Jump to content

Dumping fish

Zigs

By Zigs
in Conservation & Politics

 Share

Recommended Posts

barry luxton Member

barry luxton

Posted
Posted (edited)

Think it's a bit deeper than fish dumping, the E U masters have had control for thirty years or so, You would have thought they would have had something else sorted by now. Gonna be a few more years before the cfp is sorted, then a few more years to see if it can work or not, in our lifetime perhaps? So for thirty years or so, they have been part of the problem.

 

Anyway, does fishfight have or propose an alternative?

What about the liaison with the MCS, they are advocating 30% of our seas to be closed, ntz's, that means angling is under threat as we know it, yet the MCS are involved with this as well, so tread carefully before jumping springs to mind. How about greenpeace, i don't know what their agenda is with the anglers, so again i would like to reserch that one, unless someone has a few pointers.

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
  • 4 weeks later...
cleeclive Member

cleeclive

Posted
Posted
Think it's a bit deeper than fish dumping, the E U masters have had control for thirty years or so, You would have thought they would have had something else sorted by now. Gonna be a few more years before the cfp is sorted, then a few more years to see if it can work or not, in our lifetime perhaps? So for thirty years or so, they have been part of the problem.

 

Anyway, does fishfight have or propose an alternative?

What about the liaison with the MCS, they are advocating 30% of our seas to be closed, ntz's, that means angling is under threat as we know it, yet the MCS are involved with this as well, so tread carefully before jumping springs to mind. How about greenpeace, i don't know what their agenda is with the anglers, so again i would like to reserch that one, unless someone has a few pointers.

I could not agree more Barry, this has been going on since fishing began and the EU has only aggravated the problem. Without offering a viable alternative the campaign is pointless, MCZs protected areas etc which we are all getting in a fluster about because one of them might affect what we personally want to do, will help recruitmet in the long term as will restrictions on commercial fishing like days at sea. As we all know quotas create discards. Its a vicious circle. So long as there are a few fish left for me to catch during retirement we might as well leave it to the youngsters to sort out. I spent 30 odd years teaching people to murder fish. There are plenty out there with their fisheries science and save the planet degrees to sort it all out!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jaffa Member

Jaffa

Posted
Posted

The fish will look after themselves as long as we look after each other  and stop putting a huge layer of stupidity  and expense on everything we think we kno and start thinking for ourselves and stop looking at adverts. Just mho. 

 

 

 

 

For instance; Greenpeace, whatever it started as, is now a corporate brand  that will act it its own interests above all else. That's something we are all familiar with i'd guess.

 

 

 

 

MCS produced the first really good photographic guides to uk inshore life back when no one knew what was what down below. Respect for that but who exactly are they now? They are pushing for reserves but what happened to the science they used to do?

 

 

 

 

RSPCA seem to be the real  nutcase lot, living on the decent efforts of past members ,only escaping current real scrutiny because we have all been brought up with the notion they are a force for good.

 

 

 

 

Any angler group that ties themselves to these groups and ADVERTISES them are off the their heads imho. They will and are using you.

 

 

 

 

Just an opinion but i'm old enough to remember how cozy Greenpeace got with commercial fishermen  and how quickly they stabbed them in the back.

 

 

 

 

Chris 

Help predict climate change!

http://climateprediction.net

Link to comment
Share on other sites
barry luxton Member

barry luxton

Posted
Posted (edited)
The fish will look after themselves as long as we look after each other  and stop putting a huge layer of stupidity  and expense on everything we think we kno and start thinking for ourselves and stop looking at adverts. Just mho. 

 

MCS produced the first really good photographic guides to uk inshore life back when no one knew what was what down below. Respect for that but who exactly are they now? They are pushing for reserves but what happened to the science they used to do?

 

RSPCA seem to be the real  nutcase lot, living on the decent efforts of past members ,only escaping current real scrutiny because we have all been brought up with the notion they are a force for good.

 

Any angler group that ties themselves to these groups and ADVERTISES them are off the their heads imho. They will and are using you.

