Jump to content

Oh my God.


Recommended Posts

I got an email today from someone who obviously wants to remain anonymous, but who had some important information they wanted to put into the public domain. Apparently, they tried to post the info onto the two busy sea angling forums, including this one, without success. So I've been asked to assist. I've made a few enquiries and, as far as I can tell, the documents I'm about to post are genuine. They make disturbing reading. This is the first, two other will follow shortly.

 

................................................................................

..................

 

 

ANNEX 1: TEMPLATE FOR TWO PAGE SUMMARY

 

Project code & title:

 

MF1203 Improved understanding and management of recreational sea angling

 

 

Author : Mike Armstrong - Mike.armstrong@cefas.co.uk

 

 

 

Two page summary title question:

 

What information to we need to improve our understanding of recreational sea angling in the UK?

 

Bass – an important recreational sea angling species in England and Wales

 

Cod – a popular angling species that is over-fished and subject to EU cod recovery plans in many areas around the UK.

 

Funded by Defra

 

 

 

 

What is the Problem? [maximum word count: 160]

 

Sea angling is a major recreational activity around our coasts, and it has been estimated that between one and two million people go sea angling in the UK. In the past, the impacts of sea angling on fish stocks has been largely ignored in Europe, whereas considerable effort is expended in evaluating the impacts of commercial fishing. EU regulations on fishery data collection now require Member States to provide estimates of recreational catches of a number of species including bass, cod and sharks. This is to ensure that the conservation status of the stocks can be more accurately evaluated by accounting for all significant sources of fishing-induced mortality. In the United States, recreational catches of many species are similar to or larger than commercial catches, and there are major survey programmes to quantify recreational catches. Without such data, it is extremely difficult to determine how management should be tailored to meet the requirements of both sectors whilst achieving conservation targets.

 

 

 

 

What are the aims of the project? [maximum word count: 185]

 

 

A first aim of the project was to collate existing knowledge of important UK recreational fishery species including bass, cod, tope, grey mullet, flounder and salmon, and to review the management of commercial and recreational fisheries for the same or similar species in other parts of the world. A study of the socio-economic benefits of the two activities was also planned. We need the same type of information on recreational fishing effort and catches as is collated for commercial fisheries, so that the relative impacts of the two activities can be correctly evaluated. An important aspect of the project has therefore been to develop data sources and methods for developing time-series of data on sea angling effort, quantities of fish retained and discarded, for shore-based and boat-based angling for species such as bass. During the course of the project, the aims regarding data collection have been strengthened in response to the developing EU regulations specifying types and amounts of recreational fishery data to be collected by Member States.

 

 

 

Which policy areas will the research inform? [maximum word count: 75]

 

 

The project will support Defra’s Recreational Sea angling Strategy, as well as helping to address policy requirements in relation to meeting the demands of the EU Control Regulation and the EU Data Collection Framework.

 

 

 

 

What are the results from the project and how will they be used? [maximum word count: 430]

 

The series of case studies on bass, cod, tope, grey mullet, flounder and salmon have collated a wide range of information on biology, fisheries and management that can be used to inform policy development in relation to recreational fisheries. The recreational fisheries for these species have quite distinct characteristics that will affect how management could be tailored to identify and meet conservation needs whilst also meeting the perceived needs and objectives of commercial and recreational fishermen. For example, tope is a vulnerable species due to its biology (e.g. low fecundity), is heavily depleted in UK waters, and is mainly a by-catch in commercial fisheries. It is however a highly esteemed game fish for anglers who practice catch-and-release for this species. Cod stocks have also become severely depleted and measures to promote recovery are difficult to evaluate because the data for evaluating stock trends and exploitation status do not include all forms of fishery induced mortality. Cod are caught widely by anglers from boat and shore, yet the quantities caught in UK waters are largely unknown. Bass stocks expanded in abundance and geographic range during the 1990s, and their inshore distribution and tendency to stay close to the same location most of the time can cause conflicts between the needs of recreational and commercial fishermen that are difficult to resolve without accurate data on the activities and catches of both sectors. The results of this project should help to establish schemes for data collection to address these shortcomings.

