Yido

Barry, All the more reason for RSA to stand up and fight, joining the AT will get you inside where your voice can be heard, where RSA can change things for the better, if it needs it. How long will it take, I expect several years, and much longer if we don't unite for the better good of our sport. Yes, I am happy with the AT response to the reform of the CFP, but again, don't expect things to happen overnight Barry.

Steve, you once gave me some sound advice, to learn. That is what I am doing, the more I learn the more I want to do something to help local anglers. So do yourself a favour Steve and shred that thick dossier you have on me, I am no threat to you or any RSA, there are after all bigger fish to catch. We all want a better future, infighting will not help us at all.

Yes indeed Barry and Wayne We have an opportunity here to see if all RSA can have a alliance here, I hope it is as open and honest as we need it to be. Sorry if you guys thought that I said Stuart was back with the AT. He is back representing RSA in all its forms.

For the guys who are interested, Stuart MacPherson is back.......... in the form of RSAMCZCG Recreational Sea Angling Marine Conservation Zone Coordination Group Stuart is the coordinator of this organisation, someone we all can trust. Contact details smyorksnfsa07@yahoo.com --------- see for yourselves

Like I said before Dave, Great Mag, run by dedicated anglers

Wayne, sorry I mist your post, didn't want to rock the boat! Believe it or not, we are on the same side so I will leave it at that. I keep a keen eye on BFM too.

Barry, I agree with most of what you say. The MCZ's will be a waste of time if our government do not decide to either pull out of the EU completely, or give the 0nm-12mn fishing zones back to our British fleets and enforce changes within the CFP and make bl@@dy sure that the foreign fleets abide by the rules. Furthermore, from what I understand by reading the AT Response to the Reform of the CFP, the AT agrees with you as well, on everything you have said Barry. I really want you to see the AT response Barry so do me a favour and PM me your address, I will then print a few copies off and send them to you direct. I promise to delete your details straight away......Anglers Honour!!! I know I am banking on the MCZ's being a success Barry, I am also aware that we will see no improvement for a couple of years at least, but after that we should all notice some improvement to fish stocks, all be it, very slowly. Commercial's catch large quantities of fish daily, even the under 10's. If they are not fishing in these areas, then the stocks cannot be depleted enough to show no signs of improvement at all, simple logic if there is such a thing! My concern with MCZ's is access for anglers, we are not to blame and we all need to unite on this one, boat anglers, charter boats and shore anglers. Our government needs to listen to anglers and our commercial fishermen, that means changes to protect our nations fish stocks from all foreign fleets.

Steve, I haven't got a clue what you are saying, but it sounds bad if it is true. Could be something completely innocent and blown out of all proportions, what is it ?

Barry the link is as follows: anglingtrust.net/page.asp?section=494&sectionTitle=Consultation+Responses remember to put http://www. before this, for some reason I can't put the full address on here in one line. Yes I believe the AT website did ask anglers to nominate marine conservation zones in their local areas, they have also asked anglers to attend meetings and explain how important these areas are to angling and why we need areas of our coastline protected from over fishing by commercial fleets. I have never looked myself but I have been told this before by other anglers. The thing is Barry, the more anglers moan and shout to these organisations, the more they will listen. If we dont moan and shout then they will think we do not care and we are an easy touch. I do not believe for one minute that Balanced Seas had any intension to appoint a angling liaison officer in their region, I believe that it was only down to a lot of moaning from anglers and the AT that they then took this step. As far as the AT intensions with MCZ's, and I can only refer to Balanced Seas area because I am not in the know! They are trying to appoint an AT representative in this region to represent anglers, but remember the literature provided by Balanced Seas stated that they may not be welcome. This is an issue that the AT will have to press hard if we are to have a say in the future. As far as my opinion on MCZ's they are a major step forward in the protection of our habitat and protection of all species, if, and only if these sites do not have a devastating effect on RSA. I do not trust Balanced Seas one bit and I have told our members and the local anglers who I have spoken too, to make absolutely sure that they are aware of the ramifications of ignoring Balanced Seas and letting them dictate to us. I believe that this is a once in a lifetime opportunity for RSA to protect our future, but if we are not careful and we do nothing and say nothing then it could turn out to be the final nail in our coffin. We are losing GRASS ROOT venues all over the country because we do nothing and let government and private organisations walk all over us, when are anglers going to realise that doing nothing now is the worst thing we can do. I am not talking about joining the AT, I am talking about standing together and telling them our sport is important to this country we want our sport, our fish stocks and our fishing venues protected. That said, there are some promising signs that Balanced Seas have heard us and are now prepared to listen to anglers. The appointment of a angling liaison officer could be seen as a way to appease anglers, but I hope that is it a way to communicate with anglers, to understand our needs and adopt an approach that will not hinder our sport too severely. Jules Martin has told me that there are only going to be one or two NTZ's around the entire country where all forms of fishing will probably be banned, and reviewed again every six years. I think that in reality there may be a few sites in our area where there may well be some form of closed season during spawning periods of endangered species, there will very probably be areas where boat anglers cannot anchor, so drift fishing only will be adopted but I think that is about as bad as it will get Barry. Other locations around our coast, I simply do not know. The latest Balanced Seas information sent recently indicates that the minimum MCZ's will be approximately 5 km's wide, the maximum between 10 and 12 km's wide so they will cover a large area in any case. All zones will have to have several different habitats re: rock outcrops, sand banks, mussel beds, gravel beds etc, and they will have to hold species that are in decline or may be endangered due to over fishing. I will try to find the info and post the site on here for you guys to have a look at. These areas are for protection against damaging commercial fishing, NOT ANGLING. Some forms of commercial fishing may still be allowed, and angling may well be allowed in all areas. Remember, there is not a single site nominated yet, that won't happen until 2011 and proposed to the governemt in 2012.

