SCOTTISH SEA ANGLERS WORTH MILLIONS

[Anglers' Net]

News Release From The Scottish Sea Angling Conservation Network (SSACN)

 

Click here to view the full article

[Steve Coppolo]

News Release From The Scottish Sea Angling Conservation Network (SSACN)

 

Click here to view the full article

 

That's great news .........................for scientists, fisheries managers and politicians.

 

Not so good for the anglers, though. Or the fish stocks. That'll be them tied up in research studies, management opportunities and initiatives, proposals and consultations, for the foreseeable future, then. At least ten years worth of paper shuffling now to come before anything to benefit angler or fish. At least.

[H.A.]

At least ten years worth of paper shuffling now to come before anything to benefit angler or fish.

 

This is what I don't understand about your standpoint, Steve.

 

You don't want interference and you don't want more regulation (is that correct?).

 

You're not getting that at the moment are you?

No licence, no new MLSs, no restrictions (other than the silly perverted Council and SFC By-laws).

 

So, using your logic, the mad-brain scientists, busy-bodies, pen-pushers, initiative grabbers and consultants will be out of your hair for at least ten years.

 

No worries, then???

 

Except that, at the end of 10 years, you expect some benefits for anglers!

Thanks to your unbridled non-participation.

 

My, you spin a tangled web.

[Steve Coppolo]

This is what I don't understand about your standpoint, Steve.

 

You don't want interference and you don't want more regulation (is that correct?).

 

You're not getting that at the moment are you?

No licence, no new MLSs, no restrictions (other than the silly perverted Council and SFC By-laws).

 

So, using your logic, the mad-brain scientists, busy-bodies, pen-pushers, initiative grabbers and consultants will be out of your hair for at least ten years.

 

No worries, then???

 

Except that, at the end of 10 years, you expect some benefits for anglers!

Thanks to your unbridled non-participation.

 

My, you spin a tangled web.

 

It's only a tangled web if you are too simple to see what has been going on - and what is still going on.

 

You, obviously, still don't get it. Even after 50 years, there won't be any benefits for anglers. There will, however, be lots of pointless new rules, regulations and restrictions - all designed with the sole purpose of keeping the fisheries management industry thriving.

 

Does anyone, really, still believe that the economic worth of sea angling has any bearing on the future quality of their sport? All it does, and all it's ever done, is light up ££££ signs in the eyes of scientists, fisheries managers and civil servants.

 

Still, taking part in constant research studies and consultations give some people a feeling of purpose in their lives. Just don't confuse that with anything remotely useful for sea anglers or fish stocks.

Edited August 1, 2009 by Steve Coppolo

[glennk]

Everyone gets the Eureeka moment Steve. Me and you both once believed all this crap and it was Wurzel who was talking about the need to manage brigade and we just laughed at him, but then one day - eureeeeeeeeka !!!! we saw the light. Most other people who dont have hidden agendas will get that at some point. I think its IQ related with the brighter people getting there first.

[Worms]

It's only a tangled web if you are too simple to see what has been going on - and what is still going on.

 

You, obviously, still don't get it. Even after 50 years, there won't be any benefits for anglers. There will, however, be lots of pointless new rules, regulations and restrictions - all designed with the sole purpose of keeping the fisheries management industry thriving.

 

Still, taking part in constant research studies and consultations give some people a feeling of purpose in their lives. Just don't confuse that with anything remotely useful for sea anglers or fish stocks.

The way I've been reading all of the 'anti change' postings is that a number of sea anglers don't want change fullstop. The whole idea of most of the proposed legislation/research etc. is to improve the damaged ecology of the UK seas and to install a system that prevents future damage.

 

I'm sure that somewhere along the line people will make money from it as charter boats and tackle shops always have. The fact that public money is being spent on the new proposals and not money from sea anglers' pockets (such as from a licence similar to those that all freshwater anglers pay) seems to be missed by some.

 

No fish = no fishing, with prolific fish stocks everyone's a winner.

