steve good

What we got here is management, ie fisheries manager and MP's condeming fishermen for fiddling their log books, and landing black fish, and wilst they wave their fore-fingers and saying naughty boys you will pay for this, they themselves were doing exactly the same as the fisherman, so what message does that send out, it seems that the only crime here is getting caught, with regard to ntz and mpa how can anyone trust anyone that may fiddle their expenses, deceit abounds everywhere even in the corridors of power, what chance does mere mortals have

What aload of rubbish, the Sussex Sea Fisheries should be ashamed of themselfs just shows how inept they are, Firstly, they are in cohorts with the dredging company and are quoting from their paper work. The main thing here is that they are protecting nothing, bloody nothing at all, the chart showing the close area is meaningless you cannot trawl over that rocky ground, the area that is pair trawled where the bream spawn is from the north line on the chart going inshore, bloody clueless thats what these so called fisheries managers are or is it a case of being seen to be doing something that looks and sounds good when in fact its completly and utterly useless. If any one wants to send this to the Regional Stakeholders Group then you can, I have only been a commercial fisherman for 33 years and I know just tad about this area, If black bream are to be protected then it should be done right a near miss is not good enough PS Kingmere Ledge/rocks as shown in the chart is only fishable with pots and rods

This is all pointless really, it all depends on your own perceptions, of what was, and what is now,some say there is no fish now, others say theres loads of fish hence the discards,some say bottom sets nets are sustainable way of fishing the truth is they and pot backlines do unseen and seen damage, but certain people dont see that, just like the most damaging thing there is, is aggregate dredging which takes away whole bio and geo-diverscities, thats 1500 miles of breeding and feeding grounds of most of our fish, the goverment have a vested interest in this, thats why they introduced the Marine Bill which takes away the public right to fish for anglers and commercial fishermen, the need for aggregate and wind farms overrides any angler or commercial fishermen needs or rights, we have no rights any more,every thing thats done in the creation of MPZ's and NTZ's is an illussion that demcrocy has taken place when in fact it is the implementation of a predetermined plan conceived to protect and enchance vested interest in aggregate and windfarms, I believe everything to do with the Marine Bill and Balanced Seas NTZ's and MPA's are just a sham, Nothing is going to change, all the time you have aggregate dredging and the European fishing fleet that permently scapes the 6-12 limits with whose hugh trawls, NTZ's and MPA's will achieve nothing for anglers or commercials they are disigned to get rid of fishermen for the benefit of government income an appeasement of the greens and to kept the people that thought it all up in a job with expenses and pensions, thats right the minstry of silly thoughts the civil servants, they are not so silly are they.

When quotas or bag limits are given to anglers, anglers will face this question of discard, hauling cod up from 200ft of a wreck will only kill the cod when returned to the water

Hi Barry Yep cut the quotas and up jumps the discards unless they cut the days at sea allocation, and stop everyone from fishing, Not much mention of other EU member states discards and or what they are doing about it but then they all have far more quotas than the English and therefore less discards, perhaps its discards by post code lol lol lol

Hi Barry The Fulmars will just rips their guts out when they are still alive because thats what Fulmars do, eat or be eaten, such is life, unless you are a green then its lets ban everything, Theres nothing worst than a born again chef, look I am a good chef because I support sustainable fishing, I am against discards look at me, see how green i am, I only cook sustainable fish caught sustainably and what does he offer to stop discards nothing, chefs and supermarkets are nothing more than band wagon hoppers looking out for their own self-interest, they bring nothing to the party except winding people up with hot air and no understanding of the subject matter, they stab fishermen in the back with all this sustainable/discard hogwash of theirs and also buy the fishermens fish and sell it and yes make massive profits out of it, they preach sustainable and discards because it makes them money no more in it than that, theres a fish that best discribes them now what was it, oh yes its a blood sucking leach lol lol lol

If anglers were allocated quotas then anglers would have a discard problem, if anglers ran out of quota on cod,pollock whiting and caught them in deep water and had to throw them back they would die, seagulls would not mind would they

The yearly sole quota is used up, the EU allocated that quota on conservation grounds based on what ICES told them, the fact that 80 ton of sole has been swapped and this 80ton of sole will be caught, then it raises the question why was the 80 ton taken off the quota in the first place, or will the EU take back that 80 ton next year

