Angling Charter Boats to be Decommissioned?

[steve good]

I don't know. You tell me.

 

The important thing is if you really want to go down that road you have to look at the broader picture not Whitby only. Anglers catches of cod not in UK only but all around the North Sea should be taken into account and hold up against the total cod biomass, spawning mass and the rest, and to find out how much angling takes out and compare it with the commercials' catches, compare the two sectors environmental footprint and the socio-economic value as to decide, which sector should have how much if anything.

 

Hi FishingsFine

 

As angling is a sport, if bag limits come in, and 2 cod per day per person are introduced then anglers will play their rightful part in fishery conservation. At the moment what anglers catch is uncontrolled, unregulated and just a free for all.

 

That 110 ton of cod caught by Whitby anglers in 2001, if a 2 cod bag limit was introduced in that year what would have been the conservation saving and the increase of stock by them breeding???????

 

Also what would be the reduction of some charter boats half a ton of cod fillets be at 2 cod a day bag limit????

 

steve

Edited February 8, 2008 by steve good

[Leon Roskilly]

Fish are a publicaly owned resource that belongs to all of us, as part of our national heritage, enjoyed by past generations, enjoyed by this generation and available to be enjoyed by future generations.

 

If fish are removed from the biomass for the greater public good (ie to feed us, to support economic activity etc), it should be done in such a way that sustainability of the resource is not compromised, allowing future generations to enjoy the maximum benefits available.

 

And if the resource is limited, it should be managed to produce 'best value' for UK plc.

 

That might mean restricting access of the resource to one 'stakeholder', so that the resource available to another stakeholder which can produce a superior social and economic return from the limited resource available.

Edited February 8, 2008 by Leon Roskilly

[wurzel]

Hardly, but do you really want to go down that road?

 

Yes lets go down that road.

 

I was comparing the inshore under ten catches, it's the inshore sector that takes or would take the brunt of any measures on obtaining more and bigger fish that the RSA lobby are pushing for such as the so called golden mile and the restriction of inshore gill nets. Leon even wanted to be asked permission to readjust the monthly cod quota for the under tens!

 

So if the Whitby charter fleet took 110 tons of cod during a not so good year as 2001, with all the private boats and shore anglers from Whitby to the Solent another 200 tons or so during a good year wasn't such a bad guess after all.

the commercial under tens catch as far as I can make out is around 450 tons and if they manage to decommission the most efficient bigger under ten boats it would not take to much before anglers are seen as having more of an impact on cod stocks than the inshore fleet, so when this good year class fizzles out as it undoubtedly will anglers could be just as accountable as the inshore fleet for their demise.

[H.A.]

if they manage to decommission the most efficient bigger under ten boats it would not take to much before anglers are seen as having more of an impact on cod stocks than the inshore fleet

- Wurzel

 

I guess we'd be looking at around 100 tonnes each then, eh? (Don't include me in that, like many RSAs most of my cod go back; for conservation reasons .... I don't object to the odd dinner from deeply hooked fish. H.A.'s total for Sept - January '07/8: 41 codling caught to 7-12-0 and 31 returned, OK?)

 

Bit better than taking Whitby charter boat caught fish: 111 t

Commercial landings: 2535 t.

Combined total in a bad year 2646tonnes

 

% caught by charter boats ~ 4.2%

 

Again, I'll settle for a zero commercial catch (as recommended by CEFAS/ICES) and a 2 fish bag limit for RSAs until say a 5 year review of estimated stock.

 

[Leon Roskilly]

so when this good year class fizzles out as it undoubtedly will anglers could be just as accountable as the inshore fleet for their demise.

 

 

Why will it 'fizzle out' Wurzel?

 

When there is a table laden with food, and the fat feasters gorge themselves.

 

When it is nearly all gone.

 

It's a bit rich for the fat cats that have eaten it all to turn around to the tiny mouse that has survived on the few crumbs fallen from the table, to say "Hey you are now eating more than us!"

 

"You are now the reason that there will soon be nothing left!

Edited February 8, 2008 by Leon Roskilly

[steve good]

Fish are a publicaly owned resource that belongs to all of us, as part of our national heritage, enjoyed by past generations, enjoyed by this generation and available to be enjoyed by future generations.

 

If fish are removed from the biomass for the greater public good (ie to feed us, to support economic activity etc), it should be done in such a way that sustainability of the resource is not compromised, allowing future generations to enjoy the maximum benefits available.

 

And if the resource is limited, it should be managed to produce 'best value' for UK plc.

 

That might mean restricting access of the resource to one 'stakeholder', so that the resource available to another stakeholder which can produce a superior social and economic return from the limited resource available.

 

Hi Leon and FishingsFine

 

I do not dislike anglers, I have been an angler since I was 4, my main fishery is angling for bass, and I really enjoy doing that. I get on very well with anglers in my marina, and give them tips, and enjoy talking about fishing methods ect, I am probably one of afew commercials that would work with anglers and greens if there was a commen cause, like aggregate dredging or closed season in the English Channel so as to protect spawning bass.

 

Leon I agree with most of your post which is fair enough except for-------

 

QUOTE/ That might mean restricting access of the resource to one 'stakeholder', so that the resource available to another stakeholder which can produce a superior social and economic return from the limited resource available.

