Rsa versus Commercial

[wurzel]

You would think wouldn't you that RSA and commercials would have plenty of common ground.

 

We both want (preumably) more fish in the sea, and presumambly more bigger fish (if only because that means more good breeding stock to produce lots of smaller ones too).

 

And presumably we also want freedom to fish when and where we want, which if there are plenty of fish out there would not really be a problem.

 

The problem appears to me to be one of greed - always has and always will I fear - on the part of the majority of the commercial fleet. they are in denial, they still claim that there are plenty of fish out there.

 

They claim that the current quotas are not required (and I must say I think the quota system is one of the most stupid methods ever devised to limit deaths of sea fish species) as there are plenty of fish out there.

 

They claim that they should be allowed to catch what they want because they know better than the scientists what fish are available to be caught.

 

If the commercials had any sort of record in the recent past of self regulation I believe that we could work together, but as their history since the second world war at least has been one of massive over fishing without a shred of self restraint I for one do not believe that we van ever establish an commonality of purpose. I would not shed a sigle tear to see the total demise of the white fish fleet, any form of trawler, any form of dredger, and the over 10 meter longliners that catch and kill indescriminately.

 

 

 

Small boats using selective fishing methods are fine.

 

So with your superior knowledge of commercial fishermen and fishing industry could you please make a list of what you consider as a small boat selective fishing methods.

Explain what over ten meter long liners catch and kill indiscriminately that a under ten doesn't?

Except for a half a dozen white fish boats from Whitby the mainstay species is haddock, most of that is caught hundreds of miles off Peterhead how would the demise of the white fish fleet benefit RSA.?

Why any form of trawler or dredger?

By saying we are in denial do you mean we are telling lies when we say there are plenty enough fish in the sea?

Why should scientists know more than fishermen, most of the information they get is from fishermen

[ColinW]

Did you fish for your pot bait up a river?

My real opinion of these "professional fishermen" wouldn't stay on here for more than one minute. I can see no moral difference between netting a river for baby flounders and netting a pond for carp.

Let's make it absolutely clear again. The reason these guys have tied up their boats and gone crying to the press is because the Environment Agency have finally decided to enforce the laws that they have been breaking for the last 16 years. If someone decides to stop drink driving because the police have started breath testing people on the way out of the pub does that make him a victim too?

I know a guy (who knows what he's doing) who makes a good living fishing shrimps with no more gear than a mini-van, a pair of chest waders and a push net. Yet these guys try to tell us they can't make a living on shrimps WITH A BOAT without wiping out the flounders (Jim Royle has an expression which comes to mind.)

[steve good]

You would think wouldn't you that RSA and commercials would have plenty of common ground.

 

We both want (preumably) more fish in the sea, and presumambly more bigger fish (if only because that means more good breeding stock to produce lots of smaller ones too).

 

And presumably we also want freedom to fish when and where we want, which if there are plenty of fish out there would not really be a problem.

 

The problem appears to me to be one of greed - always has and always will I fear - on the part of the majority of the commercial fleet. they are in denial, they still claim that there are plenty of fish out there.

 

They claim that the current quotas are not required (and I must say I think the quota system is one of the most stupid methods ever devised to limit deaths of sea fish species) as there are plenty of fish out there.

 

They claim that they should be allowed to catch what they want because they know better than the scientists what fish are available to be caught.

 

If the commercials had any sort of record in the recent past of self regulation I believe that we could work together, but as their history since the second world war at least has been one of massive over fishing without a shred of self restraint I for one do not believe that we van ever establish an commonality of purpose. I would not shed a sigle tear to see the total demise of the white fish fleet, any form of trawler, any form of dredger, and the over 10 meter longliners that catch and kill indescriminately.

 

Small boats using selective fishing methods are fine.

 

Hi nick

 

I do not know if anyone has ever told you, but you are a TOP DIPLOMAT keep it up

 

There will be no WHITEWASH at WHITEHALL

 

STEVE

[steve good]

Unless I am missing something, this is yet another ill-informed cheap shot at commercial fishermen.

 

For many years I successfully fished pots and caught my own pot bait with a small trawl which I entirely made myself. I caught my own bait because it greatly out-fished other baits available at the time. The bait we used to catch was mostly plaice, but there was also a small percentage of other fish like sand dabs, flounder and Dover soles. The latter added to my overall income.

 

I have always welcomed informed opinions. However, on a thread trying to look for common ground between RSA and commercials, malicious attitudes seem to me to be counter-productive.

 

JB

 

Hi John and Michele

 

We do not know all the facts about why these fishermen stopped fishing and therefore any fair minded person should not pass judgement, some anglers on here are so quick to condemn them, that any possiblity of commercials working with anglers would be pointless

 

steve

[barry luxton]

Hi John and Michele

 

We do not know all the facts about why these fishermen stopped fishing and therefore any fair minded person should not pass judgement, some anglers on here are so quick to condemn them, that any possiblity of commercials working with anglers would be pointless

 

steve

 

 

Hi Steve Good, you are correct we do not know all the facts, what started it off was the comments from the actuall guys who stated that because of some anglers we have tied our boats up and are not allowed to fish with the pain of heavy fines. This apparently is due to a fifteen year old bylaw that had not been either implimented or totally ignored. There obviously is more detail to come out. I started to ask questions because the origional story appeared to be one sided and as far as i'm concerned it went down hill from there. There was derogartory comments made but again it was by both commercial and rsa as usuall.

