Jump to content

£5m To Scrap Fishing Boats


Elton

Recommended Posts

Hi All

 

THE GREENS ARE COMING!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

The Goverment NEED to get rid of all the small inshore fishing fleet and anglers as they can.

 

WHY, because they want to appease the GREENS, (really big vote catcher you know) and grab LOADS OF MONEY by expanding the dredging using the Marine Bill, The Goverment will get LOADS MORE MONEY by doing this, the Goverment will reinvest this money in the banking industry.

 

And guess what the only people standing in their way are the inshore commercials and anglers, you know the only people left to shout and scream and object to the gross activities of expanding the dredging areas and the impact that, that implies,

 

For the Goverment there is LOADS OF MONEY at stake so the weening down of the small inshore commercials and the softening up process of anglers has started.

 

Remember attack is the best form of defence and who wether commercial or RSA is going to object to expaning the dredging areas when you are to busy fighting amonst yourselfs trying to defend your present position, ie commercials, quota cuts, two tier licencing, marine nature reserves, no take zones ect, ect, ect....... Anglers bag limits, quotas, marine nature reserves, no take zones ect, ect, ect

 

The GREENS have not and will not object (just yet) to dredging because it is a means to an end, these goody two shoes types you know the ones that have contracted the ATTENBOUGH dissease just want all the seas around our ISLAND to be NATURE RESERVES and they have the influence and power to achieve just what they want. When they get what they want they will then get rid of dredging,

 

steve

Edited by steve good
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi All

 

THE GREENS ARE COMING!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

The Goverment NEED to get rid of all the small inshore fishing fleet and anglers as they can.

 

WHY, because they want to appease the GREENS, (really big vote catcher you know) and grab LOADS OF MONEY by expanding the dredging using the Marine Bill, The Goverment will get LOADS MORE MONEY by doing this, the Goverment will reinvest this money in the banking industry.

 

And guess what the only people standing in their way are the inshore commercials and anglers, you know the only people left to shout and scream and object to the gross activities of expanding the dredging areas and the impact that, that implies,

 

For the Goverment there is LOADS OF MONEY at stake so the weening down of the small inshore commercials and the softening up process of anglers has started.

 

Remember attack is the best form of defence and who wether commercial or RSA is going to object to expaning the dredging areas when you are to busy fighting amonst yourselfs trying to defend your present position, ie commercials, quota cuts, two tier licencing, marine nature reserves, no take zones ect, ect, ect....... Anglers bag limits, quotas, marine nature reserves, no take zones ect, ect, ect

 

The GREENS have not and will not object (just yet) to dredging because it is a means to an end, these goody two shoes types you know the ones that have contracted the ATTENBOUGH dissease just want all the seas around our ISLAND to be NATURE RESERVES and they have the influence and power to achieve just what they want. When they get what they want they will then get rid of dredging,

 

steve

 

WE are all in the POWER GAME you know winner takes it all and the losers have to fall, its a DOG EAT DOG game and the GREENS have been delt 4 aces

 

This is my take on the end gambit, I have allways had a nack of forward thinking well predicting using all current information

 

Time will tell but just watch this space

 

LOL LOL LOL

 

:thumbs:

 

STEVE

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can someone explain to me, in a rational way and without emotion, what the reason behind decommissioning small boats and giving their quota to larger boats is?

 

Hello Elton

 

For what it's worth.

 

 

What Leon describes is just the excuse being used and the quota issue is the tool being used .

All under ten licences were issued about 20 years ago , there have been no new licences issued since.

So the few boats that were shortened by a few inches or so called super under ten vessels built were done so using the existing licences that were issued to the so called traditional inshore fleet and nothing was done with out the say so from DEFRA at the time, my boat is now considered to be a super under ten rule beater even though DEFRA issued me with the licence 20 years ago when I built it.