It is very difficult to develop statistics on the socio-economic benefits of commercial and recreational fishing that allow a direct comparison. Plans for a socio-economic study as part of this project did not come to fruition, and the focus has shifted more towards the equally difficult task of quantifying the sea angling effort and catches for shore-based and boat-based angling. Approaches based on large-scale survey methods developed in the USA and elsewhere are being evaluated. These require methods to identify the population of anglers to be surveyed, based on existing lists (e.g. charter vessels) or methods such as randomised telephone surveys, and schemes to collect representative data on catch rates. An electronic logbook was developed in this project to facilitate recording of fishing activities and catches by anglers. However, uptake of the scheme has been very low due to early withdrawal of support from a major angling body. It is vital for such schemes that the angling community recognises the implications for conservation and management of stocks of having inadequate data on fishing activities and catches.

 

 

 

Where can I find more information? [maximum word count: 25]

 

For more information, contact Mike Armstrong (mike.armstrong@cefas.co.uk) Further information on marine fisheries research can be obtained from the Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science, Lowestoft, Suffolk (www.cefas.co.uk).

DRUNK DRIVERS WRECK LIVES.

 

Don't drink and drive.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 36
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Project details

1. Defra Project code - MF1203

 

2. Project title - Improved understanding and management of recreational sea angling

 

3. Defra Project Manager - Michelle Verrecchia

 

4. Name and address of contractor

 

Cefas

Lowestoft Laboratory

Pakefield Road

Lowestoft

Suffolk

Postcode NR33 0HT

 

5. Contractor’s Project Manager - Mike Armstrong

 

6. Project: start date ................1/4/2009

 

end date .................31/3/2011

 

 

 

 

 

Scientific objectives

 

Please list the scientific objectives as set out in the contract. If necessary these can be expressed in an abbreviated form. Indicate where amendments have been agreed with the Defra Project Manager, giving the date of amendment.

 

Agreed changes to objectives in 2009/10

 

Management of this project at Cefas was passed from Mike Smith to Mike Armstrong during 2009.

Defra agreed (Anthony Hynes; 29 July 2009) to changes in the aims of this project to increase the focus on the data requirements for establishing a recreational fisheries survey to estimate recreational catches as required by the EU Data Collection Framework and the EU Control Regulation. This was in response to new data collection requirements from the EU, and also the difficulties in recruiting a fisheries economist and lack of cooperation from RSA representatives that was holding up the project. The need to quantify recreational fishery removals was a theme running through all the original objectives, and in fact without reliable information on recreational removals it is near impossible to consider the relative impacts of recreational and commercial fishing to inform management. There are no existing surveys to estimate recreational fishery removals of species such as bass and cod in English waters. A pilot study has recently been conducted in Wales but cannot easily be extrapolated to English waters. The new technical and scientific aims are detailed below (previous aims are available from the project tender documentation and earlier reports).

 

 

Objectives remaining from original agreement

 

Objective 1

 

1.1. To describe the effects of the RSA and commercial fishing sectors as anthropogenic sources of mortality on resource species in terms of population demography and biology (e.g. growth rate, maturity, fecundity, distribution, migration, weight length relationship);

 

1.2. To analyse and evaluate the efficacy and relevance of existing management measures in relation to Defra’s RSA strategy through different case studies, both in the UK and elsewhere;

 

1.3. To provide basic life history and fishery data and parameters for modelling frameworks used for assessment and evaluation of potential management measures to benefit RSA.

