Angling Trust Forum

[barry luxton]

Aah!

 

keith arthur didn't think so.

 

Quote;

 

All I know is that if I controlled a fishery, otters (and mink and cormorants) would be most unwelcome and they would certainly learn that VERY quickly.

[Leon Roskilly]

Are you repping

 

 

I'll leave you to salivate over the juicy possibilities (If I were, are, will, or have been) LOL

Edited February 25, 2010 by Leon Roskilly

[barry luxton]

quote: and plenty of work regarding MCZs etc coming our way to

 

Whats sort of involvement have you regarding this subject Leon, you fighting against ntz,s or are you for them?

[Leon Roskilly]

quote: and plenty of work regarding MCZs etc coming our way to

 

Whats sort of involvement have you regarding this subject Leon, you fighting against ntz,s or are you for them?

 

In the past I've fought through many meetings and consultations for the principle that every such area should have stated objectives, and that only activities that significantly impact on the attainment of such objectives should face restriction.

 

And that socio-economic considerations should be taken into account when selecting areas for designation.

 

And that where any restrictions are considered necessary, they should be the minimum that will do the job (rather than going directly for the 'nuclear' option of a No Take Zone favoured by plenty of other 'stakeholders').

 

And just as any other angler should, I have every intention of getting involved to ensure that there will be attainable benefits, both for the wider marine environment on which we depend for our angling, and indirectly as a result of a healthier marine ecosystem for the fish and anglers in my area.

 

I would need some strong convincing that a No Take Zone was needed in any area that is likely to impact on Recreational Sea Angling activity.

 

What will you be doing to effectively address what's coming our way in the shape of SPAs SACs, WFD etc Barry?.

 

(If enough other anglers get involved in an effective way, and take responsibility, I'll most happily take a back seat and leave it to them. But both at regional and county level, there will be plenty to do in the MCZ project areas for those that are able to do more than simply spout-off).

[Steve Coppolo]

And that where any restrictions are considered necessary, they should be the minimum that will do the job (rather than going directly for the 'nuclear' option of a No Take Zone favoured by plenty of other 'stakeholders').

What? The Angling Trust support the ban on anglers taking eels. So, as you are representing anglers through the Angling Trust, that last statement of yours is a load of old rubbish.

 

(If enough other anglers get involved in an effective way, and take responsibility, I'll most happily take a back seat and leave it to them.

 

Please do it anyway, because you aren't doing anglers any favours.

[barry luxton]

In the past I've fought through many meetings and consultations for the principle that every such area should have stated objectives, and that only activities that significantly impact on the attainment of such objectives should face restriction.

 

And that socio-economic considerations should be taken into account when selecting areas for designation.

 

And that where any restrictions are considered necessary, they should be the minimum that will do the job (rather than going directly for the 'nuclear' option of a No Take Zone favoured by plenty of other 'stakeholders').

 

And just as any other angler should, I have every intention of getting involved to ensure that there will be attainable benefits, both for the wider marine environment on which we depend for our angling, and indirectly as a result of a healthier marine ecosystem for the fish and anglers in my area.

 

I would need some strong convincing that a No Take Zone was needed in any area that is likely to impact on Recreational Sea Angling activity.

 

What will you be doing to effectively address what's coming our way in the shape of SPAs SACs, WFD etc Barry?.

 

(If enough other anglers get involved in an effective way, and take responsibility, I'll most happily take a back seat and leave it to them. But both at regional and county level, there will be plenty to do in the MCZ project areas for those that are able to do more than simply spout-off).

 

 

Spouting off am i, rather a weak argument against my opinion Leon.

 

I don't consider anything i say or do to be detrimental to the rsa, unlike the restrictions agreed by the A T. Tell me what positives have been acheived to date? I feel very comfortable that i am not a member of the A T as it certainly appears to be a secretive society with many goings on that who they are repping do not know about.

 

It's a bloody shame that the rsa who are at the lower end of the chain regarding any effects to the ruddy eco system that all these so called do gooders are targetting as they think the rsa are a soft touch. Whats up with the approach of it ain't broke don't fix it. Why can't the likes of the A T concentrate their efforts in doing something for the angling community top down, instead of pussy footing around with these quangos who are trying to regulate the rsa just because they want to. Why don't the A T tell them to s@d, full stop. Then go and do what is more important.

 

Take responsibility for what? What is the effective way, negotiate with these quangos, all they have is their own agendas. I don't have a problem in doing so, is that ok? You happy for this government to spend more and more of the taxpayers money on as i have described, a wasteful, pointless, un-nessercery excercise. The rsa are already involved, in fighting off all the back stabbing threats from within and fighting these various quango organisations. Rather go fishing, but they won't let me. Have you the impression the likes of myself don't do anything, shame on you. Pig ignorant organisations that ignore emails, requests for information that they claim to rep, quangos that ignore information requests, get up my nose more than anglers who according to the few don't do anything apart from go fishing.

[Steve Coppolo]

Valid points, Barry, but unfortunately they are completely wasted on someone whose knowledge of the marine environment is built around web pages, rather than days at sea.

[Yido]

Sorry Guys, been away for a while.

 

If you are interested I have received an email from Mike Heylin,

 

To view the AT Response to the Reform of the CFP the link is as follows:

 

http://www.