What a bunch of half brain dim-wit PLONKERS, The one thing that needs sorting out is those 2 really large pair trawlers that are allways in court for trawling inside the 3 mile limit, they catch loads of spawning bream bass and skate and smoothounds tons of it. They cant tow over Kingsmere, would just rip their trawl to bits, they trawl inside Kingsmere right up to and inside the 3 mile limit right down to Selsey Bill scaping over and around Bognor rocks, they trawl where the bream spawn, all the small inshore boats got to move all their fishing gear close to the beach when the pair trawlers are about and when they are gone theres not much to catch All you PLONKERS have done is shot yourselfs in the foot if anglers can no longer fish the Kingsmere then that bloody nuts you lot are bonkers

Its alright, I have sorted it out, I saved the pdf file from my email to my desktop opened up adobe reader and draged and dropped the pdf file and it opened up and I can read it now

Its alright, I have sorted it out, I saved the pdf file from my email to my desktop opened up adobe reader and draged and dropped the pdf file and it opened up and I can read it now

I have replaced my computer, and now have windows 7, I downloaded a pdf file in my email on my old computer with XP and read it perfectly. I have downloaded abobe reader 9 and its fully updated, and still cant red the pdf file. Is there something else I must download or do so as to read this pdf file????????? thanks in advance

Hi Barry Hows you to, I am so,so been busy this summer nice run of larger fish, its been interesting. What you been up to more fishing I hope, its a waste of time and energy trying to stop the goodie two shoes people at London, everything has a predeterminded outcome (the greens have it you know) I went to the Balanced Seas meeting what aload of plonkers, that done it for me, they wanted me to join the sub-group, they dont know nothing why should I tell them anything, the sub group did not even have a rep on the reginal group our area has got a rep from hastings and/or kent, these are the most unbalanced numb skulls I know, I will let them put their half brain ideas together then blast them all over the press, LOL LOL LOL at my age you got to have some fun some where LOL LOL LOL Come on Barry what you been catching where how when and why tell me you had a good summer

It was high time to redress the balance of the many days I’ve spent with commercial fishermen by arranging for me to join the RSA sector and listen to their views, on their terms and territory,” said Mr Marsden. “We covered a lot of ground and I now have a much better understanding of the issues, concerns and psyche of sea anglers." What this means is thank you for showing me the way to stuff you, the information will be well used, against you that is

Grandfather rights, who's living on what planet, until recently we all had the public right to fish based on our immemorial rights, the marine bill has now superseded and taken away our public right of immemorial use, so anglers and commercials no longer got a right to anything, anglers can ask for ntz's for commercials and commercials can ask for ntz's for anglers, the fishery managers have designed it that way, no ones wins except the fishery mangers with their already predetermined plan, LOL LOL be careful what you wish for, it might bite you back LOL LOL

Sustainable means we will not give fishermen any quotas, we will just give them more aggregate dredging areas and loads of wind farms that make loadsofmoney and get loadsofvotes from the greens We have fisheries management according to the green gospel

Hi Sharkbyte, I expect I will attend, dont really want to, I believe its only part of a predetermined plan, leemings to slaughter springs to mind. LOL LOL Is there a reason for asking??

Hi Elton have posted terms of reference your question might be answered there look at 6.4

