another load of busters browns

[Elton]

Guys - this is an important topic. Can we please lay off the personal stuff and keep it on track?

 

I've removed a few posts, but won't be able to keep doing so, so have asked that the thread is deleted if it descends into personal name-calling again and I'm not about.

 

Many thanks in advance,

 

Elton

[big_cod]

This is terrible news in the name of angling what the hell next if people are illegal netting why the hell arent caught but to impose this on anglers beggers beliefe boat licences my lord .

 

paul.

[Steve Coppolo]

Blimy Steve your inside my brain again. Nice to see a horrifeid responce by the AT regarding whats happend, don't think it will happen though, any bets.

 

No chance. How can they, when they are being advised by the people responsible?

 

I wonder when they planned to tell the wider angling population? If you hadn't posted details of the email that you were sent, none of us would have known anything about it. A bit different to when their favourite labour MP wants a bit of publicity, though, isn't it.

 

Anyway, that'll be you off the email list now. That's what you get for being honest and up front.

[Jim Roper]

I think this whole thing was started as a gloating exercise by Lord(nobody should eat fish) Mullet.

Edited December 25, 2009 by Jim Roper

[barry luxton]

This is was in a report on the fishing within the harbour by the mullet club in 2007.

 

NMC does not support any further limitation of access to enjoy the historic right to fish

from the Harbour shore. Access is already limited by the requirement to buy permits, by

the nature of large tracts of shoreline, by other usages such as boat moorings and by

voluntary withdrawal from particularly sensitive areas. Further limitation would damage

the socio-economic value of the fishery to negligible benefit, environmental or otherwise.

 

and within this latest news item.

 

Steve Smith, NMC Chairman, said its catch records indicated a steady decline in grey mullet.

He added: “The Christchurch Harbour mullet fishery is of national importance for recreational

anglers. Having urged its protection over a number of years, we are pleased to see it

safeguarded in this way.”

 

 

The only reference i could find regarding Mr Smiths comment of a steady decline is based again within the mullet clubs paper in 2007 that is spread over five years and accounts for 256 fish landed with no indication of a decline. So i would question that comment from Mr Smith and ask that evidence is provided to back it up.

 

For balance i would like to see coments from the nmc on the state of the fishery in weymouth harbour, as contary to christchurch, this year on many occasions i have seen many thousands within large shoals, from tiny to huge. Have they migrated from one to the other? (Tounge in cheek).

 

Serious, over at least five years, i have seen very large mullet in weymouth, however, this year in particular, i have seen many thousands of not so large fish. Again i have to question the demise of the fishing in christchurch as guesswork on someones behalf unless there is evidence, not based on hearsay.

Edited December 26, 2009 by barry luxton

[Elton]

1. What is the "illegal rod and line fishing" they talk about?

 

I'm still trying to figure this one out.

[ayjay]

I dont understand this can you cleverer guys please help-

 

1. What is the "illegal rod and line fishing" they talk about?

 

2. Day tickets etc to fish in salt water for a saltwater fish?

 

I'm only guessing, but I suspect it's just anglers fishing without the appropriate licences and tickets and also disregarding different seasons.

 

The harbour is part of the Royalty fishery and as such they make the rules.

 

It's not really salt water in the harbour, with both the Stour and Avon flowing through there it contains most of the coarse species as well as sea fish, but most importantly from the point of view of those who like to make rules and regulations there are the twin gods of salmon and sea trout.

[Dick Dastardly]

I'm only guessing, but I suspect it's just anglers fishing without the appropriate licences and tickets and also disregarding different seasons.

 

The harbour is part of the Royalty fishery and as such they make the rules.

 

It's not really salt water in the harbour, with both the Stour and Avon flowing through there it contains most of the coarse species as well as sea fish, but most importantly from the point of view of those who like to make rules and regulations there are the twin gods of salmon and sea trout.

 

 

Ah yes I think you may be right Ajay.Ive not fished Christchurch Harbour despite its reputation as an excellent Mullet venue so didn't realise quite how "non harbour" and "not so salty" it indeed is! A bit of research and chatting with a few mullet mates has enlightened me a bit more!

[Steve Coppolo]

This is was in a report on the fishing within the harbour by the mullet club in 2007.

 

NMC does not support any further limitation of access to enjoy the historic right to fish

from the Harbour shore. Access is already limited by the requirement to buy permits, by

the nature of large tracts of shoreline, by other usages such as boat moorings and by

voluntary withdrawal from particularly sensitive areas. Further limitation would damage

the socio-economic value of the fishery to negligible benefit, environmental or otherwise.

 

and within this latest news item.

 

Steve Smith, NMC Chairman, said its catch records indicated a steady decline in grey mullet.

He added: “The Christchurch Harbour mullet fishery is of national importance for recreational

anglers. Having urged its protection over a number of years, we are pleased to see it

safeguarded in this way.”

 

 

The only reference i could find regarding Mr Smiths comment of a steady decline is based again within the mullet clubs paper in 2007 that is spread over five years and accounts for 256 fish landed with no indication of a decline. So i would question that comment from Mr Smith and ask that evidence is provided to back it up.

 

For balance i would like to see coments from the nmc on the state of the fishery in weymouth harbour, as contary to christchurch, this year on many occasions i have seen many thousands within large shoals, from tiny to huge. Have they migrated from one to the other? (Tounge in cheek).

 

Serious, over at least five years, i have seen very large mullet in weymouth, however, this year in particular, i have seen many thousands of not so large fish. Again i have to question the demise of the fishing in christchurch as guesswork on someones behalf unless there is evidence, not based on hearsay.

 

In what context was the original email sent, Barry? Was it sent as a news item or press release on behalf of anyone?

 

I agree about the numbers of mullet about. There is no shortage of big mullet, from what I see and hear, and I'm puzzled by efforts to improve something that doesn't need improving.

[barry luxton]

In what context was the original email sent, Barry? Was it sent as a news item or press release on behalf of anyone?

 

I agree about the numbers of mullet about. There is no shortage of big mullet, from what I see and hear, and I'm puzzled by efforts to improve something that doesn't need improving.

 

Hi Steve, sorry for the delay, been busy eating, drinking and being horizontal on the couch. It was sent as an attachment by an email From Leon, obviously i was on that list to receive it. I don't know where Leon got it from.

 

Within this item the lack of mullet, bass etc is being used as the reason for the measures being taken. I think that there has been loads of questions asked by concerned anglers, however none of the guys who support these measures have replyed. There certainly isn't a shortage of mullet according to my own eyes, unless this one particular area has been decimated by rod and line anglers fishing illegally. I don't beleive that is the case for one minute. Thats why i headed it load of busters. And accordingly we all know that there is not a shortage of bass in any event. The government keep telling us of that one. Again that is why i find this lot of claims unrealistic, and so they are setting by-laws etc on the basis of a lie. If there was any hint of illegal fishing in the last ten years it should have been picked up by the guys on site and certainly been included in the comprehensive paper the mullet club submitted, there is nothing, ziltch, so it's a stitch up, in my veiw.

 

You hear of the saying that you can walk across the water on the backs of...... etc. In the case of weymouth for example, this is true. I have seen them. I expect to see very many next year as well, even so, i have not seen a mass of anglers fishing for them, it don't happen, so again it's lies,looking forward to being corrected, however, i don't think so.

Edited December 26, 2009 by barry luxton