The Real Battle

[H.A.]

If afraid you're all admitting lack of involvement.

 

I know Steve was once interested in 'representation' and I, for one, knew who he was representing ... a big me! Like me!

 

There was never any representation in discussions with Govt./Defra nor with NFSA and probably not with AT either.

 

Fact is that we elect MPs etc (as 'representatives), but the electorate is not consulted upon all sundry issues and voting.

 

Once you've elected a rep., thassit.

You can still make your views to them.

 

The folks involved in 'angling' discussions are the dozen or so interested enough to put themselves out to attend meetings etc. They're concerned individuals, passionate about their pastime. They make no pretence to have been 'elected' reps.

There is no such facility.

 

The onus has never been on 'reps'/MPs to consult everyone of you.

That would be really stupid .. and costly!

 

We might as well ... 10k, 25k, 1 MegaK all turn up at Parliament to give our four penneth!!!

 

Get real!

 

Government and the EU members will never properly consult us, nor ask for our views.

 

It's the way politics koofin' works!

 

It always has been and always will be that you take up matters with your representatives.

Not the other way around. It does not work the other way around, whether elected 'spokesmen' or not!

 

All meetings are held 'in secret', whether it be Cabinet, Council (in the broader interpretation), Senate, SFCs et al.

 

Your're daft to hark on about this representation bit and well adrift not to be involved at top level yourselves.

 

If you are concerned enough. Get off yer bums and stop whingeing!

 

C'est la vie

[Steve Coppolo]

If afraid you're all admitting lack of involvement.

 

I know Steve was once interested in 'representation' and I, for one, knew who he was representing ... a big me! Like me!

 

There was never any representation in discussions with Govt./Defra nor with NFSA and probably not with AT either.

 

Fact is that we elect MPs etc (as 'representatives), but the electorate is not consulted upon all sundry issues and voting.

 

Once you've elected a rep., thassit.

You can still make your views to them.

 

The folks involved in 'angling' discussions are the dozen or so interested enough to put themselves out to attend meetings etc. They're concerned individuals, passionate about their pastime. They make no pretence to have been 'elected' reps.

There is no such facility.

 

The onus has never been on 'reps'/MPs to consult everyone of you.

That would be really stupid .. and costly!

 

We might as well ... 10k, 25k, 1 MegaK all turn up at Parliament to give our four penneth!!!

 

Get real!

 

Government and the EU members will never properly consult us, nor ask for our views.

 

It's the way politics koofin' works!

 

It always has been and always will be that you take up matters with your representatives.

Not the other way around. It does not work the other way around, whether elected 'spokesmen' or not!

 

All meetings are held 'in secret', whether it be Cabinet, Council (in the broader interpretation), Senate, SFCs et al.

 

Your're daft to hark on about this representation bit and well adrift not to be involved at top level yourselves.

 

If you are concerned enough. Get off yer bums and stop whingeing!

 

C'est la vie

 

I'm not going to argue with you, Ada. Some of what you say actually makes sense. What I'll do is highlight a few things that you may not be aware of.

 

The people who are talking to Defra, etc, are there because they claim to represent sea anglers. The numbers thay claim to represent have been greatly exagerated in order to gain credibility. The people who get to attend the meetings are hand picked. The meeting that you and I attended, as members of SFC's, was the only one I ever managed to attend, and even then, attempts were made to stop me from doing so. I was criticised by Leon after the meeting for wasting an opportunity to get Rodney Anderson, (director of marine fisheries), "onside", because I dared to ask awkward, but important and valid, questions. You were there, you be the judge. I seem to remember that you gave Rodders a hard time, too. I never got another opportunity to air my views in front of Defra. Did you ever get invited back? I also know of other cases where attempts have been made to prevent certain individuals from attending meetings with Defra, where sea angling has been on the agenda. One of them very recently. I also know of cases where, unable to stop individuals from attending, they have made things difficult and attempted to undermine the said individuals position. In fact, I was told, by someone standing within earshot, that the positions of most anglers present at the meeting we attended, were undermined during the coffee break!

