Jump to content

Anglers Against Artificial Reefs - Why?

Elton

By Elton
in Sea Fishing

 Share

Recommended Posts

Elton Member

Elton

Posted
Posted

Posted on behalf of Stephen. Please add all replies to this thread:

 

To Sir/Madame,

 

I am undertaking a university project in which some protection reefs are to be installed and the local fisherman are against the scheme.

 

Looking at the plan for the project the fishing quay is a long way from the protection reefs, so the only concern from the fisherman I can see is the proximity of the reefs to the pier. So if you are able to suggest what the typical max casting distances from a pier we might be able to rearrange the reefs so as not to affect the fishermen.

 

Any help you can provide will be most appreciated and if you have any other ideas as to why the fishermen are against the scheme please fell free to comment.

 

Kind Regards

 

Stephen

Anglers' Net Shopping Partners - Please Support Your Forum

CLICK HERE for all your Amazon purchases - books, photography equipment, DVD's and more!

CLICK HERE for Go Outdoors. HUGE discounts!

 

FOLLOW ANGLERS' NET ON TWITTER- CLICK HERE - @anglersnet

PLEASE 'LIKE' US ON FACEBOOK - CLICK HERE

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Norm B Member

Norm B

Posted
Posted
Posted on behalf of Stephen. Please add all replies to this thread:

:lol: I would gladly have artificial reefs as they would encourage and hold fish, giving them protection and providing food. As long as they didn't interfere with angling they'd be an asset to angling. They would need legal protection though as once they became a haven for fish the netters, towed and static ,would "want their share". :lol:

 

Posted on behalf of Stephen. Please add all replies to this thread:

:lol: I would gladly have artificial reefs as they would encourage and hold fish, giving them protection and providing food. As long as they didn't interfere with angling they'd be an asset to angling. They would need legal protection though as once they became a haven for fish the netters, towed and static ,would "want their share". :lol:

http://www.seaanglingnews.co.uk
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Deepseacodmaster Member

Deepseacodmaster

Posted
Posted

:lol: I would gladly have artificial reefs as they would encourage and hold fish, giving them protection and providing food. As long as they didn't interfere with angling they'd be an asset to angling. They would need legal protection though as once they became a haven for fish the netters, towed and static ,would "want their share". :lol:

 

I agree with you Norman

Cheers

Ivan

Visit Old Glossop to see my home and website

or visit Glossopdale Sea Angling Club

and Old Glossop Clocks for my latest venture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
glennk Member

glennk

Posted
Posted

I cant speak for other areas, but I know a little bit about my area, the north east and particularly the Yorkshire Coast. The reason I would be against artificial reefs is because we have masses of natural ones and quite a few man made in the form of wrecks. The area of coastline off Whitby and the wider Yorkshire coast has been home to an abundance of sea life for thousands of years. The fish and crustaceans and whatever else is down there (Those weird sponges that the weirdos at natural england love so much) have never needed any support to live in the past. Only in recent times and due to man's greed have we seen any damage and decline of these species. The same reefs and natural environment that supported these species for thousands of years are still there. Please spend your cash and research time in working out how you can stop large scale commercial discards rather than wasting it on un-needed underwater reefs.

 

Best fishes - Glenn

Kayak Fishing Launch Sites

 

COD COD COD COD COD

 

50lb Shore Cod

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
barry luxton Member

barry luxton

Posted
Posted (edited)

I remember the 'scandal' of american utility ships being sent here for breaking up, the row it caused by not in my back yardies. They would have made super reefs to create new habitats. Don't know why a lot more redundant ships and rigs are not sunk. It would do a heck of a lot more to the habitat than these 'greeny' restrictive quangos and the do gooders could ever offer. Bring em on i say.

 

Why do you think a charter skipper would say travel 30 odd mile to get to a typical ship wreck. Yes correct, because thats where the fish live.

 

Last year or so there was local hostility regarding an artificial surfing reef being created on the south coast, more structure the better in my mind.

Edited by barry luxton

Free to choose apart from the ones where the trust poked their nose in. Common eel. tope. Bass and sea bream. All restricted.