 

Revised Objectives

 

The original MF1203 proposal contained only some elements needed to establish the likely magnitude of recreational catches of the designated species, or the design and cost-benefit of the necessary surveys to quantify the catches. Elements of the original objectives related to estimation of RSA catches included:

 

Objective 2.2. to implement a pilot study to assess the feasibility of adapting the methodology used by Cefas for estimating bass catch and effort in the commercial sector, for the purposes of estimating catch and fishing effort (participation and activity) for bass in the RSA sector. (Bass logbook data).

 

3)Objective 3.1. to develop data sources and methodology to assess stock and fishery status for key RSA species, building on work carried out for Defra’s bass management measures consultation in 2005/6 and investigating potential data sources and methods that could be applied to situations where data are more limited.

 

3.2. to develop and apply models to quantify the impacts of fishing mortality due to targeted RSA and commercial catches on fishery yields and stock structure, taking account of salient life-history traits, under different assumptions of fisheries intensity, varying potential regulations (e.g. size limits, bag limits, restricted areas) and considering different population parameters (e.g. growth rate, recruitment) for a range of species with contrasting fishery and biological characteristics (e.g. bass, cod, grey mullet & tope).

 

Three new objectives were agreed to address the needs for quantifying recreational fishery catches:

 

Objective 2: Collate and evaluate all available information on populations, sampling frames and magnitude / distribution of recreational fishing activities relevant for designing a recreational fishery survey in the UK.

 

Objective 3: Evaluate the applicability and likely costs of different survey approaches described in the recent ICES Workshop on Sampling Methods for Recreational Fisheries (WKSMRF, Formatted: Bullets and Numbering

 

Objective 4: Develop a sampling scheme for inclusion in the UK National Programme for 2011&2012, and trial a limited-scale application.

The utility of logbooks to estimate CPUE trends (original objective 2.2) will still be addressed, although uptake of the logbook scheme has been extremely poor.

 

 

Summary of Progress

 

Please summarise, in layperson’s terms, scientific progress since the last report/start of the project and how this relates to the objectives. Please provide information on actual results where possible rather than merely a description of activities.

 

Overview

 

During the second year of this project, progress has been made against milestone 1, with the completion of all the desk based case studies. Other work has been carried out to progress the data collection aims of the project, including the continued operation of a voluntary logbook scheme for anglers that was introduced in January 2009, the collection of data relating to trends in local angling activity on an east coast beach, and a collation of information on historical estimates of recreational fishery catches for submission to the EU along with the UK National DCF Programme Bid for 2011-2013.

 

Progress on Objective 1

 

Desk-based case studies were carried out for bass, cod, grey mullet, and tope, as having different characteristics and levels of knowledge. An additional case study, salmon, was carried out centred on existing, well-established management measures and their impacts on commercial and recreational fisheries. In response to requests from the RSA sector a case study on flounder was also included.

 

The Case studies for bass, cod, tope, grey mullet, flounder and salmon were completed and are attached to this Annual report. Some revision may be necessary before the end of the MF1203 contract to bring the stock assessment results for cod up to date.

 

New datasets

 

Voluntary logbook scheme for anglers

 

The initial Objective 2.2. to implement a pilot study to assess the feasibility of adapting the methodology used by Cefas for estimating bass catch and effort in the commercial sector, for the purposes of estimating catch and fishing effort (participation and activity) for bass in the RSA sector envisaged the development of a logbook scheme to collect the necessary information.

 

An electronic logbook interface was designed during the first year of the project to enable anglers to record catch and effort data and return them electronically by email. The project originally specified that this would be for bass only, but it was broadened to include most species commonly taken by RSA, in response to requests from RSA representatives (NFSA). This logbook was launched in January 2009, ahead of schedule, but take up was very low due to the unfavourable political climate and heightened anxiety in the RSA community following the publication of proposed EU controls on RSA. This situation worsened when the Angling Trust (which had subsumed NFSA) publicly withdrew cooperation with the (MF1203) project in April 2009. During 2009, Angling Trust has subsequently gone through a period of internal upheaval involving the resignation of a number of staff, but it has not as yet re-engaged with this project.