 

Like it or not, Ada, RSA representation stinks to high heaven.

[H.A.]

Like it or not, Ada, RSA representation stinks to high heaven.

 

Then do something POSITIVE yourself, Steve!

 

I got a reply about some issues surrounding Art 47 from my MP(Con) today ...

 

at least he has taken notice of what I have said and may be able to contribute to debate (informal and formal) .....

 

[Steve Coppolo]

Then do something POSITIVE yourself, Steve!

 

I got a reply about some issues surrounding Art 47 from my MP(Con) today ...

 

at least he has taken notice of what I have said and may be able to contribute to debate (informal and formal) .....

 

 

Nice reply, Ada. Let's hope he means it.

 

Rest assured that I am not sitting idle. I have also written letters and emails. Some have had replies, other's haven't. I have also been very busy trying to highlight the threats faced by sea anglers, the reasons why and who, in my opinion, is responsible. I will continue to ask the questions that expose, by lack of answers, the devious and underhand way that the RSA lobby is being run. Lots going on in the background, also.

Edited January 22, 2009 by Steve Coppolo

[glennk]

Weve all been working our socks regarding article 47 Ada. I have a whole list of similar replies from various MP's and MEP's. The sad fact is all we seem to be doing is fighting on the defensive all the time. Its a big shame that our "Reps" arent actually going to war and fighting these issues before they even arise. The threat of bag limits, quotas, licences etc has been on the radar for quite a few years now and noone has shot it down. Its not until the last minute that the real anglers find out about these threats and go into battle. One day soon, I fear information will filter through too late, and the real men on the ground who actually take part in the sport will find it too late to act.

 

There are a couple of angling reps who I am now starting to see eye to eye with. There is one up here in Yorkshire who is actually listening to the man on the ground and getting us involved. Pauls meeting with countryfile next week came through our local nfsa rep Stuart Mcpherson. Also he has put us in touch with some regional news programs, so we are getting some help and being allowed to put our point across.

 

But sadly we are still being let down by the majority of these reps. At the end of the day, far too much credit is being given to organisations with: little knowledge of angling issues, totally insignificant and unrepresentative membership numbers, and leaders who want nothing but to massage their own egos and follow ill thought out agendas. SACN being by far the worst offender.

[wurzel]

Then do something POSITIVE yourself, Steve!

 

I got a reply about some issues surrounding Art 47 from my MP(Con) today ...

 

at least he has taken notice of what I have said and may be able to contribute to debate (informal and formal) .....

 

 

Hello Ha

 

Bin there, done that , total waste of time.

 

 

I’ve been watching the threads on here with interest , it’s amazing how closely anglers plight and the way it’s being opposed mirrors the inshore commercial fisherman’s fight to stay in business .

So for once some hind sight might be of some use to you , as it’s said that an once of fore sight is worth 10 ton of hind sight and hind sight from commercial fishermen might just be fore sight for anglers.

 

Defra take their time it’s been nearly ten years of skirmishes before they finally admitted they want to cut the under tens from over 3,000 boats to just 900 and are now in the final throws of doing so, all the meetings and trying to compromise with them were a total waste of time. With hind sight I can now see that the agenda is set out in such a way as to create as much activity as possible for the civil service (DEFRA).The EU commission also works in the same way .

Angling reps have already helped increased the work load of DEFRA considerably with as yet no results.

 

Writing letters and meetings with MP’s even more of a waste of time.