Barry, if you look back in through these posts you should be able to find the link, I posted it a few eeks ago. If its gone somehow I will do it again. I will answer your post later today, work comes first, sorry

Hi Steve, good to see your in tiptop form as always, straight onto your reply; Where is the evidence to back up your claim that the AT are ONCE AGAIN in favour of supplying data that could be used to damage sea angling. I have not read or heard them say they were in favour since Stuart McPherson was appointed. In fact a point blank refusal to help DEFRA from the very start is solid evidence against this claim don't you think! Steve, do not try to evade the question, do you agree with the AT response to the Reform of the CFP or not? Once everyone has read the AT Response they will be fully aware of how much the AT knew about Article 47 and now Article 55, they will also know the AT's views on Maximum Sustainable Yield and the pathetic Quota system in favour of foriegn fleets. Did Stuart McPherson not say 'NO' to a sea rod licence, I posted my objection to a sea rod licence when our club joined the AT, January 2009 if I remember correctly. Furthermore the AT continue to be against a sea rod licenece until such time as a licence is necessary and proven to be of benefit to RSA, my words, not words taken from the AT. Maybe I have got dates mixed up or maybe there have been two recent attempts to force a sea rod licence on RSA, one thing is for sure, it won't go away. As far as the AT and WWF taking the government to court, I believe that Fish Legal are looking into the matter now, to see where government have to justify its policy. I also believe that there is information about this on the AT web site if you want to have a look. Better still, contact them directly, they are after all your governing body. AT and their involvement in the development of MCZ's. Steve, you are wrong on this one! I have been speaking to Jules Martin of Balanced Seas about restrictions on sea anglers, I am also kept in touch with developments with regards Balanced Seas because I attended local meetings, just like Wayne McCully. I believe that Balanced Seas would of been far happier if the AT were not involved in the first place, in fact their literature states that they do not know if the AT will be allowed to represent RSA in all locations. That said, Jules Martin, who I have personally met now on three ocassions has informed local anglers that RSA will be one of the least effected stakeholders of all sea users. Thanks to input from AT representatives like Wayne and Alan Brothers amongst others, as well as a very few RSA who could be bothered to attend, I think the total RSA attendance was 24 out of the entire region. The last time I met Jules Martin was at an ADB meeting in Hastings, strange how a representative of Balanced Seas wants to help the AT, ADB and young anglers don't you think! Balanced Seas have just appointed a RSA liaison officer a Mr Ben Godsall, today I have just received confirmation that he is willing to talk to all RSA in Sussex to reassure them that we have little to fear. Ben is waiting on us to organise an interclub meeting so he can attend. This would not of been possible without the help of the AT. Yes Steve, there will be some restrictions and yes its going to hurt, that is not down to the AT, it is down to our government and European commitments. The reason why anglers aren't paying is quite simple Steve, they won't until they have too, not a fault of anglers in general, its what most people do when there is another bill to pay and to be honest I haven't got a problem with that. The problem I have is that most anglers do not care about their sport enough to pay attention to what is happening right now. Most anglers will moan and then pay up or pay a hefty fine, but if they took time to find out what is happening right now, they would be able to put a stop to the majority of it before its too late. How can the AT talk to anglers who do not want to listen, you can send them all the information possible and they will throw it in the bin. I agree with you that the real threat to sea angling is the ability to be able to fish for them and eat them. We have to keep a very close eye on DEFRA, the Revised CFP and all developments towards MCZ's. I also agree that there are not 1.4 million sea anglers out there, but no matter how many there are, if we are to blame the AT if it all goes tits up we first have to tell them what we want. If anglers do not talk to the AT how will they know what we want in localised areas, where are the main threats with MCZ's and angling, how many of us fish there, why do we want them to defend these sites on behalf of anglers. Are we to presume that the AT knows every inch of our coastline, come on Steve, we have a voice, its about time we used it. I have talked to many sea anglers about MCZ's, they moan and moan about the threats to their angling, but when I ask them what have they done about it, or who have they spoken to about it, they say: Haa......... I can't be bothered, whats the point, I'm going down the pub or footballs on tonight!! If you're going to promote the rights of RSA to the detriment of anglers who support the AT, Steve, at least be right in what you are saying.

