermen give a dam about anglers having licences or bag limits.
commercial comments are usually in retaliation to some RSA suggestion or actuation.
But the managers at DEFRA, thats a different story.

Couldn’t agree more.

#23 glennk

glennk

    Member

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

Posted 02 December 2006 - 09:54 AM

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.



Is there no quota for bass Steve ?

#24 Leon Roskilly

Leon Roskilly

    Member

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

Posted 02 December 2006 - 10:21 AM

Is there no quota for bass Steve ?



Currently bass are not a quota stock, though there is a 5 tonne per week per boat landing limit, to restrict the catch of pair trawl teams. (and the EU are looking at making bass a quota species in future).

The idea of putting a bag limit on unlicensed fishermen, including rod and line fishermen, is to make it easier to control the sale of bass caught by unlicensed fishermen, particularly to smaller outlets, particularly restuarants etc.

Because this is deemed to be a significant part of the catch, there is an attempt to pass it off as a conservation measure.

(No one seems to be able to supply any figures as to just how much fish is likely to be sold by the back door, so allegations that it is significant could all be p**s and hot air. Hardly a good basis for demanding the limitation of legitimate activity when there are already rules and regulations in place to address it that are not being properly enforced).


However, the market demand will still be there, so the same number of fish will be bought, only from licensed fishermen, rather than unlicensed fishermen, so overall there is unlikely to be any significant conservation benefit.

What of course won't be addressed by the idea of bag limits on unlicensed fishermen is the 'back pocket' sales of licensed fishermen.

Fish sold to pubs and restuarants with no paperwork etc., but where all the money goes straight into the back pocket, undeclared, so that each fish sold that way is worth more to the seller than when sold and tax paid, even though the back door price might be lower than otherwise.

A carcass tagging scheme would not only close down the sale of unlicensed fish, it would also deal with back pocket sales, and place a cap on the supply of fish to the market making for a better price for licensed fishermen and with real conservation opportunities for the stock.


see

http://www.sacn.org....or_Anglers.html

http://www.sacn.org....ss_Tagging.html

Edited by Leon Roskilly, 02 December 2006 - 10:27 AM.

RNLI Shoreline Member

Member of the Angling Trust


#25 JB

JB

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 295 posts
  • Location:Whitby, North Yorkshire

Posted 02 December 2006 - 12:02 PM

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.

Licence or permit?
In a sense, a licence for anglers would be a set price permit and anyone who had the required amount of money could have one, for an unlimited amount of participants.

In the case of commercial fishermen, their licence was enforced on anyone who had the required amount of track record, whether they wanted it or not. Thereafter, no more licences were issued. Consequently, due to human nature, anything restricted becomes valuable. Therefore these licences gained great value on changing hands.

Any anglers wanting exactly the same regime and rights as were imposed on the commercial fishermen would have to accept the fact that licences for angling would only be issued to anglers who could prove a track record of regular participation in the sport. Thereafter, no more licences would be issued. So if a newcomer wanted to take up the sport of angling, he would have to buy a licence from an established angler for a large sum of, for example, say £10,000.

If you believe what’s good for the goose should also be good for the gander you should be prepared to accept the same restrictions.

JB
John Brennan and Michele Wheeler, Whitby
http://www.chieftaincharters.com

#26 Steve Coppolo

Steve Coppolo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,110 posts

Posted 02 December 2006 - 09:40 PM

10 grand for a sea angling licence. Wow! Talk about money for old rope.

Who do I get in touch with? :unsure:
DRUNK DRIVERS WRECK LIVES.

Don't drink and drive.

#27 essexbuoy

essexbuoy

    Member

  • Anglers' Net Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 184 posts

Posted 02 December 2006 - 10:06 PM

Licence or permit?
In a sense, a licence for anglers would be a set price permit and anyone who had the required amount of money could have one, for an unlimited amount of participants.

In the case of commercial fishermen, their licence was enforced on anyone who had the required amount of track record, whether they wanted it or not. Thereafter, no more licences were issued. Consequently, due to human nature, anything restricted becomes valuable. Therefore these licences gained great value on changing hands.


If you believe what’s good for the goose should also be good for the gander you should be prepared to accept the same restrictions.

Any anglers wanting exactly the same regime and rights as were imposed on the commercial fishermen would have to accept the fact that licences for angling would only be issued to anglers who could prove a track record of regular participation in the sport. Thereafter, no more licences would be issued. So if a newcomer wanted to take up the sport of angling, he would have to buy a licence from an established angler for a large sum of, for example, say £10,000.

JB



are you real - this is one way of shutting down RSA's forever

I don't believe a licence is necessary, based on what realistically we can expect to catch in any one year, however, if licences/permits were mandatory, on exit from the sport, they should go back to a pool that can reissue or if the angler wanted, to hand on father to son - so to speak. There ought not to be the opportunity to buy one to sell at a profit. Coarse angling permits aren't done in the same way - goose and gander !!

Edited by essexbuoy, 02 December 2006 - 10:06 PM.


#28 Jim Roper

Jim Roper

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,351 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Dorset
  • Interests:Shooting, Fishing, Local History, Preservation of English Culture.

Posted 02 December 2006 - 10:34 PM

Will sea anglers have to buy a second license to use more that 1 rod, or more than 2 rods?

http://www.d-das.com/

Lower South Buckland Farm Campsite DT3 4BQ
http://www.campingan...uthbucklandfarm
Pisces mortui solum cum flumine natant

You get more bites on Anglers Net

 

http://www.fishingtails.co.uk


#29 Steve Coppolo

Steve Coppolo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,110 posts

Posted 02 December 2006 - 10:48 PM

Will sea anglers have to buy a second license to use more that 1 rod, or more than 2 rods?

Who knows? The course licence allows you to use two rods.

Maybe the sea licence will allow you to use two rods and 1000 yards of gill net?
DRUNK DRIVERS WRECK LIVES.

Don't drink and drive.

#30 mr motorola

mr motorola

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,818 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Erm , Planet Earth.............i think , but i'm still not sure!

Posted 02 December 2006 - 11:12 PM

Quote taken from today's Whitby Gazette.

Well i can't spake!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So i'm greedy then????

Nope not at all , i payed hard earned money to go on that trip , fished my b@lls off and caught plenty of top quality cod!!!! And i will be doing it again next year!

And why is everyone so disgusted with selling fish????? Whats the problem? Hookey deals are happening all over the country (cigs / beer / clothes / dvds / computer games ...........)

But if licenses are introduced , in my personal opinion ; the charter boat business around this island WILL suffer

I've been stuck on dry land for the last couple of months due to one of our locals being rather ill (HARRY BENTHAM) most of the whitby lads on here know him. Get well soon H
Fishing is fishing , Life is life , but life wouldn't be very enjoyable without fishing................ Mr M 12:03 / 19-3-2009