 

 

 

Ahh yes, my pet hate, the mcs. Unfortunately their foto's don't bear any fact when you try to link them to the areas that they say need protecting. In the example shown below, there's a lovley one put up of dolphins. Yet you can't really expect to see dolphins swimming at berry head unless you use your binoculars as the water is far too shallow and rocky. In addition if you navigate around the spiel put up, it states that trawlers operate in the area. They actually don't trawl berry head as it's too shallow and rocky. There is no evidance that the anglers take the wrass shown in the foto, nor any evidance regarding anglers damaging the habitate. So the only protection that is going to happen if they get their way is to ban anglers, thats mainly the summer cash spending holiday makers that the locals rely on and one potter that proberbly has been their since the rocks formed.

 

The anglers dictatorial governing body promotes the mcs on their web site, so as far as i can see the two orgs can go and take a hike.

 

http://www.yourseasyourvoice.com/mpa/?region=5&site=23

 

 

:fishing:

Anyone who reads this post, do me a very big personal favour please and all the other anglers who have fished this area, as i intend to continue taking my boy and all my family down to this area to fish perhaps two or three times a year, please vote very carefully no to the full protection of this area in particular, use my post above if you agree with me as it is based on fact that the mcs are lacking. :)

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
cleeclive Member

cleeclive

Posted
Posted
Ahh yes, my pet hate, the mcs. Unfortunately their foto's don't bear any fact when you try to link them to the areas that they say need protecting. In the example shown below, there's a lovley one put up of dolphins. Yet you can't really expect to see dolphins swimming at berry head unless you use your binoculars as the water is far too shallow and rocky. In addition if you navigate around the spiel put up, it states that trawlers operate in the area. They actually don't trawl berry head as it's too shallow and rocky. There is no evidance that the anglers take the wrass shown in the foto, nor any evidance regarding anglers damaging the habitate. So the only protection that is going to happen if they get their way is to ban anglers, thats mainly the summer cash spending holiday makers that the locals rely on and one potter that proberbly has been their since the rocks formed.

 

The anglers dictatorial governing body promotes the mcs on their web site, so as far as i can see the two orgs can go and take a hike.

 

http://www.yourseasyourvoice.com/mpa/?region=5&site=23

 

 

:fishing:

Anyone who reads this post, do me a very big personal favour please and all the other anglers who have fished this area, as i intend to continue taking my boy and all my family down to this area to fish perhaps two or three times a year, please vote very carefully no to the full protection of this area in particular, use my post above if you agree with me as it is based on fact that the mcs are lacking. :)

 

A couple of points here to consider:

 

Firstly Greenpeace who I do not trust an inch. However they are very clever at marketing their campaigns so long asthey are pictures of cute and cudly animals being slaughtered that they can show to Mum Dad and 2.5 kids on the 6pm news. After one of our prolonged studies into the discarding of '0' and '1' Gp fish by the brown shrinp Crangon crangon industry, we published a report in the Fishing News detailing the level of discarding hoping that Greenpeace might pick up on it. No way they could not market it. Every kid goes to the beach and catches a small fish from a rock pool puts it in a bucket and pokes and prods it for a few hours, there is no cruelty here is there!!!! Club a seal to death, murder a Dolphin, or chase a fox with a pack of hounds and there is hell on. What is the differenc?

 

As for 'No take zones 'or 'protected areas', they are a geat idea so long as they are not in my back yard, I think that this is the general view with most things that affect us personally. I am in favour of no take zones because if we take that trawing industry back around 40 years there were huge areas of ground that were not fished because we did not have the technology to work that hard ground, sonders Decca GPS Trawl and groundgear designs etc, so they existed naturally.