This is how it goes; You meet with your local MP individually or as a group he will agree with every thing you say telling you he will do what ever he can for you , if the MP in question happens to be of the party in power at the time he’ll ask a few awkward questions and sort of put your case to parliament and will get the normal set answer from his boss , usually going something like “ On our way to obtaining sustainable fisheries we have to make tough decisions and find a balance bla bla bla waffle waffle”

( sound familiar) and as you have HA receive a posh letter out lining the question and the answer and that is as far as it will go, as one MP told me when I pushed him further “ I can not be seen to oppose government policy “ he was more worried about his career than your case . So you meet with a MP of the other persuasion , now he really gets up on his soap box and swears his commitment to fight for justice against all that is bad with the party that is in power and to fight your case to the bitter end. Sadly he can do nothing worth while as he being in opposition has no power, Some times a MP will arrange for a meeting with the minister in our and your case the fisheries minister, this you may feel at the time as a good thing , but I can tell you that after several meetings with the minister I can not think of one good thing to come from them.

A change in government won’t help either as with fisheries management all parties claim to be striving for sustainable fisheries and are influenced be the quangos within DEFRA , the greens and ultimately the EU commission who at the end of the day run the show .

 

Going on telly is also a waste of time and if not very careful likely to do more damage than good, most reports start the clip with the lines “ the governments continued battle with dwindling fish stocks” as the media propaganda machine always leans towards the greens, straight away you start to defend your selves and by blaming lack of fish on commercial fishermen is counter productive as you are instantly confirming there is a problem and no matter how small you are part of that problem. Inshore fishermen tried the same line with foreign super trawlers fishing with in 6 miles of our coast catching more in one trip than we do in one year why should we be forced out and they left to continue , do you see the similarities ? And the out come will be the same.

Judging from your MP’s reply HA over fishing by commercials was mentioned in your letter to him no doubt in your usual robust manner . Waste of time, you probably don’t agree and that’s fine but in reality the UK commercial fleet is now being squeezed as hard as it can be with out being wiped out all together, the over ten fleet, what’s left of it, is self managed by the PO’s and quota traders and 900 under tens won’t take a lot of management the management industry know this, have done for a while and why they are keen to move on to anglers .

Statements like this from Leon in his fist post on this thread.

Quote

As fishery stocks decline, and quota becomes harder to find, fishing activities which were once far below the radar of concern find themselves dragged unwillingly into the limelight.

 

Are wrong fishery stocks are not in decline quota is not hard to find in most cases it’s been increased, it’s just to damn expensive the only reason angling activities are showing up on the radar is because there is nothing much else to look for.

In fact as an angling rep he should be pointing out that as the quotas have been increased the need to cap angler effort is unfounded. Mind you that didn’t work for us either.

 

 

 

With hind sight my advice to the angling reps is to cut the crap and save time meet with the boss of DEFRA who ever that might be and get him to tell what the end result is going to be, believe me he will know , you might need to pull his finger nails out before he tells you though .

At least that way you will know what’s coming .

 

I don’t see how any body will change the out come unlike Steve I can see into the future and I can see anglers will be embroiled into the monstrous CFP and the parasitic fisheries management industry and I can fore tell that there will come a time when a highly paid delegation of experts from the Angling Trust will return from Brussels and claim they have got the best deal possible for UK’s anglers and I doubt very much you will agree with them.

 

Best of luck.

[barry luxton]

Wise words from Wurzel, the enemy from within, or the men in suits, suprise, surprise. So what is required, instead of whinging about a rep or the same one all the time, is someone to step up and have a word in defra's ear then, up for it.

 

Mind you joe bogeys stepping down this year, who wants his job.

 

More evidence, thanks Leon.

 

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/daniel_hannan...ational_anglers

 

The Common Fisheries Policy is being extended to recreational anglers

Posted By: Daniel Hannan at Jan 21, 2009 at 17:31:18 [General]

 

 

 

I've just done something which I do very rarely: I've attended a Committee of the European Parliament. Regular readers will have gathered by now that I think there are altogether too many EU laws. I promised when I was elected that I would go to Brussels to attack the legislative process, not contribute to it, and I like to think I have kept my word. You are likelier to find me railing and voting against regulations than helping to draw them up.

