Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

RSA Strategy Consultation Launched


  • Please log in to reply
173 replies to this topic

#1 Leon Roskilly

Leon Roskilly

    Member

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

Posted 06 December 2007 - 11:17 AM

see:

http://www.sacn.org....y-Launched.html

RNLI Shoreline Member

Member of the Angling Trust


#2 ColinW

ColinW

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,417 posts

Posted 06 December 2007 - 01:03 PM

So in summary.
The second objective

To capitalise on the economic potential of the sport

Deliberately worded to make us think they mean get more people angling, but in reality means "We've spotted a new taxation stream".
Then the money obtained from a licence will be used to educate us simple minded folk that, contrary to our beliefs, minimum landing sizes will not improve our sport

The concept of a minimum landing size (MLS) that is above the size at first maturity for each species is broadly promoted, but may not be the most effective or appropriate tool to meet management objectives in all cases.
This will need to be clearly communicated to stakeholders.

and the trawlers we see working up and down our beaches and the miles of gill nets are not in fact doing any damage to fish stocks.

..misconceptions about the extent and impact of netting and trawling inshore. Much of this
misconception could be remedied through improved marking of fishing gear, education about fishing practices and clear signage via a national code.


Only one thing needs to be noted

A sea angling licence will be considered. Costs and benefits will be clear and transparent..

The ONLY benefit I am concerned about is what they state as the the primary objective

To provide more and bigger fish within a healthy and sustainable ecosystem and environment

If they can't guarantee that then they can forget it. I am not interested in parking, slipways, information signs, seats, bins or toilets!

MORE AND BIGGER FISH. NOTHING ELSE WILL DO.

#3 glennk

glennk

    Member

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

Posted 06 December 2007 - 01:46 PM

You can read the consultation document here :

http://www.whitbysea...on-document.php

:rolleyes: B)

#4 glennk

glennk

    Member

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

Posted 06 December 2007 - 01:50 PM

Particular interest should be paid to this section

5. RSA Management


Summary
A sea angling licence will be considered. Costs and benefits will be clear
and transparent, and additional revenue returned to the angling sector to
provide benefits.
• As part of a balanced package of conservation measures, effort control
(such as increased MLS, voluntary codes of conduct, bag limits or log books) should be considered on a species by species basis. Objectives
for such measures must be clearly defined.
Detail
5.1 There is relatively little management of sea angling activity in comparison
with the commercial sector, with SFCs and the EA being the main bodies
taking action. This may be a contributing factor to the broad appeal of the
sport. However, with relatively high angling participation levels, and a
possibility that this could increase in future, anglers have the potential to
have an impact on some stocks. Everyone who catches fish has a
responsibility to respond to changing stock levels to prevent overexploitation.
5.2 The potential benefits that might result from taking a more active approach
to RSA management would include ensuring that RSA needs are identified
and accounted for; preventing some participants from significantly impacting
upon the ‘angling experience’ of others; and maximising the overall socioeconomic
value of the activity. However, the success and potential benefits
of any measures will be dependent on anglers being actively involved in the
development process, and ensuring the objectives are communicated
effectively to generate interest and participation from anglers. Management
measures, such as a sea angling licence or bag limits, are not widely
supported by the angling sector at present. Anglers want to see clear
improvements in the sea angling experience before such measures are
introduced.
5.3 Any measures should be part of an overall package that aims to benefit
anglers and society as a whole. Responsibility would fall both to anglers,
who should be willing to contribute constructively to the debate, and
management bodies, who should ensure there is a clear, participative and
extensive consultation process. Enforcement bodies should be actively
involved in the development of proposals to ensure that any management
measures can be enforced effectively.
Recreational Sea Angling Licence
5.4 All fisheries stakeholders have a responsibility to share the cost of science
and fisheries management. A combined mechanism that would raise money
for the benefit of sea anglers, provide an effective communication tool,
gather information to better understand anglers’ needs, promote fuller
participation in management fora, and enable effective monitoring and
enforcement would underpin other elements of the RSA Strategy. A sea
angling licence (operating in a similar way to the freshwater angling licence)
could meet these needs. The costs and benefits must be transparent,
justifiable and clearly understood. Additional revenue would need to be
14
returned to the angling sector through a range of projects and programmes
that would enhance the angling experience.
Recreational Sea Angling Management tools
5.5 Other tools to manage the potential impact anglers and other sectors have
on stocks should be considered as part of an overall package of measures
designed to manage and improve stocks. These tools should be flexible,
enable action to be taken quickly if necessary to protect vulnerable stocks
as well as look to the longer term, and be driven by clear scientific evidence
or the precautionary approach. The conservation benefits of taking any
action would need to be balanced and proportionate to the potential impact
anglers have on stocks. Possible management tools include voluntary
codes of conduct, log books, closed areas or seasons and ‘bag limits’.
5.6 The objectives should clearly state whether measures are being taken for
conservation or enforcement purposes, or both. Action should be taken at
the most appropriate level for any species, but should be primarily driven by
SFCs and the EA so that measures can be designed to take account of
particular local circumstances.
Key mechanisms and actions
5.7 Defra should take the opportunity of the Marine Bill to provide the necessary
powers to introduce appropriate management measures. Consultation
processes involved in introducing enabling powers or any resulting
measures will enable anglers to provide evidence and express their views
on proposals. Translating any powers into practical legislation will take
some years and involve further consultation on specific details. This period
of time would enable other measures in the Strategy to be progressed and
realise improvements in the angling experience before the introduction of
any control measures.
5.8 SFCs already have powers that would enable the introduction of some local
management measures, such as bag limits and fixed engine byelaws.
Where measures are justified, pilot schemes could be considered by SFCs,
working with local anglers and scientists to introduce, test and monitor the
impact of the measures. SFCs should work together to ensure measures
cover a full range of situations and locations. This would build evidence to
inform decisions about using such measures on a wider and national basis.