 

The angler logbook scheme was therefore continued through 2009, with a very low input. Two anglers have returned logbooks for the whole year, with a further 4 submitting returns for part of the year. Although cooperation has been limited the scheme has provided some preliminary baseline data and indicates that despite some negative press some anglers are still prepared to commit their time voluntarily in support of improved research and management. The possibility of implementing the logbook interface as a web-page on the Cefas internet site will be investigated in order to improve efficiency and reduce administrative effort. The logbook data will be analysed in the final year of the project.

 

 

Trends in localised angling activity

 

Numbers of anglers fishing on Pakefield Beach (Lowestoft) were recorded several times daily (largely limited to daylight hours and weekdays) over a period of just over a year. This has resulted in a data set of just under 1000 records which will be explored using general linear modelling during the final year of the project to explore trends in angling activity in relation to temporal (e.g. time of day, day of week, season, holiday) and environmental (tidal state, weather conditions) variables. This beach is considered a fairly typical east coast beach and temporal trends in activity are likely to be similar in many other locations in the southern North sea and eastern English Channel.

 

 

Other related work

 

Cefas undertook a short term contract for Natural England during the first quarter of 2009 which entailed a desk study on the biology, behaviour and angling methods used for species commonly caught by RSA and a small scale survey of anglers to ascertain information on their catch and effort and attitudes towards conservation and potential control measures for marine conservation zones (MCZs). The final report was submitted to Natural England prior to the end of FY 2008/9, but has not been made publicly available. Data on angling activity collected during this programme of work were compared against other published sources (e.g. Drew, 2004) and were found to be generally in good agreement with these.

 

 

Progress on objectives 2 - 4

 

There is a DCF requirement for member States to estimate recreational catches of cod, sharks and freshwater eels in the North Sea and eastern Channel, and bass, salmon, sharks and eels in western waters. The EU Control regulation requires recreational catches of recovery plan species to be recorded for boats “carrying the national flag”. During 2009/10, the UK DCF submissions to the Commission included results of pilot studies carried out by the Countryside Commission for Wales (CCW). However, the UK also informed the Commission that information from Defra project MF1203 would be provided as a pilot study to define the nature of a recreational fishery survey in England, if such a survey was to be undertaken. There is considerable experience worldwide in implementing such surveys, particularly in the US, Australia and New Zealand. A number of European countries including France and Germany have already instigated large-scale surveys to meet DCF requirements. To review the methodology, ICES convened a Workshop on Sampling Methods for Recreational Fisheries [WKSMRF] in Nantes in April 2009, which was chaired and attended by Cefas, with a US co-chair. The Workshop report provides a detailed review of survey methods available, as well as information on recreational fisheries in each Member State.

 

Based on the WKSMRF report, a review of data from previous surveys of RSA activity and catches was compiled by Cefas, highlighting the specific needs for data in terms of populations, sampling frames and survey design, and evaluating the robustness of previous RSA catch estimates in relation to survey design (Armstrong and Bailey, 2010; attached). The report highlighted that many of the previous studies have focussed on socio economics of RSA and were not specifically designed to provide robust estimates of recreational effort and catches by species. However, a number of the studies provided fairly consistent estimates of annual fishing effort per angler (Fig. 1). The Cefas MF1203 report was submitted to the European Commission in 2010.

 

Work on Objectives 2 – 4 in year 3 of the project will focus on compiling the information needed to establish a suitable sampling survey design, taking into account the DCF and Control regulation requirements. Cefas is currently liaising with the MMO and CCW to establish how this could be done, bearing in mind the legal requirements as well as the resource requirements. Cefas has compiled registers of charter / for-hire boats used for recreational fishing which could form the basis of list frames for sampling, although these may not yet be comprehensive. The annual Cefas ports census in 2010 is including the collection of contact details for angling charter vessels in the area covered by the census in 2010 (NE and NW England, and Wales).

