Jump to content

Kent and Essex SFC & bag limits on anglers

Tom Pinborough

By Tom Pinborough
in Conservation & Politics

 Share

Recommended Posts

Steve Coppolo Member

Steve Coppolo

Posted
Posted (edited)
Hi steve, i think you need to read pages 86 and 90-91 of the eu report before you discount them. The first page refers to a later post of yours regarding the value of the rsa in the uk. All they are doing is highlight work done by other people.

 

The second is refering to my post regarding the bass figures. Again these are the only ones that i believe have been posted. I have not seen any others by anyone else. I wonder where the men in suits got their information from saying that the rsa are doing the bass stocks harm so they want to offer restrictions. Or is this all pub talk that defra and co are using? Please have a look and tell me what you think. cheers

 

There's nothing there that changes my opinion Barry. The way the data was collected and compiled was probably the best they could do, but still very iffy. For example, to estimate the RSA catch they interviewed anglers on site and by post. Where in the country did they interview anglers? All over, or a few select spots? What type of anglers did they speak to, and what questions did they ask during these interviews? Did they allow for the traditional fishermen's exagerated catches or not? And how did they manage to target bass anglers by post?

 

Then to estimate the commercial catch they used "official" sea bass statistics for the over 10's. Did they take into account the "unofficial" statistics? Then they used what I assume were voluntary log books for a sample of the under 10's. What boats provided the info? Were they full time bass boats, part time, mixed fishery boats? Where were these boats based? Were they all over the country regardless of local bass populations? or in a just few select ports?

 

The figures that are provided are not complete. Parts of the data for the commercial catch in 1993 are missing, and parts of the data for the recreational catch for 1987, 1992 and 1993 are also missing.

 

It says that these are only "estimates" of the RSA catch, and given the way they had to collect their information I don't think the estimates are very accurate at all. The commercial catches are only estimates too, and again I don't think these estimates are very realistic given how they were collated. The document says that illegal sales of bass was "possibly" 20-25 tonnes. How do they know? Did they interview those selling bass illegally, or the people buying it, on site or by post?

 

Those figures say that recreational sea anglers accounted for 40% of the total bass landings in England and Wales, and that is complete nonsense. You don't have to be a scientist to work it out.

Edited by Steve Coppolo

DRUNK DRIVERS WRECK LIVES.

 

Don't drink and drive.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 78
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

barry luxton Member

barry luxton

Posted
Posted
There's nothing there that changes my opinion Barry. The way the data was collected and compiled was probably the best they could do, but still very iffy. For example, to estimate the RSA catch they interviewed anglers on site and by post. Where in the country did they interview anglers? All over, or a few select spots? What type of anglers did they speak to, and what questions did they ask during these interviews? Did they allow for the traditional fishermen's exagerated catches or not? And how did they manage to target bass anglers by post?

 

Then to estimate the commercial catch they used "official" sea bass statistics for the over 10's. Did they take into account the "unofficial" statistics? Then they used what I assume were voluntary log books for a sample of the under 10's. What boats provided the info? Were they full time bass boats, part time, mixed fishery boats? Where were these boats based? Were they all over the country regardless of local bass populations? or in a just few select ports?

 

The figures that are provided are not complete. Parts of the data for the commercial catch in 1993 are missing, and parts of the data for the recreational catch for 1987, 1992 and 1993 are also missing.

 

It says that these are only "estimates" of the RSA catch, and given the way they had to collect their information I don't think the estimates are very accurate at all. The commercial catches are only estimates too, and again I don't think these estimates are very realistic given how they were collated. The document says that illegal sales of bass was "possibly" 20-25 tonnes. How do they know? Did they interview those selling bass illegally, or the people buying it, on site or by post?

 

Those figures say that recreational sea anglers accounted for 40% of the total bass landings in England and Wales, and that is complete nonsense. You don't have to be a scientist to work it out.