New for 2016 TAT are the main instigators for the demise of the u k bass charter boat industry, where they went screaming off to parliament and for the first time assisting so called angling gurus set up bass take bans with the e u using rubbish exaggerated info collected by ices from anglers, they must be very proud.

Upgrade, the door has been closed with regards to anglers being linked to the e u superstate and the failed c f p. So TAT will no longer need to pay monies to the EAA anymore as that org is no longer relevant to the u k . Goodbye to the europeon anglers alliance and pathetic restrictions from the e u.

Angling is better than politics, ban politics from angling.

Consumer of bass. where is the evidence that the u k bass stock need angling trust protection. Why won't you work with your peers instead of castigating them. They have the answer.

Recipie's for mullet stew more than welcomed.

Angling sanitation trust and kent and sussex sea anglers org delete's and blocks rsa's alternative opinion on their face book site. Although they claim to rep all.

new for 2014. where is the evidence that the south coast bream stock need the angling trust? Your campaign has no evidence. Why won't you work with your peers, the inshore under tens? As opposed to alienating them? Angling trust failed big time re bait digging, even fish legal attempted to intervene and failed, all for what, nothing.

Looks like the sea angling reps have been coerced by the ifca's to compose sea angling strategy's that the ifca's at some stage will look at drafting into legislation to manage the rsa, because they like wasting tax payers money. That's without asking the rsa btw. You know who you are..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Walker Member

Steve Walker

Posted
Posted

I think you'll need to ask your particular complainers what their problem is - I think most anglers would welcome a reef.

 

Maybe they are concerned that it will be too far from the pier and they won't be able to cast to it? :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
barry luxton Member

barry luxton

Posted
Posted
I think you'll need to ask your particular complainers what their problem is - I think most anglers would welcome a reef.

 

Maybe they are concerned that it will be too far from the pier and they won't be able to cast to it? :lol:

 

As an example there is a wreck or two off portland that actually hold trigger fish, they are caught every year by the shore angler, as the distance is at most 150 yard. So again, more wrecks the merrier. :D

Free to choose apart from the ones where the trust poked their nose in. Common eel. tope. Bass and sea bream. All restricted.


New for 2016 TAT are the main instigators for the demise of the u k bass charter boat industry, where they went screaming off to parliament and for the first time assisting so called angling gurus set up bass take bans with the e u using rubbish exaggerated info collected by ices from anglers, they must be very proud.

Upgrade, the door has been closed with regards to anglers being linked to the e u superstate and the failed c f p. So TAT will no longer need to pay monies to the EAA anymore as that org is no longer relevant to the u k . Goodbye to the europeon anglers alliance and pathetic restrictions from the e u.

Angling is better than politics, ban politics from angling.

Consumer of bass. where is the evidence that the u k bass stock need angling trust protection. Why won't you work with your peers instead of castigating them. They have the answer.

Recipie's for mullet stew more than welcomed.

Angling sanitation trust and kent and sussex sea anglers org delete's and blocks rsa's alternative opinion on their face book site. Although they claim to rep all.

new for 2014. where is the evidence that the south coast bream stock need the angling trust? Your campaign has no evidence. Why won't you work with your peers, the inshore under tens? As opposed to alienating them? Angling trust failed big time re bait digging, even fish legal attempted to intervene and failed, all for what, nothing.

Looks like the sea angling reps have been coerced by the ifca's to compose sea angling strategy's that the ifca's at some stage will look at drafting into legislation to manage the rsa, because they like wasting tax payers money. That's without asking the rsa btw. You know who you are..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ColinW Member

ColinW

Posted
Posted

Unfortunately the more rabid greenies insist on a quite ridiculous amount of preparation before a ship can be sunk for this purpose. I saw a documentary about the preparation of a U.S. aircraft carrier, the USS Oriskany, and it cost them over $20 million to prepare it. They seem to ignore the fact that the wrecks of ships sunk by U-boats, sent down with no such clean-up operations, are full of sea life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We and our partners use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences, repeat visits and to show you personalised advertisements. By clicking “I Agree”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies. However, you may visit Cookie Settings to provide a controlled consent.

  I accept