Article 47

[Guest challenge]

Accountable to who, the overburdend, non-accountable eu who can't manage thier own accounts, who waste mega millions on a failed cfp. And or defra who again waste slightly less than them, who have just announced yet another closing of the cod fishing in the channel as neither of them can give us a fishery, so what have the rsa done in comparison to the failed organisations and a crappy fish stock that these so called managers have managed. Why should the bouyant rsa be linked to such a crap system, why try to drag the rsa down to thier level is beyond me, no doubt at an extra cost to the taxpayer.

Hello Barry.

I agree, but the powers that bee wont. So what could you offer them? I know that you wont want to offer them anything, but in doing that I can only imagine that you would play right into there hands.

Regards.

[barry luxton]

Hello Barry.

I agree, but the powers that bee wont. So what could you offer them? I know that you wont want to offer them anything, but in doing that I can only imagine that you would play right into there hands.

Regards.

 

Hiyer challenge, i suppose we could offer them a log book say for the next five years of accurate detail of our catches, releases and landings to show how miniscule the effect is on the stock.There is something of that nature being proposed to counter the stupid over twelve ban by the ssfc for passenger angling vessels to prove that as a conservation control it acheives absolutly nothing, as said a waste of time, effort, money big time to keep the managers in work.

 

If the managers consider that they need the rsa to keep them in work, despite all the reasoned argument against and none for, i suppose the next stage would be to keep a very accurate record or possibly over emphasise the amount of landings to prevent the french taking a huge slice of the rsa cod landings as happend when the uk commercial underdeclared thier catches, if you get me drift.

Edited April 5, 2009 by barry luxton

[Guest challenge]

Hiyer challenge, i suppose we could offer them a log book say for the next five years of accurate detail of our catches, releases and landings to show how miniscule the effect is on the stock.There is something of that nature being proposed to counter the stupid over twelve ban by the ssfc for passenger angling vessels to prove that as a conservation control it acheives absolutly nothing, as said a waste of time, effort, money big time to keep the managers in work.

 

If the managers consider that they need the rsa to keep them in work, despite all the reasoned argument against and none for, i suppose the next stage would be to keep a very accurate record or possibly over emphasise the amount of landings to prevent the french taking a huge slice of the rsa cod landings as happend when the uk commercial underdeclared thier catches, if you get me drift.

Morning Barry.

How about a licensing scheme, something similar to what our district uses for our hobby fishermen.

The licence (the same as the hobby fishermen) would be free; it would allow each individual SFC to be able to report how many RSA are fishing in there district annually.

Also a voluntary log book. I have seen some of the anglers log books that are doing the rounds and they look ok to me.

You don’t (as some suspect) have to go giving secret marks away or revealing when the best time to fish them marks are. But just a general log book that would submit your catch, the times in a year that you fish and a general description of what you where targeting and what method of fishing e.g. from a boat, shore, kayak etc.

Not the end of the world Barry, but at least it would give the powers that be some information and look as if they are in control of RSA when in fact they won’t be.

these are just some suggestions I would hope that many more would have better suggestions, but if RSA don’t come up with something soon I believe that the powers that be will have no alternative but to go with the suggestions that RSA reps are coming up with that the majority seam to be so against.

Regards.

[Steve Coppolo]

Morning Barry.

How about a licensing scheme, something similar to what our district uses for our hobby fishermen.

The licence (the same as the hobby fishermen) would be free; it would allow each individual SFC to be able to report how many RSA are fishing in there district annually.

Also a voluntary log book. I have seen some of the anglers log books that are doing the rounds and they look ok to me.

You don’t (as some suspect) have to go giving secret marks away or revealing when the best time to fish them marks are. But just a general log book that would submit your catch, the times in a year that you fish and a general description of what you where targeting and what method of fishing e.g. from a boat, shore, kayak etc.

Not the end of the world Barry, but at least it would give the powers that be some information and look as if they are in control of RSA when in fact they won’t be.

these are just some suggestions I would hope that many more would have better suggestions, but if RSA don’t come up with something soon I believe that the powers that be will have no alternative but to go with the suggestions that RSA reps are coming up with that the majority seam to be so against.

Regards.