Edited by glennk, 06 December 2007 - 01:51 PM.


#5 big_cod

big_cod

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,879 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:fishing and ladies, Just love ladies.

Posted 06 December 2007 - 02:14 PM

We keep haveing to say this a sea angling licence is just another tax you wont get jack schit for haveing a licence just regulations for priverlidge of giveing the goverment your hard earned cash in return for nothing.

http://sea-otter2.co.uk/

Probably Whitby's most consistent charterboat

Untitled-1.jpg


#6 glennk

glennk

    Member

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

Posted 07 December 2007 - 09:20 AM

You wont have to keep saying it for long Big Cod because after March it will be all but over and fishing as you currently know it will be coming to an end and a new era will dawn. It will then be fishing as Leon thinks it should be with a licence, restrictions on catches, closed areas(coming to your beach soon - especially if you live at Bridlington), bait digging bans etc etc etc ........

I wonder if you and your colleagues in the charter fishing and tackle industry will look back and say "If Only I ....................................."

Maybe you should take the time to read the consultation and make a response, its your last chance now on this one, there will be no more invites to London, no more chances, no more moaning on here.

#7 ColinW

ColinW

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,417 posts

Posted 07 December 2007 - 12:53 PM

However negatively we may feel about this process and whatever lack of confidence we have in it achieving what we want

i.e. MORE, BIGGER FISH!

it is essential that we all do take the time to send in constructive responses.

It is no use "going off on one" in the response (do that on here) because that just makes us look like idiots who they can disregard.
Remember that if you do take the time to respond, YOUR opinion will carry more weight than it might deserve, simply because there will probably only be a few hundred responses. You can bet that the commercial fishermen will have plenty to say, because their organisations pay people to do this sort of stuff.
If you don't want the responses to be unduly influenced by the bass and mullet guys then you'd better get your fingers out!

What I want.
If I can take home two four pound bass in a session, I will be happy.
If I can catch a couple of mullet and return them, I will be happy.
Clearly these aims probably don't match those of north eastern cod fishers!

#8 Cranfield

Cranfield

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,935 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Romney Marsh
  • Interests:All coarse and sea fishing

Posted 08 December 2007 - 09:49 AM

Having very carefully read the document and thought about it for a couple of days, I confess to still feeling disappointed and not at all optimistic that the eventual outcome will benefit RSA at all.

It does appear that things will remain exactly as they are now, except I will be paying a licence, have new limits on what I can catch and take home and probably restrictions on where and when I can fish.
Some "victory" for RSA.

I will of course be invited to take part in a Code of Conduct and I even detected the hint of booklets/training on how to tie a hook on and pick up my own rubbish.

I'm not sure whether all the other sea anglers that have read this document are happy, complacent, or illiterate, but I am surprised at the lack of comments.

Its really a pity we can't turn the clock back.
"I gotta go where its warm, I gotta fly to saint somewhere "

#9 barry luxton

barry luxton

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,518 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:rochester
  • Interests:Boat fishing and more boat fishing. Some times i have to go to work so it does interfere with my boat fishing, but not much.

Posted 08 December 2007 - 10:12 AM

Having very carefully read the document and thought about it for a couple of days, I confess to still feeling disappointed and not at all optimistic that the eventual outcome will benefit RSA at all.

It does appear that things will remain exactly as they are now, except I will be paying a licence, have new limits on what I can catch and take home and probably restrictions on where and when I can fish.
Some "victory" for RSA.

I will of course be invited to take part in a Code of Conduct and I even detected the hint of booklets/training on how to tie a hook on and pick up my own rubbish.

I'm not sure whether all the other sea anglers that have read this document are happy, complacent, or illiterate, but I am surprised at the lack of comments.

Its really a pity we can't turn the clock back.


If you read the four main objectives:

more and bigger fish (they have already proven where they are coming from on this)

capitalise on the economic potential (only if they want to steal some of it)

maintain and increase partisipation (not with a licence)

awareness and understanding. (they might win this one, understand their interfearence is going to cost)

Can't see how the heck defra is going to acheive any of these without costing the rsa and the ratepayers more money. They can,t even get sorted with the eu and the cfp at present so what hope have the rsa got when defra start getting the hooks in.

 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.. 


#10 steve pitts

steve pitts

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 275 posts

Posted 08 December 2007 - 10:35 AM

I'm not sure whether all the other sea anglers that have read this document are happy, complacent, or illiterate, but I am surprised at the lack of comments.


It may have something to do with it being tucked away here in the Politics and Conservation section - which only a hand-full of forum users appear to visit on a regular basis.

If a new topic were posted in the other sea angling related sections, with a link to this thread, would it be moved or deleted? I would hope not.

Perhaps, just this once, a topic of such importance as this should be opened up across other sections with a sticky message?

Cheers
Steve

Edited by steve pitts, 08 December 2007 - 10:36 AM.