Balanced Seas: Local Groups Draft Terms of Reference 1.0 Role of the Local Groups The Balanced Seas Local Groups have a crucial role in planning MCZs. Their primary function will be to inform and support the work of the Regional Stakeholder Group (RSG). 2.0 Local Group Membership (roles and responsibilities) 2.1 Members of the Local Group must represent and liaise with their sector outside the meetings to ensure as far as possible that everyone’s views and concerns are raised. Selected members will represent the views of their sector as a whole, because it will not be possible to have every individual stakeholder on the group. 2.2 Members of the Local Group should have a good knowledge of the sector they are representing. Their role will be to work positively with the other members of the group in order to give information and feedback to the RSG as they in turn develop recommendations for an MCZ network by June 2011. They should also be willing to actively speak about the interests of their sector in discussions and engage positively in the process and the workshops associated with it. 2.3 Between meetings or workshops, group members should liaise with the sector they are representing in order to: Provide information on potential environmental, economic, and social effects of any emerging MCZ options. This will include information on the potential for sectors to adapt their activities where necessary to achieve the conservation objectives for features in the proposed MCZs. Disseminate information on the MCZ recommendation process and meeting outputs to their sector. Act as the point of contact for establishing a two-way dialogue to ensure their sector’s aspirations for the MCZs are represented at workshops. 2.4 Travel costs incurred by stakeholders attending meetings may be covered on an individual basis as decided by the regional MCZ projects. 3.0 Working within and reviewing these Terms of Reference The Terms of Reference (ToR) are open to continual review and evolution in order to respond to changing circumstances and needs. Members of the Local Groups agree to operate within the ToR and the integral working agreements set out below. Abiding within this working agreement is considered an act of respect to other members of the group. Seriously breaching the agreement is considered to be a withdrawal of commitment and an act of disrespect. In the event of a serious breach, a task group will be asked to consider, with the facilitators and project team, the appropriate action to be taken. 4.0 Aim and Objectives Aim of the Local Group: To work together with the Project Team and facilitators to contribute to the working of the RSG in producing recommendations to Natural England, JNCC and DEFRA, by June 2011 concerning: The location and boundaries of recommended MCZ sites, in the project area The conservation objectives for the above recommended MCZ sites The impact assessment for the regional MCZ recommendations Objectives of the Local Group: The objectives are to: engage with local communities of interest (stakeholders) who may be impacted by the recommendations ensure that local stakeholder interests are understood and considered access local stakeholders’ experience and knowledge maximise areas of agreement acknowledge and clarify areas of outstanding disagreement establish and maintain an open and transparent working process including information sharing, reporting and communication 5.0 Operation 5.1 Decision Making - Decisions will be reached by consensus. When they arise, insurmountable differences of view will be clarified and recorded (including attribution where necessary) 5.2 Working Style – the Local Group meetings will be interactive and facilitated by independent facilitators appointed by the Project Team. The facilitators will work on behalf of all stakeholders; they will focus on managing the working process and will not take a view on the issues at hand. 5.3 Chairperson The group may wish to appoint a Chairperson. Whilst a facilitated group does not need a Chair to undertake ‘meeting management’ or to take a ‘casting vote’, it may be of benefit in undertaking the following activities: Championing the group and its work Generally representing the group (including media) Assisting the facilitators with process planning dilemmas Providing a contact point for the project team 5.4 Secretariat – Where necessary, administrative support and coordination will be provided by the Project Team, and by the facilitators if appropriate 5.5 Expenses - expenses incurred in attending meetings will be paid according to conditions and rates of the University of Kent. 5.6 Frequency of meeting - the group will meet according to the demands and development of the RSGs work, with particular respect to the nationally determined timetable. 5.7 Reporting. After each Local Group meeting a brief Meeting Report will be issued. As a minimum, meeting reports will focus on decisions taken and actions agreed. Under normal circumstances each Meeting Report will be published as soon as possible after the meeting, usually within two weeks. 5.8 Accuracy of Meeting Notes - It is the responsibility of each member to check the meeting notes for accuracy and raise any concerns as soon as possible with the project team. 6.0 Working Together 6.1 General - Members of the group agree to operate within the draft working agreement set out in section 7 below 6.2 Collaboration- Members must be willing to develop and maintain a collaborative working spirit whilst recognising that differing views may exist. 6.3 Confidentiality and Attribution - To encourage free expression in meetings, participants can request that their views are not attributed. The meeting record will not normally attribute comments unless requested in a specific instance e.g. where agreed and necessary for clarity in the record 6.4 External communications - All members agree to work together to ensure that communication of the group’s business is clear, consistent and accurate. In this spirit, all members agree: a) not to talk for the group unless mandated to do so by the group to notify the Project Team in advance of any intention to communicate widely so that communication opportunities can be coordinated and maximised c) to use existing forms of words or other agreed text where possible to describe the group’s business in their own communications d) to make the group aware of inaccurate communication or reporting by others, so that the group’s view(s) can be clarified 6.5 Urgent communications – The Project Team has the mandate to manage urgent communication issues on behalf of the group, for example responding to media requests etc and may call upon members of the group for further information or support. 6.6 Active Representation - Members are expected to actively represent their sectors. This means that each member must provide their sector with updates on the work and must feed in the views of their sector on issues under consideration. Members should give consideration as to how this is best managed for their particular sector. 6.8 Continuity and Substitution - It is highly desirable that each sector designates a lead person to attend meetings so that continuity of membership is maintained. It is recognised that this may not always be possible so some degree of substitution may be required. Members should be mindful of the impact this can have both on the effectiveness of meetings and their sector’s representation: it is the member’s responsibility to fully brief substitutes and obtain adequate debriefs in return. 6.9 Preparation - Members are expected to have read papers circulated and be appropriately prepared by liaising with colleagues as necessary before meetings. 7.0 Meeting Conduct The following protocol will be in place for each and every meeting of the Local Group unless explicitly agreed otherwise 7.1 Mobile phones to be switched off during meeting time 7.2 Only one person to speak at a time 7.3 Listen respectfully even though you may disagree 7.4 Be punctual – we start and finish on time