 

"Brussels now has control of how and when we fish and how much fish we can catch. The UK provides the EU with 70% of its fishing but we are only allowed 13% by value of the quota species. (confirmed by Frans Fischler, fisheries commissioner 2002). This 13% equates to about 20% of the total catch in British waters and is stilll worth £500 million a year, which means that we are giving away to EU interests about £2 billion a year in fish plus the value added costs of boat building and repair, fish processing, employment and ancillary services, in total about £2.5 billion.(DEFRA UK Sea Fisheries Statistics)"

 

"Due to EU quota system imposed by Brussels, the EU's own estimate is that 40% of all fish caught are dumped as discards. This discard policy contravenes the UN Convention on Law of the Sea with regard to dumping. (UNCLOS sect 5 art 210)"

 

Allowing for discards the British fishermen are losing about £3 billion a year by our membership of the EU, that is our socio-economic LOSE,

 

You keep pushing the anglers superior social and economic return, however it cuts no ice, the Government,DEFRA and the EU all know that they have wrecked the British fishing fleet and its social and economic return, it would have been far greater than the anglers economic return.

 

Thats probably why the bass mls was not increased.

 

I believe that you and others keep pushing this superior social and economic return so as to take away what anglers are really doing. Which fishing without regulation, unrestricted, uncontrolled and not within any conservation policy whatsoever in short anglers take collectively enormous amounts of fish. Mean while commercials are restricted beyond belief as to what they can catch and earn.

 

The fact is the commercials social and economic return is beyond there control.

[steve good]

Yes lets go down that road.

 

I was comparing the inshore under ten catches, it's the inshore sector that takes or would take the brunt of any measures on obtaining more and bigger fish that the RSA lobby are pushing for such as the so called golden mile and the restriction of inshore gill nets. Leon even wanted to be asked permission to readjust the monthly cod quota for the under tens!

 

So if the Whitby charter fleet took 110 tons of cod during a not so good year as 2001, with all the private boats and shore anglers from Whitby to the Solent another 200 tons or so during a good year wasn't such a bad guess after all.

the commercial under tens catch as far as I can make out is around 450 tons and if they manage to decommission the most efficient bigger under ten boats it would not take to much before anglers are seen as having more of an impact on cod stocks than the inshore fleet, so when this good year class fizzles out as it undoubtedly will anglers could be just as accountable as the inshore fleet for their demise.

 

Hi Peter

 

QUOTE/ anglers could be just as accountable as the inshore fleet for their demise.

 

Anglers landing half a ton of COD FILLETS[/b] a trip, yes I think you could be right. what do they do with all those fillet?????

 

Seems to me that anglers collectively take far more cod than the under 10 commercial fleet

 

 

steve

Edited February 8, 2008 by steve good

[Leon Roskilly]

name='steve good' date='Feb 8 2008, 06:46 PM' post='806889'

You keep pushing the anglers superior social and economic return, however it cuts no ice, the Government,DEFRA and the EU all know that they have wrecked the British fishing fleet and its social and economic return, it would have been far greater than the anglers economic return.

 

Steve, I really wish that I could go back to the days when there was plenty of fish for all, and anglers held commercial fishermen in high regard, not at all concerned with the amount of fish being taken out of the sea.

 

However, all around the world, the Recreational Sea Fishery is shown to produce a superior socio-economic return (with minimum impact upon the exploited resource) when compared to the economic value of the different fisheries for the fin fish species which both sectors target.

 

And remember too that the UK RSA sector is also depressed because of the lack of fish, and particularly fish of a good stamp.

 

If more and bigger fish became a reality, based on experience from overseas the not only would anglers fish more, more people would go fishing, and the amount each angler would be prepared to spend would increase considerably.

 

Now we are at the bottom of the barrel, it becomes even more important to ensure that the dimished resource is used to return best value.

 

Thats probably why the bass mls was not increased.

 

When asked to explain his decision regarding the bass mls decision by another MP, Jonathan Shaw has written in his reply:

 

….part of my decision not to increase the MLS for bass was my concern about the impacts to the under 10m fleet in the short to medium term.

 

This sector faced a number of additional pressures last year in relation to the availability of quota species.

 

It is difficult to calculate the exact economic cost, but inshore netters fishing for sole, cod and plaice would have been especially affected.

 

As a non-quota species, bass is an important displacement species for these fishermen

 

So, even though the Prime Ministers Strategy Unit recommended to Government that they should consider making bass a 'wholly recreational species" (something that anglers never pressed for incidentally, believing that the stock should be equitably shared), Jonathan Shaw has confirmed it's status as 'an important dispalcement species for inshore commercial fishermen'. (At least until they have matched the size of the inshore fleet to the available quota, when the position will be reviewed).

 

That is some turn around!

 

For the better long term good?

Edited February 8, 2008 by Leon Roskilly

[barry luxton]

Hi Peter

 

QUOTE/ anglers could be just as accountable as the inshore fleet for their demise.

 

Anglers landing half a ton of COD FILLETS[/b] a trip, yes I think you could be right. what do they do with all those fillet?????

 

Seems to me that anglers collectively take far more cod than the under 10 commercial fleet

 

 

steve

 

I haven't seen a decent cod caught for over two years. and yes i have been out more than once or twice

[wurzel]

I haven't seen a decent cod caught for over two years. and yes i have been out more than once or twice

 

Perhaps you should try a different skipper Barry.