 

John has pointed out previously and i'm inclined to agree, the real problem is with the men in suits. They have 'managed' the commercial sector for a while, now is the turn of rsa. It's just like a soap opera but it is for real.

[JB]

It seems we may be at cross purposes. This thread of Stavey’s is a subject that is close to my heart. Anyone who has read any of my previous posts, and/or the threads I have started, will know that I have always advocated that everyone who fishes should get together and fight the common enemy - our government and the EU. Unfortunately, many of my posts have not been received favourably.

 

Hoping that opinions may have been changed with recent events, and that posters may now have less confidence in our fisheries management system, I followed this thread with great interest - until post six. And then the topic completely changed.

 

Maybe I went off half-cocked when commercial fishermen were being called for doing something that I had done for many years. I think the posts 6 and 7 should have gone into another thread which I have not been following. Michele often tells me I should keep up and should know when she is going to change the subject. I guess the same applies with this forum. Anyway, apologies if I have upset anyone.

 

JB

[barry luxton]

It seems we may be at cross purposes. This thread of Stavey’s is a subject that is close to my heart. Anyone who has read any of my previous posts, and/or the threads I have started, will know that I have always advocated that everyone who fishes should get together and fight the common enemy - our government and the EU. Unfortunately, many of my posts have not been received favourably.

 

Hoping that opinions may have been changed with recent events, and that posters may now have less confidence in our fisheries management system, I followed this thread with great interest - until post six. And then the topic completely changed.

 

Maybe I went off half-cocked when commercial fishermen were being called for doing something that I had done for many years. I think the posts 6 and 7 should have gone into another thread which I have not been following. Michele often tells me I should keep up and should know when she is going to change the subject. I guess the same applies with this forum. Anyway, apologies if I have upset anyone.

 

JB

 

Personally, i do look forward to your posts John as they are allways the voice of reason, cheers.

[Newt]

Anyway, apologies if I have upset anyone.

 

I'm not sure it is reasonable for anyone reading these topics to be upset about comments.

 

For the most part, the positions of the regular posters are so hardened and immune to argument that we pretty much know in advance what folks are likely to say on a given subject.

[Leon Roskilly]

The poor old fishing industry is being battered from all sides, the greens, consumers, supermarkets etc.

 

 

The World has changed.

 

 

Anglers percieve that the fish they target are being increasingly squeezed; flounder for pot bait, wrasse for sushi, mullet for beer money, as 'the industry' struggles to supply an increasing consumer demand for fish.

 

Whereas the science often warns that you can only cut the flesh so close to the bone, and environmentalists see the natural world, and the marine environment in particular, in deep trouble due to man's exploitation of vulnerable, once renewable resources.

 

 

The World has changed.

 

 

When there was plenty of fish, anglers and commercials lived in relative harmony, anglers happy with the more than adequate crumbs left by inefficient commercial exploitation of the available resources.

 

But as fish, particularly those close inshore where most angling takes place, became scarcer (apart from pouting!), RSA started questioning why a single stakeholder should take ownership of what was left of a publicly owned resource.

 

Despite the fact that in some areas, and for some species, management of a recreational sea fishery could provide far better societal and economic benefits for the people of the UK, both in livelihoods and business opportunites.

 

Not all areas, and certainly not all species.

 

So they asked for a slice of the cake, rather than making do with the few remaining crumbs.

 

 

The World has changed.

 

 

Now, if the beleaguered fishing industry had a nonce of sense and vision, it would know that it needs new friends, others with a common interest that can work with them towards a better future for all.

 

Add a million or so anglers voices to that of a few thousand fisherman and you have a force to be reckoned with.

 

All it would need to accomplish that is for 'the industry' to say 'Right lads, you have a case'

 

'Tell you what, where there are areas important to you, we will stay clear. After all most of your fishing is off the beach and in the estuaries in a relatively few places, whereas we have the whole of the fish-filled continental shelf to work, and the miles of coastline where you hardly ever see an angler. And of course, you won't mind us setting some herring-nets, pots etc in the places important to you will you?'

 

'Oh! and flounder, mullet and wrasse, tope? OK they are useful as pot bait, but we know you guys love catching them close inshore, so we'll not work them hard in recognition that you need some sport to sustain the livelihoods and businesses that depend on the RSA sector'

 

'And perhaps we can work something out on spudog and roker and bass, so that we all get increased value out of sustainable and robust fisheries'

 

And anglers say, 'Hey these are decent responsible guys, we can do a lot if we work together'

 

 

 

 

In your dreams!!

 

Just 4cm on bass and 'the industry' goes ape!

 

'It's our cake and you can p**s off', you aren't having any of it!'

 

 

 

 

What a terrible miscalculation, and another step backwards into the redoubt where all the world outside of 'the industry' becomes the enemy.

 

Scientists, fishery managers, the bl***y greens, the F*****g supermarkets, politicians, the consuming public and of course the anglers.

 

 

The world is changing.

 

 

Not now, perhaps not for a long time, but the penny will finally drop that it's over.

 

 

'The industry' has lost control of it's fish, lost the respect of the people, and now desperately needs friends.

 

'If only we had given a little, won over the anglers to our side, forged a respectful brotherhood of fishermen, not realised too late that the world had changed......................'

 

 

 

The World was changing and we didn't realise.

Edited March 2, 2007 by Leon Roskilly

[thedogs]

Oh Leon I love it when you talk so dirty! and masterful to boot!