 

 

Fair enough, so if these figures are cr.p what figures are ben and co and the hangers on using to discredit the rsa over bass stocks, why can't we have sight of them? (Perhaps they don't exist and restrictions are even more pie in the sky?). If there are no other, or more acurate, defra do not know the condition of the stock in any case.

Free to choose apart from the ones where the trust poked their nose in. Common eel. tope. Bass and sea bream. All restricted.


New for 2016 TAT are the main instigators for the demise of the u k bass charter boat industry, where they went screaming off to parliament and for the first time assisting so called angling gurus set up bass take bans with the e u using rubbish exaggerated info collected by ices from anglers, they must be very proud.

Upgrade, the door has been closed with regards to anglers being linked to the e u superstate and the failed c f p. So TAT will no longer need to pay monies to the EAA anymore as that org is no longer relevant to the u k . Goodbye to the europeon anglers alliance and pathetic restrictions from the e u.

Angling is better than politics, ban politics from angling.

Consumer of bass. where is the evidence that the u k bass stock need angling trust protection. Why won't you work with your peers instead of castigating them. They have the answer.

Recipie's for mullet stew more than welcomed.

Angling sanitation trust and kent and sussex sea anglers org delete's and blocks rsa's alternative opinion on their face book site. Although they claim to rep all.

new for 2014. where is the evidence that the south coast bream stock need the angling trust? Your campaign has no evidence. Why won't you work with your peers, the inshore under tens? As opposed to alienating them? Angling trust failed big time re bait digging, even fish legal attempted to intervene and failed, all for what, nothing.

Looks like the sea angling reps have been coerced by the ifca's to compose sea angling strategy's that the ifca's at some stage will look at drafting into legislation to manage the rsa, because they like wasting tax payers money. That's without asking the rsa btw. You know who you are..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
barry luxton Member

barry luxton

Posted
Posted (edited)
quote

 

defra do not know the condition of the stock in any case.

Well there's a surprise !!!

 

Both you and i Wurzel help to keep them in jobs with their healthy pensions, indexed linked. Do you think we are getting value?

Edited by barry luxton

Free to choose apart from the ones where the trust poked their nose in. Common eel. tope. Bass and sea bream. All restricted.


New for 2016 TAT are the main instigators for the demise of the u k bass charter boat industry, where they went screaming off to parliament and for the first time assisting so called angling gurus set up bass take bans with the e u using rubbish exaggerated info collected by ices from anglers, they must be very proud.

Upgrade, the door has been closed with regards to anglers being linked to the e u superstate and the failed c f p. So TAT will no longer need to pay monies to the EAA anymore as that org is no longer relevant to the u k . Goodbye to the europeon anglers alliance and pathetic restrictions from the e u.

Angling is better than politics, ban politics from angling.

Consumer of bass. where is the evidence that the u k bass stock need angling trust protection. Why won't you work with your peers instead of castigating them. They have the answer.

Recipie's for mullet stew more than welcomed.

Angling sanitation trust and kent and sussex sea anglers org delete's and blocks rsa's alternative opinion on their face book site. Although they claim to rep all.

new for 2014. where is the evidence that the south coast bream stock need the angling trust? Your campaign has no evidence. Why won't you work with your peers, the inshore under tens? As opposed to alienating them? Angling trust failed big time re bait digging, even fish legal attempted to intervene and failed, all for what, nothing.

Looks like the sea angling reps have been coerced by the ifca's to compose sea angling strategy's that the ifca's at some stage will look at drafting into legislation to manage the rsa, because they like wasting tax payers money. That's without asking the rsa btw. You know who you are..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wurzel Member

wurzel

Posted
Posted
Both you and i Wurzel help to keep them in jobs with their healty pensions, indexed linked. Do you think we are getting value?

 

Hello Barry

 

99% of Defra are nothing but a huge burden on the tax payer, probably the same applies for all other departments within government.

The EU commission are even worse.

 

As I keep saying and you will find out soon enough, their need to manage is far greater than our need to be managed.