 

 

 

 

Amendments to project

 

9. Are the current scientific objectives appropriate for the remainder of the project? ................. YES

 

If NO, explain the reasons for any change giving the financial, staff and time implications.

Contractors cannot alter scientific objectives without the agreement of the Defra Project Manager.

 

Section 7. outlines the background to, and subsequent, changes in the project that were approved by Defra.

 

Progress in relation to targets

 

 

10. (a) List the agreed milestones for the year/period under report as set out in the contract or any agreed contract variation.

It is the responsibility of the contractor to check fully that all milestones have been met and to provide a detailed explanation when they have not been achieved.

 

Milestone Target date Milestones met

Number Title In full On time

 

1

Four case studies completed and documented

31/3/2009

Yes

Yes

 

2

Fieldwork for RSA bass logbook scheme completed.

 

Alternative electronic logbook scheme launched encompassing all species, but take up very low. Fieldwork on bass not carried out as project objectives were changed.

30/6/09

Yes (partially)

Yes

 

3

Fifth case study completed and documented.

Fifth case study completed and additional case study (requested by NFSA) on flounders completed

30/6/09

Yes

Yes

 

4

Bass assessment model extended to include spatial structuring.

The revised objectives, agreed by Defra do not include this task.

31/12/09

No

No

 

5

Preliminary results of evaluation of new datasets from RSA sector and other sources and their potential application.

Some new datasets relating to RSA and species of interest have been compiled and some evaluated. However, non-cooperation by Angling Trust has limited potential for progress in this area.

Yes (partially)

Yes (partially)

 

(B) Do the remaining milestones look realistic? .................................................................. NO

 

If you have answered NO, please provide an explanation.

 

The remaining original milestones are not relevant under the revised objectives of the project. The new objectives have not explicitly specified milestones.

 

 

 

Publications and other outputs

 

11. (a) Please give details of any outputs, e.g. published papers/presentations, meetings attended during this reporting period.

 

Three Cefas staff (Mike Armstrong, Mike Smith and Andrew Bailey) attended and contributed to the ICES Workshop on Sampling Methods for Recreational Fisheries (April 2010). Mike Armstrong was Co-Chair off the meeting and Mike Smith made presentations on UK recreational fisheries. All contributed to the meeting and the report:

 

ICES, 2009. Report of the ICES Workshop on Sampling Methods for Recreational Fisheries. ICES CM 2009\ACOM:41. 225pp.

 

Bailey, A. and Armstrong, M.J. 2010. A review of surveys of marine recreational fishing activity around the United Kingdom. MF1203 report to European Commission. 19pp.

 

Smith, M.T., Pawson, M.G. & Bailey, A., 2009. A baseline study of Recreational Sea Anglers: the species and areas targeted, techniques used and acceptability of proposed Marine Conservation Zones. Final report to Natural England. Commercial in confidence. 150pp.

 

Walmsley, S., Pawson, M., Smith, M. and Potter, E. 2010. Case studies on the general life history, commercial and recreational fisheries, and management of fisheries, for bass, cod, grey mullet, tope, flounder and salmon in UK waters and comparisons with similar stocks worldwide.

 

Report for Defra Contract MF1203 “Improved understanding and management of recreational sea angling”. 62pp

 

 

(B) Have opportunities for exploiting Intellectual Property arising out of this work been identified? .......................................................... NO

 

If YES, please give details.

© Has any other action been taken to initiate Knowledge Transfer? ................................. NO

 

If YES, please give details.

 

Future work

 

12. Please comment briefly on any new scientific opportunities which may arise from the project.

 

Declaration

 

13. I declare that the information I have given is correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.

 

M.J.Armstrong

Date

6 October 2010

Position held

MF1203 Project Manager

DRUNK DRIVERS WRECK LIVES.

 

Don't drink and drive.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Proposal for recreational fishery sampling by MMO and Cefas in England in 2011, including one-year extension of MF1203 (Improved management and understanding of recreational sea angling) to collect catch, effort and socio-economic data from shore-based and boat-based recreational fishing around the English coast.

