Representative Organisations

[H.A.]

In all seriousness, though, things have gone far enough now. The situation has reached "serious" status. I have taken the much punted advice of people who know better than me, and have written to my MP.

-

 

there's the rub, Stevie.

 

Do I now put all my trust in your judgement or persons like-minded? You are going to lobby your MP to brief him on what you think is the way forward for RSAs? Or just for you?

 

And I haven't got a clue what that is.

 

Should I trust you? Or are we all (how many thousands?) supposed to give our vastly different individual opinions to the 600 or so members of the House and hope that they come up with plans to protect anglers' rights, fish stocks, give us access to all fisheries and scrap CFPs/Defra regs so that UK (or English only?) anglers and commercials can have a trouble-free future?

 

Perhaps we could have your opinions in some detail, so that we can jump on a common bandwagon .......

 

or not?

 

[Steve Coppolo]

-

 

there's the rub, Stevie.

 

Do I now put all my trust in your judgement or persons like-minded? You are going to lobby your MP to brief him on what you think is the way forward for RSAs? Or just for you?

 

And I haven't got a clue what that is.

 

Should I trust you? Or are we all (how many thousands?) supposed to give our vastly different individual opinions to the 600 or so members of the House and hope that they come up with plans to protect anglers' rights, fish stocks, give us access to all fisheries and scrap CFPs/Defra regs so that UK (or English only?) anglers and commercials can have a trouble-free future?

 

Perhaps we could have your opinions in some detail, so that we can jump on a common bandwagon .......

 

or not?

 

 

No, no, no, no, NO. You've got hold of the wrong end of the stick. I don't want to represent you, or anyone else.

 

As far as what I think is the way forward, that's got nothing to do with you. Mind your own business.

 

I do agree, though, that the 10 trillion, (or whatever the current ridiculous figure is), sea anglers out there should all write to their MP's and let them know what they think is the way forward. Then, the politicians might appreciate just how diverse a bunch us sea anglers are, and that they can't possibly hope to manage us on the strength of what they are told by the misguided few who think they know what's best for all of us.

 

Anyway, going back to the point of your post, (wrong, or otherwise), I take it you wouldn't be too chuffed if i were to speak to government on your behalf? I also take it that you would be even less impressed if I chose to do so, but ignored your request to tell you what I think is the way forward? And I wouldn't blame you. So, why are you prepared to let one or two other people do just that? You either want to be guided blindly, or you don't. Which is it?

[barry luxton]

-

 

there's the rub, Stevie.

 

Do I now put all my trust in your judgement or persons like-minded? You are going to lobby your MP to brief him on what you think is the way forward for RSAs? Or just for you?

 

And I haven't got a clue what that is.

 

Should I trust you? Or are we all (how many thousands?) supposed to give our vastly different individual opinions to the 600 or so members of the House and hope that they come up with plans to protect anglers' rights, fish stocks, give us access to all fisheries and scrap CFPs/Defra regs so that UK (or English only?) anglers and commercials can have a trouble-free future?

 

Perhaps we could have your opinions in some detail, so that we can jump on a common bandwagon .......

 

or not?

 

 

Could spend the next few years on a blaming mission of the reps , that'll be after defra and the eu have changed the rsa fishing experiance into what they consider to be benifit to the rsa in any event. difficult decision to either liaise with the managers direct or not. For the very least they should hear from the rsa as to what is not acceptable.

 

I also have a problem in considering if the new super rsa org is going to benifit the rsa needs , they have to be stong enough to deal with the issues that are going to happen, for example, already, one small issue of oversize angling boats, the apparent defeatist attitude of 'too late it has already been decided',move on. Don't think that is going to be good enough some how.

[SandTiger]

Honestly, I don't have a list of ones that DEFRA recognise. I'm told that they'll get back to me, so we'll see.

 

As you say Elton, it would be good to know just who DEFRA have chosen as our 'representatives'. Not sure how these proposals will pan out with the survival of charter vessels if they come into being?

Edited December 6, 2008 by SandTiger

[Steve Coppolo]

Could spend the next few years on a blaming mission of the reps , that'll be after defra and the eu have changed the rsa fishing experiance into what they consider to be benifit to the rsa in any event. difficult decision to either liaise with the managers direct or not. For the very least they should hear from the rsa as to what is not acceptable.

I also have a problem in considering if the new super rsa org is going to benifit the rsa needs , they have to be stong enough to deal with the issues that are going to happen, for example, already, one small issue of oversize angling boats, the apparent defeatist attitude of 'too late it has already been decided',move on. Don't think that is going to be good enough some how.

 

My vision of the future doesn't involve working with politicians, Defra, Cefas, or any of the sea angling misrepresentative bodies, Barry, but rather fending them off.

[H.A.]

So, why are you prepared to let one or two other people do just that?

You either want to be guided blindly, or you don't. Which is it?

 

I have a stark choice and what I decide will be my own business.

 

Do I abandon any support for representation and put my trust in you (and Ronnie boy and the other dissenters) or do I wait and see what the brains' 'Trust' comes up with.

I'll wait and see for a while.

 

My interpretation of your views and some of the, as I call them 'hybrids' (who are commercials at heart), is that you and they want to stop dialogue with the 'fat controllers' and kindee resurrect the 70s 'Status Quo' (Merry Christmas, by the way).