 

On this occasion, though, the Fisheries Committee was debating a proposal so disproportionate, so heavy-handed, so asinine, that there is a chance that even MEPs will modify it sensibly.

 

In essence, the EU wants to extend the Common Fisheries Policy to recreational anglers. Sporting fishermen, who go out in small boats or fish from piers, will be required to purchase licences and to log every fish. At present, while they keep the odd fish for personal consumption, most sea anglers return their catches to the water. In some cases, they tag them first, contributing to conservation programmes. If the European Commission gets its way, they will be forced to land every tiddler they catch, and to count their quota against the national one.

 

Why? Where is the need for this expensive and cumbersome scheme? Will it rescue the EU's fish stocks? Hardly. T

 

he CFP has already wiped out most of what ought to have been a great renewable resource. Recreational sea anglers account for perhaps one per cent of the total catch that remains.

 

No, this is regulation for its own sake: the product of an attitude that sees "unregulated" as synonymous with "illegal".

 

British and Irish MEPs, led by that flinty patriot Struan Stevenson, put up a heroic defence this afternoon, demolishing every point in the Commission's case.

 

But the Commission continued to insist, mulishly, that the measure was necessary for conservation. Conservation?

 

Coming from the organisation that has presided over the ecological calamity of the destruction of North Sea fish stocks, that really is hard to take.

 

The CFP put most the skippers in my constituency out of business years ago.

 

Some of them turned to tourism, making a new living by taking anglers out in their boats.

 

Now, the CFP threatens to ruin them a second time, bringing to amateur fishermen the same destruction that it brought to professionals.

 

And to think that there are people in Iceland who want to join this wretched organisation.

Edited January 23, 2009 by barry luxton

[Steve Coppolo]

Statements like this from Leon in his fist post on this thread.

 

Quote

As fishery stocks decline, and quota becomes harder to find, fishing activities which were once far below the radar of concern find themselves dragged unwillingly into the limelight.

 

Are wrong fishery stocks are not in decline quota is not hard to find in most cases it’s been increased, it’s just to damn expensive the only reason angling activities are showing up on the radar is because there is nothing much else to look for.

In fact as an angling rep he should be pointing out that as the quotas have been increased the need to cap angler effort is unfounded. Mind you that didn’t work for us either.

 

Everytime they open their mouths they drop us deeper and deeper in the 5hit, Peter. The whole RSA campaign that they've been driving has been based on silly statements like that one. But you try telling them to shut up! You see, they know best and there's no one that can tell them different. Their arrogance defies belief.

 

And even now, they still won't shut up. Leon is supposed to have retired, yet he is still attending meetings and talking about the future of sea angling. I'd like to know under what capacity. Who knows what rubbish he is coming out with now.

[Guest challenge]

Hello Ha

 

Bin there, done that , total waste of time.

 

 

I’ve been watching the threads on here with interest , it’s amazing how closely anglers plight and the way it’s being opposed mirrors the inshore commercial fisherman’s fight to stay in business .

So for once some hind sight might be of some use to you , as it’s said that an once of fore sight is worth 10 ton of hind sight and hind sight from commercial fishermen might just be fore sight for anglers.

 

Defra take their time it’s been nearly ten years of skirmishes before they finally admitted they want to cut the under tens from over 3,000 boats to just 900 and are now in the final throws of doing so, all the meetings and trying to compromise with them were a total waste of time. With hind sight I can now see that the agenda is set out in such a way as to create as much activity as possible for the civil service (DEFRA).The EU commission also works in the same way .

Angling reps have already helped increased the work load of DEFRA considerably with as yet no results.

 

Writing letters and meetings with MP’s even more of a waste of time.