 

anglingtrust.net/page.asp?section=494&sectionTitle=Consultation+Responses

 

Barry, YES the AT must consult all anglers when it comes to MCZ's etc, they better not make the same mistakes as the EA Byelaws/Eel

 

However, it will be a massive task, how can they consult with anglers when they are spread all over the country. One answer would be for local angling clubs and individuals to get together and hold a meeting directly with the AT. It is easy to do, just takes a bit of effort, at least it will show the AT that real anglers are prepared to listen and state clearly what they want.

 

I am not going to preach to you guys anymore, but what I will say is that the AT and especially Mike Heylin are approachable, he will do what he can to listen and understand your concerns. I told Mike Heylin why I needed the AT links for the AT Strategy and AT Response to the CFP, he was fully aware that I will be giving them out on this forum, he was happy to provide them.

 

Jaffa, re: Golden Mile

 

I have thought long and hard about the Golden Mile, I have spoken to many sea anglers, talked to other clubs during that process. For me, the Golden Mile is the first step forward as far as recognition for Sea Angling as a sport. It will not be THE CURE but it will help to secure grass roots angling, it will also help to put sea angling as a sport, on the front pages of most local papers, for a while anyway.

[Yido]

I'm the same as you Reg, most of my angling is offshore. Im not so selfish as to not care about inshore marks, because i do. I care very much and have great concern about the rest of the rsa. And as such the biggest thing that is bugging me, very big time is the recommendation by the A T to go through the mcs to register their votes etc with regards to the mcz's that this useless government are imposing on us. Do me a great service as a fellow angler and log onto the mcs site and have a good look at their set up. Most of their jewel's are asking for them to be ntz's. I have mentioned this numerous times before. This is what the A T and the mcs are party to. they will be wittingly or unwittingly i hope in the A T's case, in CLOSING down areas to the angler. This is what is going to happen Reg. Most of the areas are not trawled or dragged in any event. You must begin to understand this or you will be in the same class as the do gooders and do more harm then good.The mcs have only one agenda and that is restriction Reg.

 

As i am not a selfish angler Reg, this is something that i care very much about. I can't put it any plainer than that. I hope you can understand exactly where i am coming from, this is why i am so very angry about any restrictions. If the eu, the government and the rest use taxpayers money into targeting what is wrong with the seas around our shores and further afield instead of pratting around, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

 

 

Hi Barry, I took the time to attend the Balanced Seas Meeting in Brighton, last November. From what I can remember, the only areas that are now being pushed forward for NTZ's are specifically SPA's, areas specifically designated under the Birds Directive for certain bird species of European importance re: rock outcrops, areas of rugged coastline that are at best, quite dangerous for the participation of sea angling/anglers anyway. You said that the location in your photo was an area set aside due to sea caves and I think underwater rock pinnacles, not SPA's so hopefully you and many others like you will now be unaffected. I will look back on the information I collected from that meeting to try and clarify this with you. However, you are still right to be very cautious about their agenda, we have all seen how quickly government funded organizations can change their minds.

 

If you want to know more you can try this link, I have been told it will provide you with the topics that have been discissed in each meeting.

 

http://www.balancedseas.org/news/download/88.pdf

 

The information provided, I presume, will be the same as the other three areas around our coastline.

 

Our area, Balanced Seas have just appointed a dedicated recreational angling liaison to meet up with local anglers. That person is Ben Godsall, his job will be to talk in detail to many local anglers to ascertain what the true feeling is amongst the RSA in Kent/Sussex/ East Hampshire. Hopefully, by the end we will all have a better understanding of what will happen and why.

 

There will be some anglers that will be affected, there is no way of avoiding them other than making sure that every sea anglers unites and tells them that we will not put up with restrictions, why should we when we are not to blame. The problem with this is Barry, some anglers, probably those that can't be bothered, are not prepared to do that, and as a result people like you, me and every other dedicated angler will suffer the consequences. When I asked Balanced Seas, why are we the only club attending this meeting, their reply was, we have contacted several clubs in our combined area, they have chosen not to attend in Sussex.

 

The link above will tell you the full story, only four anglers attended the Sussex meeting, everyone from our club, the only other angling representation was Alan Brothers. We will only have sea anglers to blame if we get shat-on. I think there were 24 commercial stakeholders at that meeting, so what chance have we got if we cannot be bothered. Anglers moan about the AT but honestly mate, we need to get a grip of our attitude towards our own representation.

 

Maybe this is an area where the angling press can do sea angling a big favour and ask anglers to stand up and say no. It seemed to work well with the sea rod licence.

[Steve Coppolo]

I have thought long and hard about the Golden Mile, I have spoken to many sea anglers, talked to other clubs during that process. For me, the Golden Mile is the first step forward as far as recognition for Sea Angling as a sport. It will not be THE CURE but it will help to secure grass roots angling, it will also help to put sea angling as a sport, on the front pages of most local papers, for a while anyway.

 

Hello Reg

What good has come of, or will come, of sea angling becoming recognised? How will the 'golden mile' secure grass roots angling? And why would sea angling want to be on the front pages of most local papers?

 

P.S. The link to the AT response to the CFP consultation appears, but you didn't post their response to the RSA strategy. Any chance of posting that up, please?

Edited February 27, 2010 by Steve Coppolo