 

Prepared by Mike Armstrong (Cefas) and Kevin Williamson (MMO)

26 November 2010

 

 

Background

 

The objectives of Defra project MF1203 were modified for 2010/11 to increase the focus on meeting the requirements of the EU data Collection Framework and the EU Control Regulation for providing catch estimates of defined species / areas. These requirements are:

 

DCF: quarterly recreational catches of bass, salmon, sharks and freshwater eels in the NE Atlantic and cod, sharks and freshwater eels in the North Sea and eastern Channel, achieving annual relative standard error of 20%;

 

Control regulation: annual catches of recovery plan stocks (e.g. cod, hake) taken by (registered) recreational fishing vessels.

 

It has not been possible to implement such surveys in 2010, and Defra are considering extending MF1203 for one year and to use deferred income to carry out pilot studies. The surveys would include collection of socio-economic data to help determine the value of the fisheries.

 

Proposed work for 2010/11 and 2011/12

 

It is proposed that the survey and sampling work required for meeting the DCF and Control regulation requirements are split between Cefas MF1203 and the MMO. It is also proposed that the new IFCAs from April 2011 onwards are encouraged to become involved in regional data collection, using their detailed local knowledge. The proposed division of responsibilities and resources is indicated below.

 

Task 1: Carrying out a series of nation-wide surveys to establish the demography and magnitude of recreational sea angling activities in England (MMO).

 

During Quarter 1 in 2011, the MMO will include questions on recreational sea angling in a multipurpose government social survey covering 2100 households /month. This is a national survey using random probability sampling. It collects general information about the households concerned, and thus provides overall demographic information to complement the results from the specific questions asked. Further details are in Annex 1. The data will guide the allocation of sampling schemes to estimate catch rates, particularly for shore-based and private boats for which there are no list frames available, and to provide raising factors to estimate total catches for shore-based and private boat fishermen. This exercise will be repeated during later months in 2011 to allow estimation of the seasonal pattern of activity to be made.

 

The following types of questions will be included (value of “x” will be 12 months for first survey, and 3 months for subsequent quarterly surveys):

 

How many members of your household participated in recreational sea fishing in the last X months? (If answer = 0, skip remaining questions)

 

How many shore-based sea angling trips did you undertake in the last (X months)?

 

Is that the same level the other members of your household undertook in that period?

 

In what county did most of these shore angling trips take place

 

Of the total number of trips quoted, how many times did you take part in trips on commercially-run sea angling boats for which you paid a charter fee or other fee in the last (X months)?

 

What was the main county from which these charter boats operated?

 

Again, of the total number of trips quoted, how many sea angling trips did you make on a private boat owned by you or a fishing companion in the last (X months)?

 

What was the main county from which you made private boat trips?

 

How many recreational fishing trips did you make using gears other than rod and line in the last (X months)?

 

What is the main non-angling gear that you use?

 

What national sea angling body, if any, do you belong to?

 

What local angling club, if any, do you belong to?

 

 

Task 2: Conducting an intercept survey of licensed recreational fishing boats (MMO)

 

For head boats(2), charter vessels(3) and for-hire(4) companies with contact details linked to licenses and MCA documentation, an initial telephone census will be used to compile information on the vessels, such as location, type and frequency of trips, species targeting, number of anglers, recent catches etc. Data are also available from recent vessel censuses carried out by Cefas contractors at English and Welsh ports to estimate numbers of vessels targeting bass. Use will be made of this information and also of the local knowledge from Marine Management Organisation local staff as well as staff in local Sea Fisheries Committees to update the details of vessels carrying out such activity to provide an operational register of recreational fishing boats that will form the sample target population.

 

 

(2) Short fishing trips taking anglers on a casual first-come first-served basis, e.g. mackerel fishing trips.