I believe the Balanced Seas Project is already flawed or its a sham, I phoned them up because I wanted to be on the Regional Group and not the Sub Group, I was informed that they only wanted people who are in organisations as representatives, so I asked who on the Regional Group will represent Solent commercial fishermen and was told someone from Kent and Hastings, I also asked who would recommend MCZ's, I was told Regional Group would recommend MCZ's to the local Sub Group, So what we have here is no Regional Group representative from the Solent area having imput into recommendations for MCZ's made at Regional Group level which will then be passed down to the Solent Sub Group, beggars belief does it not. Theres nothing balanced about the Balanced Seas Project I believe everything has already been predetermined, alot of us are on a hiding to nothing, the alleged laudable Marine Bill has taken away our immemorial rights, the public right to fish, The Marine Bill is the tool to achive predetermined goals and the Balanced Seas Project is all about giving the illusion that democracy has taken place

Balanced Seas: Aims, Objectives and Structure for Stakeholder Engagement Context: The Balanced Seas Project is committed to engaging with stakeholders in making recommendations about Marine Conservation Zones (MCZs). We need to ensure that the spectrum of interests across the region is understood and that stakeholders have had a fair opportunity to make their views known and heard. This paper sets out the way in which we propose to manage the stakeholder engagement. The aim and objectives for engaging stakeholders in the Balanced Seas project are: Aim: To enable regional stakeholders to work together and produce recommendations to Natural England, JNCC and DEFRA, by June 2011 concerning: the location and boundaries of recommended MCZ sites, in the project area the conservation objectives for the above recommended MCZ sites the impact assessment for the regional MCZ recommendations Objectives: The objectives are to: engage with regional, sub-regional and local communities of interest (stakeholders) who may be impacted by the recommendations ensure that all stakeholder interests are understood and considered access stakeholders’ experience and knowledge maximise areas of agreement, so achieving support for and/or understanding of the recommendations and how they have been developed acknowledge and clarify areas of outstanding disagreement establish and maintain an open and transparent process through information sharing, reporting and communication Basic Structure We propose a simple structure, which responds to the above Aims and Objectives, the stakeholders’ needs, the time available and the budgetary constraints. The November 2009 series of County stakeholder meetings across the region included discussion about options for structuring the engagement process and the results from these have been influential in our thinking. There are three major elements in the structure: Regional Stakeholder Group (RSG) - responsible for working through the issues and options, communicating with the Local Groups and developing recommendations. The RSG will meet on a regular basis, determined by the timetable developed nationally for production of the recommendations. Local Groups - will meet as required in relation to the national timetable, requirements of the RSG and other needs for input into the process. They will be regularly updated by the RSG and have an opportunity to input through meetings, correspondence especially in response to information circulated from the RSG. Named Consultative Stakeholders (NCSs) - stakeholders who would normally be invited to the RSG but are unable to attend meetings. Through correspondence, NCSs will be able to contribute to the recommendation-making process carried out by the RSG. Diagram: Overall Structure Regional Stakeholder Group (RSG) The RSG will be a multi-interest, stakeholder working group. It will meet regularly to develop a set of recommendations to be produced in accordance with the project aims and the national Ecological Network Guidance (ENG) which will be made available over the next couple of months. The RSG will be supported by the Balanced Seas Project Team who will guide the work of the group by providing technical support and administration. The working process will be managed by independent facilitators from 3KQ who will act with all stakeholders’ interests in mind. Responsibilities – the RSG will be responsible for: considering information and working through the issues as required in order to develop recommendations consistent with the project aim and objectives (e.g. meeting ecological requirements) regularly consulting with Local Groups (see below) working with the facilitators and project team to ensure a co-operative, effective and efficient process Group Membership – the group will: be made up of representatives from organisations who have a regional perspective, including national bodies as necessary broadly reflect the range of interests in the wider stakeholder community ideally not exceed 20-25 members in size to enable the development of a cohesive, practical and effective working group Individual Members - the RSG will be formed of individuals who can: represent the interests of their sector/organisation (constituency) contribute to the work of the group in regular meetings (and between meetings from time to time) work in a co-operative spirit, whilst respecting that a diversity of views may exist keep their constituency regularly updated and act as a conduit for information flowing both ways take a strategic, regional perspective Named Consultative Stakeholders (NCSs) Some regional or national stakeholders may not be able to resource attendance at the meetings of the RSG or may wish to play a less involved role in the direct decision-making. These stakeholders can choose to be listed as an NCS and regularly consulted. At key stages they will be asked for their views on the work of the RSG and their comments will be recorded along with a note of any action taken as a result. The stakeholders in this group would be giving up their direct, ‘hands on’ role in the RSG’s decision-making process and will be sent a structured format to follow for their comment at appropriate times. However, they will retain a significant level of influence i.e. the RSG will take due account of their comments, recognising that they come from a key regional or national stakeholder. Responsibilities – NCSs will be responsible for: Providing information to the RSG in relation to their specialised knowledge of their sector Responding to requests for comment from the RSG via the project team in a timely fashion and according to the appropriate structure. Membership open to any stakeholder invited to join the RSG but unable to attend regular meetings Local Groups (LGs) We propose three Local Groups, based on geography, and reflecting natural/ geographical boundaries Solent Plus (including Isle of Wight) Southern Kent and Sussex coast Essex, Thames and North Kent coast These Local Groups will act as advisory bodies for the RSG. They will meet at key points in the process, to enable discussion, input and deliberation amongst members in response to the work being developed by the RSG. The Local Groups will provide a crucial opportunity for the wider stakeholder community to regularly contribute to the RSG’s work. As well as occasional meetings we envisage a regular information exchange between the RSG and members of the Local Groups via the web and email in particular, but using paper mail outs as necessary. There are two geographic areas that, for practical reasons, may warrant their own meetings and/or subgroups – the Thames corridor and the Isle of Wight. Responsibilities – the Local Groups will be responsible for: ensuring that the RSG is aware of any local implications of options, draft recommendations etc, which may not be apparent at a regional level offering information to the RSG to assist them in their work responding to requests for information and/or comment from the RSG and project team in a timely fashion Group Membership – we envisage that the groups will: be made up primarily of representatives from organisations who have a regional, sub-regional or local perspective broadly reflect the range of interests in the sub-region be co-ordinated by the project team Individual Members – the Local Groups will be formed of individuals who can: represent the interests of their organisation or group contribute their views in Local Group meetings and between meetings when requested work in a co-operative spirit, whilst respecting that a diversity of views may exist keep their organization or group regularly updated and act as a conduit for information flowing both ways The Science Advisory Panel (SAP) The SAP will play an independent, national role, advising all the regional MCZ projects about the progress they are making and particularly about how well the recommendations are meeting the ecological guidance. During the lifetime of the project, the RSG will submit three draft recommendations to the SAP, who will then assess these in relation to the Ecological Network Guidance (ENG) and the recommendations of the other three MCZ Projects, and will provide feedback and guidance. National Stakeholder Forum This body is being established by JNCC and will play an advisory role. Information on this Forum will be made available shortly.