This is how it goes; You meet with your local MP individually or as a group he will agree with every thing you say telling you he will do what ever he can for you , if the MP in question happens to be of the party in power at the time he’ll ask a few awkward questions and sort of put your case to parliament and will get the normal set answer from his boss , usually going something like “ On our way to obtaining sustainable fisheries we have to make tough decisions and find a balance bla bla bla waffle waffle”

( sound familiar) and as you have HA receive a posh letter out lining the question and the answer and that is as far as it will go, as one MP told me when I pushed him further “ I can not be seen to oppose government policy “ he was more worried about his career than your case . So you meet with a MP of the other persuasion , now he really gets up on his soap box and swears his commitment to fight for justice against all that is bad with the party that is in power and to fight your case to the bitter end. Sadly he can do nothing worth while as he being in opposition has no power, Some times a MP will arrange for a meeting with the minister in our and your case the fisheries minister, this you may feel at the time as a good thing , but I can tell you that after several meetings with the minister I can not think of one good thing to come from them.

A change in government won’t help either as with fisheries management all parties claim to be striving for sustainable fisheries and are influenced be the quangos within DEFRA , the greens and ultimately the EU commission who at the end of the day run the show .

 

Going on telly is also a waste of time and if not very careful likely to do more damage than good, most reports start the clip with the lines “ the governments continued battle with dwindling fish stocks” as the media propaganda machine always leans towards the greens, straight away you start to defend your selves and by blaming lack of fish on commercial fishermen is counter productive as you are instantly confirming there is a problem and no matter how small you are part of that problem. Inshore fishermen tried the same line with foreign super trawlers fishing with in 6 miles of our coast catching more in one trip than we do in one year why should we be forced out and they left to continue , do you see the similarities ? And the out come will be the same.

Judging from your MP’s reply HA over fishing by commercials was mentioned in your letter to him no doubt in your usual robust manner . Waste of time, you probably don’t agree and that’s fine but in reality the UK commercial fleet is now being squeezed as hard as it can be with out being wiped out all together, the over ten fleet, what’s left of it, is self managed by the PO’s and quota traders and 900 under tens won’t take a lot of management the management industry know this, have done for a while and why they are keen to move on to anglers .

Statements like this from Leon in his fist post on this thread.

Quote

As fishery stocks decline, and quota becomes harder to find, fishing activities which were once far below the radar of concern find themselves dragged unwillingly into the limelight.

 

Are wrong fishery stocks are not in decline quota is not hard to find in most cases it’s been increased, it’s just to damn expensive the only reason angling activities are showing up on the radar is because there is nothing much else to look for.

In fact as an angling rep he should be pointing out that as the quotas have been increased the need to cap angler effort is unfounded. Mind you that didn’t work for us either.

 

 

 

With hind sight my advice to the angling reps is to cut the crap and save time meet with the boss of DEFRA who ever that might be and get him to tell what the end result is going to be, believe me he will know , you might need to pull his finger nails out before he tells you though .

At least that way you will know what’s coming .

 

I don’t see how any body will change the out come unlike Steve I can see into the future and I can see anglers will be embroiled into the monstrous CFP and the parasitic fisheries management industry and I can fore tell that there will come a time when a highly paid delegation of experts from the Angling Trust will return from Brussels and claim they have got the best deal possible for UK’s anglers and I doubt very much you will agree with them.

 

Best of luck.

How I enjoyed reading that thread wurzel.

Hindsight

RSA (like commercial fishermen have) will have to learn that there lives are not determined by what happens to them anymore, but how they react to what happens.

Again thanks Wurzel

Regards.

Edited January 23, 2009 by challenge

[glennk]

Hello Ha

 

Bin there, done that , total waste of time.

 

 

I’ve been watching the threads on here with interest , it’s amazing how closely anglers plight and the way it’s being opposed mirrors the inshore commercial fisherman’s fight to stay in business .

So for once some hind sight might be of some use to you , as it’s said that an once of fore sight is worth 10 ton of hind sight and hind sight from commercial fishermen might just be fore sight for anglers.