(3) Vessel and skipper/crew hired by a group for a defined period.

(4) Vessel hired without skipper/crew.

 

 

 

The vessel list information will be used to carry out a telephone census of vessels to validate the information held. Following this a stratified direct interview survey involving completion of logbooks will be set up based on the information from the telephone census. The skippers or vessel owners will be requested to provide a record of the activity taking place on their vessels over a set period of time. This will include details of the total number of trips in survey period. For each trip the operator will be asked to report the following information:

 

- Number of anglers on board

- Species targeted for the trip

- Type and location of activity (e.g. wreck fishing / indication of location of activity)

- Species caught, and for each species:

- Number and length of fishes caught

- operators will be asked to provide the weight if possible, but it is thought unlikely that they will be able to provide such information, and as such it is envisaged that the use of keys to estimate weight from length obtained from other modules of the DCF will need to be used

 

- Number of fish retained

- Number of fish returned

- Estimate of number of fish surviving return

 

Specific emphasis will be placed on the recording of species as required under the DCF and the requirements of the Control Regulation. Additional species will be covered as part of the exercise in order to validate the recording of information by respondents. (Note – previous pilot exercises in the UK have demonstrated the necessity of recording the full range of activity rather than just specific species of interest in order to allow the accuracy of reporting to be assessed)

 

Raising the catches to the overall fleet of charter vessels will be based on the area-season stratified vessel list, with appropriate adjustment for non-responses.

 

 

Task 3: Conducting an intercept survey of shore-based and private boat recreational fishermen (MF1203)

 

For shore angling and private boats, there are no list frames and the population must be estimated by the ONS survey in order to derive raising factors for estimating quarterly and annual catches based on randomised on-site intercept surveys. A possibility also exists to develop lists of individuals belonging to local clubs and nationwide angling organisations such as the Angling Trust (AT) and the Bass Anglers Sportfishing Society (BASS) and to randomly sample these as a separate stratum using a self-reporting system. Possible novel approaches involve the development of mobile phone apps to collect and upload data, or internet sites for uploading data (these have been developed in other countries). In general, only a minority of anglers belong to clubs or associations, and these do not include visiting anglers from other countries.

 

The proposed general approach is to divide the coast of England into geographic strata (e.g. the 10 IFCA areas) and identify access points that can be visited using a random or random-systematic basis to carry out observations and complete questionnaires with anglers. Local knowledge is needed to classify access sites according to the amount of fishing and sizes of catches of the target species, allowing increased sampling (with known sampling probabilities) at sites contributing more to the overall species catches. A methodology has been developed by the Countryside Council for Wales using questionnaires completed on-site with anglers intercepted by observers. These questionnaires will collect socio-economic data as well as data on catches and effort.

 

It is planned to carry out an initial pilot study in each of the IFCA regions using part-time contract staff to carry out surveys, funded through MF1203. Another approach could be to put the work out to competitive tender. Based on the pilot results, the requirements for a full-scale survey to meet DCF requirements will be established, taking into account the relative catches and variance of catches estimated for shore based, private boats and charter boats estimated in Tasks 1-3. It is hoped that from April 2011, it will be possible to obtain collaboration with the IFCAs in carrying out the surveys, using their local knowledge and utilising their offices as bases for the surveys. A database will need to be set up (probably in ACCESS) to capture the data.

 

The work will be conducted in three phases. A possible programme based on remaining funds in MF1203 is laid out in Annex 2.

 

Task 4: Preparation of a pilot study report for submission to the European Commission.

 

The work undertaken in 2011 will form part of the UK National DCF programme for the first of the years in the period 2011-13. The results will be presented with the Annual report of DCF sampling activities for 2011, to be submitted in 2012.