Very valid points Sportsman, but with all honesty, you have nothing to fear from AT members. However, the Government is forcing these changes on all anglers, that's you, me and every other angler in this country, we do not have a say in the matter. We are to be governed like it or not, unless the next Government does a U turn all angling will be governed. Our choice is to either shape our governing body into an organisation that can represent us properly or do nothing and let government ruin our sport. 40 years ago we had everything we could ever wish for regarding fish stocks, but that is not the case now! Do you really want the government to tell us what we can and cannot do with our sport? Rod licence revenue, bag limits, NTZ's, catch and release, the list goes on and on. If RSA's take control of our sport we can use the changes to protect our sport for all anglers and for the marine bio-diversity of our seas. Our government has decided to walk away from RSA many times before, remember the 45cm Bass size limit, only this time they have created a governing body to take all the SH.. away from their front door coming up to an election. No one, including me wants to be told what we can do, I will stop there because I did promise these guys that I would not promote the AT to them anymore and I feel that I cannot answer your reply properly without doing so. All I will say is that I feel that RSA's cannot walk away from our responsibilty as anglers to protect our sport for all anglers, even those that do not care at all about RSA's. We have no choice but to become political our government has made sure of that. I think that 80% of RSA's feel the same as you and the same 80% will continue to feel the same as you no matter what the AT can achieve, the same 80% that our government will enforce change upon because we they will not stand up and fight.

A MESSAGE FROM THE DARKSIDE THERE IS !!! First of all, our club rules and regulations have been thought up by our members, approved by our members via voting, implemented by our members for our members to abide by. There is no dictatorship within our committee and no member has ever broken club rules since the formation of our club, therefore the committee has never had to enforce them. This shows responsibility and commitment amongst our membership and long may it continue. We have a 60% average turnout by our members during monthly meetings and club competitions, a figure unmatched by many other angling clubs throughout the country I expect. If our members were unhappy with the rules they would simply walk away from the club, our members rejoin because they want to be part of an angling club to learn and participate in our sport and long may it continue. Second, I do not think that I am a cut above the rest, I am an angler just like you guys. I believe that the other AT members on the AT forum feel exactly the same. However, it is no coincidence that these guys and girls are also committee members or hold other positions within their local angling clubs. That they make the effort to learn more about the troubles facing angling, voice their opinions and suggestions and that they want to continue to promote angling and angling politics. If you want to comment on our opinions feel free to do so but first please read the entire topic before responding, then you will not misunderstand the comments raised, as in my case. For those of you who have not read the topic, my views were towards the 'Joe Angler' who catches 50 mackerel and leaves them on the floor roasting in the midday sun, only to catch another half dozen as bait when they realise that the mackerel left on the floor are a total waste. The 'Joe Angler' who leaves fishing line, hooks and rubbish everywhere after fishing because they could not be bothered to act responsibly. The 'Joe Angler' who enters competitions and catches buckets full of GG Mullet etc, weighs them in at the end of the competition, then walks down the beach and dumps them back dead into the sea, all in the name of self greed. I mention GG Mullet because in Sussex that is one specie that is famous on our shores and I have witnessed the slaughter of these fish several times. Steve, as far as DEFRA. I want them to recognise the amount of revenue currently raised through RSA and I want them to promote RSA as a sport as stakeholders throughout our coastal communities, a sport that is worthy of protecting for future generations. I want them to act responsibily towards sustainable fish stocks and commercial maximum sustainable yield instead of protecting commercial profit at all costs to the bio-diversity of our seas. Barry, Just seen your photo-Great Turbot. I take it everyone has seen the AT Response to the Review of the Common Fisheries Policy. I have been waiting for your interpretation of the response with interest. As there has been no replys I take it that everyone is happy with the AT response, it would be nice if some members would agree that the AT has at least got one thing right instead of finding ways to attack on every issue. Credit where credit is due.