New Rules to Protect our Bass Fishing

[Jim Roper]

Leon Roskilly:

Who said anything about bass being a sportfish only?

Still sounds like that is being pursued!

 

[ 17. April 2005, 09:13 AM: Message edited by: Jim Roper ]

[Leon Roskilly]

Jim Roper:

Jim Roper:

Who said anything about bass being a sportfish only?

Still sounds like that is being pursued!

You missed off the 'only' Jim.

 

TL - leon

[kentangler]

Leon Roskilly:

Originally posted by wurzel:

[qb] We are all doomed , the end of the world is nigh, gloom and doom ,gloom and doom, good night.

You are right Wurzel!

 

See http://www.armageddononline.org/

 

Great site to cheer me up when I can't go fishing!

[Jaffa]

Leon Roskilly:

Read and understand it Wurzel, along with the Bass Management Plan, and try to suppress your tendency towards negativity.

 

Inshore commercials who target bass should do well

 

Tight Lines - leon

Leon, it would be helpful if someone spelt out exactly what this plan would mean for a commercial netting boat like Wurzels. Not in any vague, longer term "we will all be better off" way, but exactly what happens the year this is introduced. To often in fisheries the commercials are the last to know whats going on until it hits them.

 

Also, its far from clear in the report that the French Pair teams could be prevented from fishing between 6 and 12 miles. It might be possible to make them adhere to the regulations if they land into a UK port but not if they land in France?

[Jaffa]

From the BMP:

 

quote:

---

d) In the case of an order made under subsection (1) (a) by fishing boats registered

in a specific country (French vessels with historic rights inside the 6-12 mile

boundaries could apply for a license but would be bound by the conditions

of the license if fish were landed in Britain. Not sure what would happen

regarding compliance with license conditions if fish were caught in the 6-12

mile area but landed in France)

---

Does this mean they could ignore the closed season etc as long as they land in France? or can this massive loophole be closed.

 

If it can be closed, what implications does this have for other fisheries? Will the French retaliate, licence all the species in the their 12 mile zone, and effectively prevent UK boats from working there?

[Leon Roskilly]

Jaffa:

Leon, it would be helpful if someone spelt out exactly what this plan would mean for a commercial netting boat like Wurzels. Not in any vague, longer term "we will all be better off" way, but exactly what happens the year this is introduced. To often in fisheries the commercials are the last to know whats going on until it hits them.

The Net Benefits report states:

 

The overarching aim of fisheries management should be ‘to maximise the return to the UK of the sustainable use of fisheries resources and protection of the marine environment’

 

Following that you will often find the phrase 'Best Value Management' used.

 

i.e. How should any particular stock be managed to provide the best possible socio-economic return from the publicly owned resource to 'UK PLC'

 

The re-designation of bass as primarily a sports fish has been built upon this foundation, comparing the overall value of the species managed primarily as a commercial fishing resource against the return that is possible when it is managed primarily as a recreational resource (and using information from similar changes in management strategy implemented elsewhere around the world).

 

Those who have put together the Bass Management Plan have argued their case to DEFRA/CEFAS and the government etc, but have no brief to account to the commercial fishing industry (although their arguments and discussions with officials have addressed various concerns in that direction addressed to them).

 

In a similar fashion, I cannot recall the commercial fishing industry, when putting forward a case of its own, ever detailing the effects that their activities will have on the development of the recreational angling sector.

 

And as has been pointed out, bass has, until recently, always been primarily a recreational species, until the commercials moved onto the species in fairly recent times (and bought the days of ordinary anglers catching big fish with relative 'regularity' almost to an end.

 

It really isn't for anglers to detail the full effects of the management changes on the commercial sector.

 

All that we have done is to present a case to government and fishery management and they have taken that aboard, weighed the arguments and are currently drafting some legislation.

 

Until we see exactly what they come up with, none of us will know anyway.

 

I'm pretty certain that once they have moved things along, there will be a period of consultation with all stakeholders, and modifications made where there is a case for doing so.

 

Anglers will put forward their arguments, and the commercials theirs.

 

The point to;make strongly is that we are looking for a 'win win' result here that (as far as possible) benefits both the recreational sea angling sector, and the commercial sector; particularly the small inshore fishermen like Wurzel who are prepared to fish sustainably and look toward a better future.

 

Tight Lines - leon

[Leon Roskilly]

Hi Leon,

 

Perhaps you could post this on your dicussion site for me.

 

"For those that are concerned that the dastardly French might walk off with the spoils between the 6-12.

 

In the short term they might snatch a few of our fish but in the medium term my guess is French sea anglers and line fishermen (already protesting about excessive pelagic landings) will ensure the French Government also adopts the BMP or something similar.

 

There is a desperate need for examples in fisheries management. If we wait for the perfect plan and the perfect moment our fish will be even in more dire straits.

 

We must show the French how its done. You might not think so but they do notice if somewhat grudgingly and they are not short of sea anglers and line fishermen desperate for change to a more prudent and rewarding system of managing the bass fishery.

 

I can't really think of any other option . There is therefore no point in negativity. They say fortune favours the brave.

 

 

FranKB

[Pugs]

Leon Roskilly:

Pugs, you need to read the Bass Management Plan.

 

I bet that you would much rather have plentiful fish around in the 5 - 8lb range than the current crop of schoolies.

Tight Lines - leon

Ah yes, but I'd rather take a fish home for supper of 3lbs than 8lbs. Anyone wishing otherwise in my eyes is just plain greedy or ignorant.

 

Why would anyone take home an 8lb Bass?

 

Thanks for the info.

 

Pugs

 

[ 17. April 2005, 05:15 PM: Message edited by: Pugs ]

[Norm B]

Pugs:

Pugs:

Pugs, you need to read the Bass Management Plan.

 

I bet that you would much rather have plentiful fish around in the 5 - 8lb range than the current crop of schoolies.

Tight Lines - leon

Ah yes, but I'd rather take a fish home for supper of 3lbs than 8lbs. Anyone wishing otherwise in my eyes is just plain greedy or ignorant.

 

Why would anyone take home an 8lb Bass?

 

Thanks for the info.

 

Pugs

:cool: Nobody HAS to take home an 8lb bass, I'm sure that a 42cm bass will be about 3lbs, you may just wish to take home a larger one if you have friends to dinner.

[Jim Roper]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Leon Roskilly:

Those who have put together the Bass Management Plan have argued their case to DEFRA/CEFAS and the government etc, but have no brief to account to the commercial fishing industry

---

I suppose you could say the same about religion beliefs.

 

In other words "Who gives a sh!t about the others?"