Jump to content

Article 47

Snatcher

By Snatcher
in Conservation & Politics

 Share

Recommended Posts

steve pitts Member

steve pitts

Posted
Posted
Any news on a statement from the angling trust ?

 

There was a guy from the AT out on a charter boat from Falmouth on the BBC South West news at 6:30 this evening. It looked like the AT arranged the trip to get the subject on the telly.

 

I didn't see all of the report (mowing the b****y lawn) and by the time I got back in the house the AT guy was telling the reporter that the plan was nonesense and would damage the sport fishing industry. The reporter quoted £3 million is spent in the West Country over one bank holiday by visiting anglers.

 

They then went via a video link to a EU fisheries spokeswoman who said that article 47 was necessary to quantify how much bluefin tuna, eels and cod was being taken by recreational fishermen in order to protect the resource from overfishing. Once they knew how much was being taken from the stock, the scientists could advise the managers how much could safely be taken from the fisheries.

 

She left out the bit where the managers would routinely ignore what the scientists advised.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 216
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

barry luxton Member

barry luxton

Posted
Posted

At last someone who has said what needed to be said regarding this stupid inclusion. Just hoping that the new trust can follow in this guys footsteps and come out with something simular. At present they are still trying to get licences and restrictions on the boat anglers, within 47. What about it AT can we rely on you?

 

http://www.fishupdate.com/news/fullstory.p...YS_SNP_MEP.html

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
Sharkbyte Member

Sharkbyte

Posted
Posted

Right, I can no longer bite my lip.

 

More cut'n'pastes, no 'professional' opinion to balance some of the wayward content!

 

 

 

Leon, perhaps you can explain why it is that you spend your time feeding us the likes of Arbroath's take on the Article 47 proposals, yet you do not inform the anglers of Kent and Essex about the response your very own SFC (upon which you sit as an RSA rep) issued to DEFRA?

 

I have seen the response with my own eyes, it is a disgrace. Sick.

 

 

In it, a recommendation for bag limits instead of angler quotas has been made, and yet to the best of knowledge you have not issued a warning to the anglers in the KESFC's jurisdiction, many of whom frequent the same forums as you. Why?

 

An appeal for letters, emails and telephone calls should be made, bombarding Joss Wiggins for a full retraction of the nonsense fed back to DEFRA.

 

 

Some argue that it is not only wholly undemocratic and biased, but borders on the corrupt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
H.A. Member

H.A.

Posted
Posted

i'm not sure I've followed this 'Fred', but I have fished out of Poole and Littlehampton for bream.

 

The Skip makes it clear before you leave that there is a four bream keep rule.

You take it or leave it.

 

Are the blokes from Whitby (for example), so poor that they must take 100lbs of fillets home to sustain their families ... why do I think they measure greed v necessity on the wrong side of 5/10?

 

I'm inclined toward bag limits for non-sellers.

 

<_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites
barry luxton Member

barry luxton

Posted
Posted (edited)
I'm inclined toward bag limits for non-sellers.

 

<_<

 

I'm not, as that comes in it needs policing, as yet, there ain't no need, in particular, if you take bream for example, commercially you can fill an artic up and send it abroad to get paid, thats were the majority of it goes, yet if a rsa take what you consider lots home, how can that have an effect on the stock in comparison. Best of all who is going to pay to run this bag limit restriction. You can, i ain't. This weekend we were overflown by a fisheries plane, i thought he was trying to land on the deck, what blo@@Y good was that, we are already paying for them to get thier jollies. What sort of extra policing will they get up to when the to@@ers (ex men in suits) :) get thier way and start 'controlling' the rsa. Tell us what boats they are HA. i'll make it a point to leave it then, do the skippers tell you about the restriction as you book the boat. I managed to get a couple of trips breaming last year, proberbly took home a dozen and gave eight of them away to me mates as you can't buy that in the shops, it's exported remember, any thing wrong with that.

Edited by barry luxton

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
Guest challenge

Guest challenge

Posted
Posted

So that’s as clear as mud then Leon?

 

The establishment of the precise catch threshold from which controls will have to apply, whether it be 5, 10 or 15 kilos or some other yard stick will depend on the kind of fish caught. I announced’ in my speech at the European Parliament last week that this threshold will be determined on a case by case basis after we have received advice from the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee on Fishers (STECF), which should provide us with advice on a proportionate figure that makes common sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sharkbyte Member

Sharkbyte

Posted
Posted
i'm not sure I've followed this 'Fred', but I have fished out of Poole and Littlehampton for bream.

 

The Skip makes it clear before you leave that there is a four bream keep rule.

You take it or leave it.

 

Are the blokes from Whitby (for example), so poor that they must take 100lbs of fillets home to sustain their families ... why do I think they measure greed v necessity on the wrong side of 5/10?

 

I'm inclined toward bag limits for non-sellers.

 

Hi HA

 

Did the South coast charters always have a boat limit for Black Bream in force.

 

No they didn't. It wasn't until relatively recently that this kind of approach has been taken.

 

Why is it then that the stuffed shirts insist on meddling with a constantly evolving discipline. ££££.....that is why.

 

There's no profit in allowing anglers to continue evolving as we wish, and at our own pace.

 

 

PS. Make no mistake it is the Cod that they have their eyes set upon (UK RSA's), which in itself is rather strange. North Sea commercial quotas were raised by 30% this year........ and without an exact figure for the projected RSA take.

 

 

 

 

 

What about the letter from the K&E SFC and bag limits for anglers?

 

 

Hi Steve

 

Don't hold your breath. Another cut'n'paste that serves to throw boat anglers to the wolves, tells me just about all that I need to know.

 

 

 

 

after we have received advice from the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee on Fishers (STECF), which should provide us with advice on a proportionate figure that makes common sense.

 

 

Hi Challenge

 

Millions will be squandered, proportionate is not a term they understand...93% of quota being held by the over 10's, common sense does not exist in their world.

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
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • 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.

  I accept