 

Defra take their time it’s been nearly ten years of skirmishes before they finally admitted they want to cut the under tens from over 3,000 boats to just 900 and are now in the final throws of doing so, all the meetings and trying to compromise with them were a total waste of time. With hind sight I can now see that the agenda is set out in such a way as to create as much activity as possible for the civil service (DEFRA).The EU commission also works in the same way .

Angling reps have already helped increased the work load of DEFRA considerably with as yet no results.

 

Writing letters and meetings with MP’s even more of a waste of time.

This is how it goes; You meet with your local MP individually or as a group he will agree with every thing you say telling you he will do what ever he can for you , if the MP in question happens to be of the party in power at the time he’ll ask a few awkward questions and sort of put your case to parliament and will get the normal set answer from his boss , usually going something like “ On our way to obtaining sustainable fisheries we have to make tough decisions and find a balance bla bla bla waffle waffle”

( sound familiar) and as you have HA receive a posh letter out lining the question and the answer and that is as far as it will go, as one MP told me when I pushed him further “ I can not be seen to oppose government policy “ he was more worried about his career than your case . So you meet with a MP of the other persuasion , now he really gets up on his soap box and swears his commitment to fight for justice against all that is bad with the party that is in power and to fight your case to the bitter end. Sadly he can do nothing worth while as he being in opposition has no power, Some times a MP will arrange for a meeting with the minister in our and your case the fisheries minister, this you may feel at the time as a good thing , but I can tell you that after several meetings with the minister I can not think of one good thing to come from them.

A change in government won’t help either as with fisheries management all parties claim to be striving for sustainable fisheries and are influenced be the quangos within DEFRA , the greens and ultimately the EU commission who at the end of the day run the show .

 

Going on telly is also a waste of time and if not very careful likely to do more damage than good, most reports start the clip with the lines “ the governments continued battle with dwindling fish stocks” as the media propaganda machine always leans towards the greens, straight away you start to defend your selves and by blaming lack of fish on commercial fishermen is counter productive as you are instantly confirming there is a problem and no matter how small you are part of that problem. Inshore fishermen tried the same line with foreign super trawlers fishing with in 6 miles of our coast catching more in one trip than we do in one year why should we be forced out and they left to continue , do you see the similarities ? And the out come will be the same.

Judging from your MP’s reply HA over fishing by commercials was mentioned in your letter to him no doubt in your usual robust manner . Waste of time, you probably don’t agree and that’s fine but in reality the UK commercial fleet is now being squeezed as hard as it can be with out being wiped out all together, the over ten fleet, what’s left of it, is self managed by the PO’s and quota traders and 900 under tens won’t take a lot of management the management industry know this, have done for a while and why they are keen to move on to anglers .

Statements like this from Leon in his fist post on this thread.

Quote

As fishery stocks decline, and quota becomes harder to find, fishing activities which were once far below the radar of concern find themselves dragged unwillingly into the limelight.

 

Are wrong fishery stocks are not in decline quota is not hard to find in most cases it’s been increased, it’s just to damn expensive the only reason angling activities are showing up on the radar is because there is nothing much else to look for.

In fact as an angling rep he should be pointing out that as the quotas have been increased the need to cap angler effort is unfounded. Mind you that didn’t work for us either.

 

 

 

With hind sight my advice to the angling reps is to cut the crap and save time meet with the boss of DEFRA who ever that might be and get him to tell what the end result is going to be, believe me he will know , you might need to pull his finger nails out before he tells you though .

At least that way you will know what’s coming .

 

I don’t see how any body will change the out come unlike Steve I can see into the future and I can see anglers will be embroiled into the monstrous CFP and the parasitic fisheries management industry and I can fore tell that there will come a time when a highly paid delegation of experts from the Angling Trust will return from Brussels and claim they have got the best deal possible for UK’s anglers and I doubt very much you will agree with them.

 

Best of luck.

 

 

Your the man Peter. I think your right and I think we are doomed. I do howevere hope and pray you are wrong.