 

I don't know for sure; but I can tell you something ....

sit on your arses or 'I know Nothin' has never reaped dividends in the real world of politics.

 

Some of the 'players' would call it 'appeasement' by any other name or even 'sedition'.

Certainly some of your statements could be interpreted as 'naive' non-participation in the processes which (whether we like it or not) affect our daily lives.

 

To be honest, when I hear the 'bleatings' of the impotent dissenters, or 'I'm alright Jack, leave it as it is' crowd or worse still ... 'I wanna know nuthin' because it might upset what I truly believe in (and that ain't recreational angling) - then I'm tempted to tell them to koof off to some idealistic island paradise where there are still fish left to catch (and sell?) and anything (explosives, poisons ... you name it) is allowed.

 

My vision of the future doesn't involve working with politicians, Defra, Cefas, or any of the sea angling misrepresentative bodies, Barry, but rather fending them off.

 

get real Stevie!

 

Stick yer head in the sand and sort the world out ....

 

nah!

 

Edited December 7, 2008 by H.A.

[Newt]

Just that you want a strategy, that you don't mind being excluded from fishing in certain areas, that you won't mind having a bag limit, that you won't mind paying for a sea angling licence, that you think scientific studies and research are beneficial to sea angling, that you want to fill in a log book, that you don't want to take fish home to eat, among other things.

Are all of those bad things?

 

Some sound reasonable (at least to me) if UK sea fishing is in good condition and urgent if it is not.

[glennk]

Hi Newt, this is a question that should be answered before the government go any further. They need to know what the 1-2 million sea anglers think and want. They have been hoodwinked into believeing these recognised organisations know the answers. They dont.

 

I see your concerns Elton. When the DEFRA roadshow came here last summer I made a point of asking the question you have asked here and told them I personally believe 99% of sea anglers havent even heard of their recognised bodies. Sadly not enough people have been saying the same and now I believe its far too late in the day to change things. When the local charter skippers in Whitby were in fear for the future they rang Nicola Clark at Defra and asked if they could represent themselves. The answer came back - Sorry no speak to SACN or NFSA. THe views of the skippers were in such contrats to these 2 organisations that they were never going to get their voices heard no matter how loud they shouted.

 

 

Who are our rep bodies ? Track back to the beginning of the inshore fisheries working group and you have your answer.

 

RECREATIONAL SEA ANGLING STAKEHOLDERS MEETING

15 March 2006

HQS Wellington, Victoria Embankment, London

______________________

 

Minutes

______________________

 

 

Present

 

Trevor Hutchings Defra (Chair)

Richard Ferre National Federation of Sea Anglers (NFSA)

Gerard Twigger NFSA

Alan Brothers Sussex Sea Fisheries Committee

NFSA

Tony Williams NFSA

Nigel Proctor North Eastern Sea Fisheries Committee

 

Tom Pinborough NFSA

Sea Anglers Conservation Network (SACN)

Eastern Sea Fisheries Committee

John Leballeur Bass Anglers Sportfishing Society (BASS)

NFSA

Leon Roskilly SACN

NFSA

Alistair McDonnell Marine Fisheries Agency (MFA)

Anthony Hynes Defra

Nicola Clarke Defra (morning only)

Richard England Defra (minutes)

 

Apologies

 

Ben Mullins

Bruno Broughton Angling Trades Association

Chris Caines

Dave Rigden

David Gibson

Malcolm Gilbert NFSA, BASS

Neil Bryant

 

Who appointed them ? Who asked for them and more to the point who wants them.

[steve good]

Hi All

 

Some time ago some bright sparks push for the BMP through their hats in the arena and exspected DEFRA to implement it without question, The rsa reps did not consult commercials first so a war broke out between the two stakeholders

 

Defra and the EU have listerned too the commercials when they say that anglers are exempt from quotas and all the other constaints that commercials have to comply with, why should commercials have to discard cod when anglers can catch as much as they like and then the anglers moan about commercial discards to DEFRA

 

ARTICLE 47 welcomes anglers to the real world maybe you will now learn what it is like to be allways having to defend your position from all these NOBLE men in suits in London and Brussels

 

There is the worst to come when the Marine Bill comes in the Greens will come into there own and the onslaught against the RSA and Commercials will begin.

 

Personally I dont like whats happening to commercials or anglers our rights have been eroded beyound belief and its getting worst

 

There is no room for a split in the ranks remember DIVIDE and RULE anglers are ripe for the taking now, you need to sought it and QUICK CUSTARDS last stand springs to mind lol lol

 

Steve

[SandTiger]

Are all of those bad things?

 

Some sound reasonable (at least to me) if UK sea fishing is in good condition and urgent if it is not.

 

What one needs to maybe ask is "will these measures actually protect stocks by any meaningful level?"

 

I think that the answer has to be "No" for my box area or any other UK area where angling occurs has a very low impact on fisheries. There is no need to introduce these proposals which just add unneeded bureaucracy to what is for most a hobby.

 

What it has the potential to do is put charter vessels out of business and have a negative financial impact on struggling coastal communities that rely on income generated by anglers.

 

The implications of these proposals need to be closely looked at and strongly resisted.

Edited December 7, 2008 by SandTiger