I fish to live and live to fish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
barry luxton Member

barry luxton

Posted
Posted
Hello Barry

 

99% of Defra are nothing but a huge burden on the tax payer, probably the same applies for all other departments within government.

The EU commission are even worse.

 

As I keep saying and you will find out soon enough, their need to manage is far greater than our need to be managed.

 

 

Wurzel i totally agree with you. i have being saying exactly the same. It is all about control and they want it. It ain't broke, but they still want to fix it. how else do they stay in business.

Free to choose apart from the ones where the trust poked their nose in. Common eel. tope. Bass and sea bream. All restricted.


New for 2016 TAT are the main instigators for the demise of the u k bass charter boat industry, where they went screaming off to parliament and for the first time assisting so called angling gurus set up bass take bans with the e u using rubbish exaggerated info collected by ices from anglers, they must be very proud.

Upgrade, the door has been closed with regards to anglers being linked to the e u superstate and the failed c f p. So TAT will no longer need to pay monies to the EAA anymore as that org is no longer relevant to the u k . Goodbye to the europeon anglers alliance and pathetic restrictions from the e u.

Angling is better than politics, ban politics from angling.

Consumer of bass. where is the evidence that the u k bass stock need angling trust protection. Why won't you work with your peers instead of castigating them. They have the answer.

Recipie's for mullet stew more than welcomed.

Angling sanitation trust and kent and sussex sea anglers org delete's and blocks rsa's alternative opinion on their face book site. Although they claim to rep all.

new for 2014. where is the evidence that the south coast bream stock need the angling trust? Your campaign has no evidence. Why won't you work with your peers, the inshore under tens? As opposed to alienating them? Angling trust failed big time re bait digging, even fish legal attempted to intervene and failed, all for what, nothing.

Looks like the sea angling reps have been coerced by the ifca's to compose sea angling strategy's that the ifca's at some stage will look at drafting into legislation to manage the rsa, because they like wasting tax payers money. That's without asking the rsa btw. You know who you are..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
steve pitts Member

steve pitts

Posted
Posted
Hi the information you require on bass is on pages 90-91. i think defra and co need reminding of these figures as i'm sure they will help in deciding that bass limits are not required. cheers

 

Thanks very much Barry

I had started to re-read it, but it's a bit like wading up your knees on Severn Estuary mud - chuffin' hard going :thumbs:

 

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites
barry luxton Member

barry luxton

Posted
Posted
Thanks very much Barry

I had started to re-read it, but it's a bit like wading up your knees on Severn Estuary mud - chuffin' hard going :thumbs:

 

Steve

 

 

Good luck, try to discount the forin stuff unless you are a mas-o-kist. Cheers :thumbs:

Free to choose apart from the ones where the trust poked their nose in. Common eel. tope. Bass and sea bream. All restricted.


New for 2016 TAT are the main instigators for the demise of the u k bass charter boat industry, where they went screaming off to parliament and for the first time assisting so called angling gurus set up bass take bans with the e u using rubbish exaggerated info collected by ices from anglers, they must be very proud.

Upgrade, the door has been closed with regards to anglers being linked to the e u superstate and the failed c f p. So TAT will no longer need to pay monies to the EAA anymore as that org is no longer relevant to the u k . Goodbye to the europeon anglers alliance and pathetic restrictions from the e u.

Angling is better than politics, ban politics from angling.

Consumer of bass. where is the evidence that the u k bass stock need angling trust protection. Why won't you work with your peers instead of castigating them. They have the answer.

Recipie's for mullet stew more than welcomed.

Angling sanitation trust and kent and sussex sea anglers org delete's and blocks rsa's alternative opinion on their face book site. Although they claim to rep all.

new for 2014. where is the evidence that the south coast bream stock need the angling trust? Your campaign has no evidence. Why won't you work with your peers, the inshore under tens? As opposed to alienating them? Angling trust failed big time re bait digging, even fish legal attempted to intervene and failed, all for what, nothing.