 

That sounds a lot like the 'party line' you're quoting there, challenge. Why the bloody hell should we be licenced and have to fill in log books? Is it because we pose such a serious threat to fish stocks that we need to be mis-anaged, in the same way as the commercials have been? The answer to that has to be no, so maybe it's to keep fisheries managers and officers in a job? Much more likely. You can take you're proposed management measures and your log books and stuff them right up your 4rse. And the same thing goes for any other stupid and invasive proposals that our mad RSA reps come up with. They are not necessary, not wanted, and not needed. You're all like pigs around a trough.

[barry luxton]

That sounds a lot like the 'party line' you're quoting there, challenge. Why the bloody hell should we be licenced and have to fill in log books? Is it because we pose such a serious threat to fish stocks that we need to be mis-anaged, in the same way as the commercials have been? The answer to that has to be no, so maybe it's to keep fisheries managers and officers in a job? Much more likely. You can take you're proposed management measures and your log books and stuff them right up your 4rse. And the same thing goes for any other stupid and invasive proposals that our mad RSA reps come up with. They are not necessary, not wanted, and not needed. You're all like pigs around a trough.

 

Definatly a no to that proposel then Steve, I could never consider being a jurno type as i don't have such a delicate grasp of the english language. I recon you could do another job as the chief rsa boat negotiator to the eu and defra, seeing that nothing else appears to get their attention. snigger.

[Steve Coppolo]

Definatly a no to that proposel then Steve, I could never consider being a jurno type as i don't have such a delicate grasp of the english language. I recon you could do another job as the chief rsa boat negotiator to the eu and defra, seeing that nothing else appears to get their attention. snigger.

 

Just makes me see red when I read posts like those above, where people seem to think we must be 'managed' and telling us that we can either accept what they have planned for us or face a worse fate in the shape of proposals from our so called reps. It's like we're being held to ransom.

[Sharkbyte]

Just who do they think they are?

 

Give them a uniform and they turn native within weeks.

 

Log books will be used for one reason, and one reason only. The data can / will be 'presented' (manipulated) to make a case for increased management, restriction and of course the need for more data. Most 'studies' conclude so as to ask more questions, than they provide answers. After all, they have to keep the gravy train nicely stoked up.

 

Where does the licence bit comes in, you may ask? Simple, If you have one, it can soon be taken away! Additionally, future restrictions can be introduced at the drop of a hat.

 

 

 

 

Challenge, I'm suspicious, you never answered my question from the other week. How did your SFC respond to the Article 47 proposal?

[Guest challenge]

I don’t know shark byte, was to busy at home cleaning my new uniform.

How am I supposed to know how they react? Are they suppose to tell me what there reaction should be to this proposed legislation.

You could of course go to our website and read the minuets of the last NESFC meeting.

Steve.

All I am saying is don’t play right into there hands. With a reply like that I am afraid to say you are doing just that.

I would personally love to have nothing to do with any legislation brought on recreational fishermen. At a personal level and at a professional level.

All I am trying to do is give a little bit of advice. If you don’t want to listen then fell free.

Regards.

Edited April 5, 2009 by challenge

[Steve Coppolo]

Steve.

All I am saying is don’t play right into there hands. With a reply like that I am afraid to say you are doing just that.

I would personally love to have nothing to do with any legislation brought on recreational fishermen. At a personal level and at a professional level.

All I am trying to do is give a little bit of advice. If you don’t want to listen then fell free.

Regards.

 

O.K, Challenge, fair enough, but please don't talk in riddles. Why not tell us how opposing these crazy proposals is playing into their hands? Making statements like that, you must know what they have in store for us. Could you let us in on the secret? Surely you are not advocating negotiating the future of sea angling with these people?

[Guest challenge]

O.K, Challenge, fair enough, but please don't talk in riddles. Why not tell us how opposing these crazy proposals is playing into their hands? Making statements like that, you must know what they have in store for us. Could you let us in on the secret? Surely you are not advocating negotiating the future of sea angling with these people?

Ok Steve let me put it this way. Do you think that there is going to be change?

 

You can oppose the changes that our so called reps propose vigorously but at the end of the day there will be change.

The proposals that I have made would (in my opinion) course as little harm (or change) to recreational angling as we know it today through change.

It might not be acceptable to you Steve. But it just could be to the change makers.

Regards.

Edited April 5, 2009 by challenge