 

Does anyone, really, still believe that the economic worth of sea angling has any bearing on the future quality of their sport? All it does, and all it's ever done, is light up ££££ signs in the eyes of scientists, fisheries managers and civil servants.

and charter skippers and hotels and pubs and B+B s and camp sites and tackle shops etc.etc. Everything that keeps the angling tourism industry going in small seaside towns. I know because that's what I spend my money on when I go sea fishing! When I fish freshwater it might cost me a few quid on bait or a day ticket. When I seafish it costs, on average £100 a day, all spent in the town I fish from.

 

IQ's not in it, it's just common sense.

[Steve Coppolo]

IQ's not in it, it's just common sense.

 

O.K, using your argument, can you tell me the economic worth of the commercial fishing industry? Not the flawed figures that have been manipulated by RSA mouthpieces over the years, but the real economic worth. I think you might be surprised by the real figures involved. Which might explain why, (if it really is a case of who spends more, gets more, like RSA's mouthpieces seem to think), we have always come a very poor second best to the commercial sector whenever push has come to shove.

 

You might also be intersted to know that it costs the tax payer the same amount of money to manage the fishing industry, as the fishermen themselves contribute to the economy. Perhaps now you might be able to see where all these management opportunities, and nothing else, are going to come from? Telling politicians, fisheries managers, scientists, and anyone else who will listen, how much money sea angling is worth just serves to advertise how much money there is to be made from managing it. Or, rather, mismanging it in the case of the commercial fishing industry.

 

Still, RSA's established mouth pieces know what's best for everyone. I mean, look at what they've achieved over the last 30 years.

Edited August 1, 2009 by Steve Coppolo

[Worms]

O.K, using your argument, can you tell me the economic worth of the commercial fishing industry? Not the flawed figures that have been manipulated by RSA mouthpieces over the years, but the real economic worth. I think you might be surprised by the real figures involved. Which might explain why, (if it really is a case of who spends more, gets more, like RSA's mouthpieces seem to think), we have always come a very poor second best to the commercial sector whenever push has come to shove.

 

Absolutely no idea. My discussion is about RSAs not commercials. Funnily enough this is what all the legislation that some people seem to be so anti is aimed at. The commercial fishermen not the RSAs

 

You might also be intersted to know that it costs the tax payer the same amount of money to manage the fishing industry, as the fishermen themselves contribute to the economy. Perhaps now you might be able to see where all these management opportunities, and nothing else, are going to come from? Telling politicians, fisheries managers, scientists, and anyone else who will listen, how much money sea angling is worth just serves to advertise how much money there is to be made from managing it. Or, rather, mismanging it in the case of the commercial fishing industry.

 

Still, RSA's established mouth pieces know what's best for everyone. I mean, look at what they've achieved over the last 30 years.

Precisely why, if you are interested in your angling, people like yourself should get involved and do something about it. Moaning about people who are doing something whilst fighting in the other direction might give you some personal satisfaction but it does bugger all for the cause of people who want to fish in water with fish in it.

 

Moaning about it and burying your head in the sand won't help the angling community and divided sea anglers won't attract sympathy or as much support/money from the Govt. or anywhere else.

[Ian Burrett]

At least ten years worth of paper shuffling now to come before anything to benefit angler or fish. At least.

 

Zero TAC on Porbeagle and spurdog from this December

25% by catch limit on rays

Full protection on common skate

tope protected in England and Wales

 

I would say thats a benefit to anglers

[Steve Coppolo]

Zero TAC on Porbeagle and spurdog from this December

25% by catch limit on rays

Full protection on common skate

tope protected in England and Wales

 

I would say thats a benefit to anglers

 

Rubbish!! Zero TAC means bugger all in terms of protection. It might make some people feel good about themselves and feed a few egos, but it doesn't stop the fish from being caught and, in a lot of cases, discarded.

 

You see. This is precisely what I'm going on about. Token gestures that do sod all to benefit anglers, or fish stocks, being lauded as great achievements and victories. Meanwhile, the real issues go unaddressed. Well done, give yourselves a big pat on the back.