This is the paper work they sent me Elton, Durrell Institute for Conservation and Ecology (DICE) University of Kent, Canterbury CT2 7NR, Kent. Tel. 01227 827839 1 April 2010 Dear Stakeholder Local Group – Solent/Isle of Wight/Hampshire Southampton University: 29th April 2010 We are writing to invite you to join the Local Group of the Balanced Seas Marine Conservation Zones (MCZs) project for the Solent/Isle of Wight/Hampshire sub region and to attend its first meeting on Thurs 29th April, 10.00-16.30, in Southampton. The three Local Groups are a key element in the delivery of this important project, with a responsibility for providing information to, and reviewing the recommendations of the project-wide Regional Stakeholder Group (RSG). The RSG will be responsible for developing the recommendations for Marine Conservation Zones in the project area that will be submitted to the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) and Natural England in June 2011. We envisage that the Local Groups will meet regularly and will also be engaged via other methods (e.g. email). We realise this is quite a commitment but also know that MCZs are a key interest of your sector and we very much hope that you will be able to take your place on the group. To find out more about the Balanced Seas project please: Go to www.balancedseas.org See the attached paper which sets out the proposed approach to stakeholder engagement in the project, and gives more information on the role of the Local Groups. The broad purpose of the first meeting will be to establish the group and begin to understand the context and the work ahead. We will circulate an agenda, any further background information and venue details about two weeks before the meeting to those who confirm their attendance. Please let me know by Fri 16th April that you are able to attend the meeting (e-mail: s.m.wells@kent.ac.uk). If you have not already provided us with a named substitute (should you not be able to attend the meeting) please could you do so. In the meantime, if you have any questions, please do not hesitate to get in touch. Yours sincerely Sue Wells, Project Manager More to follow

There you have then, MPA's used to exclude people for other reasons,

GLENNK Rod and line fishing for bass is the most consistant and effective method, Drift net mainly only works when ragworm come to the surface during the night to mate, spring and autum Bottom set net suffer with strong tides, sea weed, spider crab ect ect, Rod and line can be worked over any ground bottom to surface

The Balanced Seas only want people on the Regional group ie NUTFA they only represent 10% of the under 10 sector, Balanced seas will not entertain anyone else, I suppose its the same for anglers, looks like a case of like it or lump it