The 80's were the years of technological development in fisheries that left no grounds un-touched, and lead us towards the current crisis. Whether the proposed areas for conservation are in the right place and who should be excluded from those areas, will be up for much debate. Many of these decisions will be based on bits of research from in-experienced scientists and far too many stakeholders with lots of opinion and little knowledge. In other words the whole situation has become highly politicised and is likely to be a complete shambles, because it has too many objectives and is trying to please too many people. The outcome will be many not so pleased people who are happy about the concept so long as it is not in their back yard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
barry luxton Member

barry luxton

Posted
Posted (edited)

The example i have put up is fished by local anglers and during the very short summer period fished by holiday makers who arrive down the southwest spending valuable money into the local economy. The only commercial activity as i have mentioned is small time local potting, again that has been going on before i started going down there 35 years ago. The likes of the mcs have many very simular to the one i have shown. Therefore for many reasons this org is dangerous to the anglers and also a threat to local economies, they are playing with peoples livelihoods.

 

I would like to know what they are trying to achieve, answers on a postage stamp please.

 

Another example is again trying to exclude local and holiday makers fishing for summer special, mackerel etc from the pier area at babbacombe,there is no commercial activity at that one, again what are they trying to acheive apart from causing a lot of damage for little or no return.

 

NTZ's may well be a good idea on paper, the example off lundy will take a couple of generations to determin if it is going to be a sucess or not. Thats a long time to wait for little or no return, in the mean time, exclude all apart from the diver's, is that the way to go?

 

As for the commercial industry, most if not all are aware that it requires decent management, the E U are not fit for that purpose, they have had long enough by now to demonstrate, they have indeed shown their worth. :rolleyes:

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
cleeclive Member

cleeclive

Posted
Posted
The example i have put up is fished by local anglers and during the very short summer period fished by holiday makers who arrive down the southwest spending valuable money into the local economy. The only commercial activity as i have mentioned is small time local potting, again that has been going on before i started going down there 35 years ago. The likes of the mcs have many very simular to the one i have shown. Therefore for many reasons this org is dangerous to the anglers and also a threat to local economies, they are playing with peoples livelihoods.

 

I would like to know what they are trying to achieve, answers on a postage stamp please.

 

Another example is again trying to exclude local and holiday makers fishing for summer special, mackerel etc from the pier area at babbacombe,there is no commercial activity at that one, again what are they trying to acheive apart from causing a lot of damage for little or no return.

 

NTZ's may well be a good idea on paper, the example off lundy will take a couple of generations to determin if it is going to be a sucess or not. Thats a long time to wait for little or no return, in the mean time, exclude all apart from the diver's, is that the way to go?

 

As for the commercial industry, most if not all are aware that it requires decent management, the E U are not fit for that purpose, they have had long enough by now to demonstrate, they have indeed shown their worth. :rolleyes:

 

Barry, I know both of the areas that you talk about having lived in the Torbay area as a kid, and I can see where you are coming from. One of my concerns is niave young scientists making decisions with no historical knowledge and incapable of looking at the broarder economic picture, also too many stakeholders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
barry luxton Member

barry luxton

Posted
Posted
Barry, I know both of the areas that you talk about having lived in the Torbay area as a kid, and I can see where you are coming from. One of my concerns is niave young scientists making decisions with no historical knowledge and incapable of looking at the broarder economic picture, also too many stakeholders.

 

 

They are right about the rock pinnacles to the front of berry head, they are good holding areas, in particular for bait fish, the charter skippers will stop off to catch both herring and mackerel for the day, yet again it's rod and line fishing that they wish to exclude as you definitely don't see trawlers working there. Now and again the anglers may well commit a crime in bringing up a sailors ars@ole if they touch the pinnacle's while drifting over the mark, could that be what they are on about? :D

 

 

Yes science. There is no science to back up the mcs claims that there will be a benefit in closing these areas. never will be. Due to the fact that the people using them do not or cannot cause any damage to the area or stock in any event. Of course the spill over areas in both these cases make for the best protection, they fail to mention facts like there's 200' cliffs protecting the areas from being fished from shore. Perhaps they can ask for those areas to be closed, i would vote for it, might not achieve anything though, apart from looking good, on paper.

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

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