 

The reason behind what they are doing is still unclear to me, the excuse of dwindling fish stocks does not make sense when they have just increased cod quota for 09 by 30% for my area , bass stocks are claimed to be sustainable , sole stocks are ok and further north the nephrop fishery is also claimed to be sustainable.

 

It’s more I think to do with pressure from the EU to all member states for more cuts in fleets and effort , perhaps it’s to make it easier to implement the proposed 30% of sea closed off for MPA’s and to pacify the green lobby or perhaps to make room for the Spanish fleet who are constantly lobbing for more access to community waters under the EU ’s equal access for all .

 

What ever the reason behind it, with the UK the over ten fleet has been slashed down to a shadow of what it once was and leaves DEFRA with no option but to do the same to the inshore fleet to meet the targets set by the EU.

 

RSA should take note that DEFRA new what was coming and worked out what they were going to do years ago as I have said in the past they work to a set agenda , all the meetings, consultations , working groups and discussions on compromises over the last 3 or 4 years amounted to nothing, a total waste of time and effort it is DEFRA’s way of generating activity for their fishery department s and nothing more.

 

With the revelation that the EU want member states to manage RSA with in their quota system sheds some light on what has been happening with RSA concerns in the last couple of years which is probably when DEFRA was told this was coming and have already got their objective in place and are currently generating as much activity as they can before they implement it.

 

Glen I think I have changed the “need to manage “ to the need to generate as much work as possible in the time scale given . This gives the illusion that they are gainfully employed.

I fish to live and live to fish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is three dredgers at the top end of the channel doing a bit of gardening at present, don't suppose they will volunteer. :lol:

 

Hello Barry

 

There was a lone netter working a couple of miles to the north of them last weekend that won't be vounteering iether.

I fish to live and live to fish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Barry

 

There was a lone netter working a couple of miles to the north of them last weekend that won't be vounteering iether.

 

 

You must have seen the rsa fleet of four inshore of you then. They can't go out too far as the cost of fuel the rsa now have to buy is rather expensive. :D

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..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The decommissioning scheme is only aimed at the biggest, high catching under 10s. No doubt there are some skippers that believe they can't survive on the quotas they are allocated (50kg/month for cod in the english channel is fairly common) so they will take the opportunity to get out of the industry. currently extra quota can be leased which is allowing some boats to keep their heads above water -this is stopping next year, so those boats will become unviable.

The other interesting part is the restriction of 'low catching' vessels' licenses. This will effectively make them worthless to a full-time 'quota species' fisherman, and as such the value of them may drop. This, however, may make them more attractive to "RSA's" targetting bass, who can then buy a license relatively cheaply and start hammering the bass for profit.

Edited by Toerag

Like Fresh coffee? www.Bean14.com

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest challenge

I think the £5million that has been set aside for this round of decommissioning will go to the ones who want out of the industry. If it’s anything like the first round of decommissioning of the over ten’s there shouldn’t be much problem them (DEFRA) getting the volunteers.

They say they are aiming at the boats at the top end of the catching power. But yet every under ten boat has been informed of the decommissioning available. If they don’t get the targeted boats they where after will they just decommission anyone that applies and that qualifies under the track record criteria that they are asking?

In my home port of Whitby they have very few under ten metre boats that actually qualify for decommissioning because they have caught very little fish in resent years and therefore have very little if any track record.

Has any body stopped to think that there might be quite a few of the under ten’s that might welcome this way out and that might of even campaigned for it?

I remember with the over ten’s and there decommissioning. In the First round of decommissioning they just wanted rid of the old boats in the fleet, then the second round they wanted rid of the underachievers saying we want a small effective modern fleet, then in the 3rd round they just wanted rid.

I agree with wurzel, I believe that the reduction of the under ten’s is not for recovering quota but more for appeasing the EU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We and our partners use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences, repeat visits and to show you personalised advertisements. By clicking “I Agree”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies. However, you may visit Cookie Settings to provide a controlled consent.