Looks like the sea angling reps have been coerced by the ifca's to compose sea angling strategy's that the ifca's at some stage will look at drafting into legislation to manage the rsa, because they like wasting tax payers money. That's without asking the rsa btw. You know who you are..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
barry luxton Member

barry luxton

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

My letter to the sfc. cheers

 

Dear Mr Wiggins, I write to inform you of my objection to the proposal to restrict recreational anglers with regard to what i assume to be the preservation of bass stocks. There is no problem with the stock, why try to fix it. It is illegal selling that is being targeted to possibly appease loud unfounded protests from the commercial sector.

 

Just published is the pan European study 2006 of marine recreational fishing by the EU. Within it quoted is the bass figures where it clearly states the possible illegal selling of bass that amounts to a miniscule figure based on what is landed by both rsa and commercial. Where have defra got its figures from to counter this to say there is an urgent problem that has to be addressed by the local sfc. I do not believe that they have such figures and are relying on what us lay people call pub talk, totally unprofessional, defra need to do and to act with the upmost integrity. In this instance i do not think so. If they were to carry on without due consideration they would only achieve a negative responce from the rsa sector instead of working together to improve the fishing experience. I hope that this is their objective and not to appear to have a big brother attitude to impose unrealistic rules on the rsa that could cost us all a huge amount of money as rate payers.

 

I object that the rsa is being lumped in with non-commercial landing and illegal selling of any of the bass stock. A rsa as i am one does not conduct his sport as a lucrative business to sell his catch. To demonise the whole of the rsa sector on that basis is wrong. If there is a local problem similar that appears to be within the welsh sector it is down to them to deal with it and not impose a draconian restriction on the whole of the uk. Before any measures of bag limits are considered there also has to be consideration as to cost. Who would have to pay for any policing of bag limits and at what cost? As we are aware there is no threat to the bass stock both commercially and rsa, it is not a stock under pressure so again where do defra consider the opposite to be true. If there is a perceived threat to the stock and the reduction of illegal selling as this is what i consider defra are trying to stamp out, there has been the simple self policing idea of gill tagging at the point of sale, certainly at a negligible cost to the rate payer. Why has this not been considered?

 

I respectfully ask you sir to use this letter within the next meeting as you discuss the issue i look forward to attending. :thumbs:

 

Barry Luxton.

Edited by barry luxton

Free to choose apart from the ones where the trust poked their nose in. Common eel. tope. Bass and sea bream. All restricted.


New for 2016 TAT are the main instigators for the demise of the u k bass charter boat industry, where they went screaming off to parliament and for the first time assisting so called angling gurus set up bass take bans with the e u using rubbish exaggerated info collected by ices from anglers, they must be very proud.

Upgrade, the door has been closed with regards to anglers being linked to the e u superstate and the failed c f p. So TAT will no longer need to pay monies to the EAA anymore as that org is no longer relevant to the u k . Goodbye to the europeon anglers alliance and pathetic restrictions from the e u.

Angling is better than politics, ban politics from angling.

Consumer of bass. where is the evidence that the u k bass stock need angling trust protection. Why won't you work with your peers instead of castigating them. They have the answer.

Recipie's for mullet stew more than welcomed.

Angling sanitation trust and kent and sussex sea anglers org delete's and blocks rsa's alternative opinion on their face book site. Although they claim to rep all.

new for 2014. where is the evidence that the south coast bream stock need the angling trust? Your campaign has no evidence. Why won't you work with your peers, the inshore under tens? As opposed to alienating them? Angling trust failed big time re bait digging, even fish legal attempted to intervene and failed, all for what, nothing.

Looks like the sea angling reps have been coerced by the ifca's to compose sea angling strategy's that the ifca's at some stage will look at drafting into legislation to manage the rsa, because they like wasting tax payers money. That's without asking the rsa btw. You know who you are..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We and our partners use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences, repeat visits and to show you personalised advertisements. By clicking “I Agree”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies. However, you may visit Cookie Settings to provide a controlled consent.

  I accept