 

 

 

Annex 1: Office for National Statistics Opinions survey

 

The Office for National Statistics Opinions survey uses random probability sampling broken into Government Office Region, proportion of households with no car, socio-economic classification and the proportion of people aged over 65 years. The survey draws its sample from the Royal Mail's Postcode Address File (PAF) of 'small users'. This PAF contains the addresses for approximately 27 million private households in the UK which receive fewer than 50 items of mail per day. It is the most up-to-date and complete address database in the UK. Each month 67 postal sectors are selected, with probability of selection proportionate to size. Within each sector, 30 addresses are chosen randomly giving a final sample of 2,010 addresses each month.

 

At the start of the interview, the interviewer determines the household composition and then he or she selects the respondent from among all those aged 16 and over. This selection is performed at random using a Kish grid. All household members over the age of 15 years are asked a set of classificatory questions but only one person per household is selected to answer the Opinions module questions. Proxy responses are not permitted on the Opinions modules. As only one person per household is interviewed, the data are subsequently weighted to correct for the unequal probability of selection that this causes. Applying these weights will gross up the data by age, sex and region to the population control totals used on the Labour Force Survey (LFS). As well as accounting for the unequal probability of selection, these weights correct for certain types of non-response bias and improve precision for most variables.

 

When the sample for a particular month is selected by the ONS’s Sampling Implementation Unit, a letter is sent out to the sampled address approximately one week before the start of the field period. This letter explains the purpose of the survey and advises the residents that an interviewer will be calling regarding the survey. As an incentive to respond to the survey, a book of postage stamps is included with the letter. The interviewer is required to call at all sampled addresses to ensure that they are residential and not business addresses. Businesses, institutions, temporary accommodation and vacant addresses are ineligible in most instances. The Opinions Survey interviews are conducted using Blaise questionnaire programming tool on a laptop and, in most instances, the interviewer enters the respondents' replies directly into the computer. If the questions are considered to be sensitive then respondents are given an option of self completion.

 

For the separate exercise related to recreational fishing from boats, vessel list frames for licensed charter vessels, head boats and for-hire vessels will be stratified by geographic region and season following the telephone census. Non-respondents will be recorded. Allocation of sampling effort (number of trips to sample) will be adjusted according to the number of vessels in each stratum. Raising will be from sampled trips of each sampled vessel to all the trips of that vessel in the stratum (determined from telephone contact or voluntary logbook), then raised to all vessels considered to be active in the strata, excluding non respondents from the initial telephone survey. The species to be monitored will be those for which data are required by the DCF and by the Control Regulation.

 

 

 

Annex 2. Example work plan

 

I envisage the work would split into three phases over the 21-22 month period starting December/Jan. The following plan covers only Cefas and contractors costs and excludes any IFCA, Defra or MMO costs that might be incurred. With existing funds remaining in MF1203 this would allow only ~120 sampling trips of 1.5 days from base, including travel. This is a quite sparse sampling effort spread out over a year and the full English coast. Costs are indicative: the work would need to be fully costed out using latest salary costs etc.

 

Two possible options are:

 

1. Cefas to run the sampling programme using contract staff coordinated by IFCAS.

2. Competitive tender published to get an independent consultancy or other body to carry out the field work under a fixed-price sub contract.

 

 

Preparatory phase 1 (Dec – Feb):

 

Developing the survey design and the questionnaire approach (building on similar surveys undertaken by CCW), setting up data base, and getting recording sheets printed.

 

Liaising with Angling Trust to get buy-in and publicity (Defra have been talking to them already)

 

Establish project steering Group which could include an angling body such as AT; set up and attend initial meetings.

 

Employing and training contract staff, who would (hopefully) use IFCA offices (or SFC offices prior to April?) as home bases. An idea at present is that the IFCAs could take responsibility for this type of work in the long run. Alternative approach: put out to tender for an independent body to carry out the survey work in liaison with IFCAs with view to potential future handover to IFCAs.

 

Contractor days: 12

Cefas days: 35

 

 

Data collection phase 2 (March – December 2011):

 

Representative sampling of angling sites to record angling activity and catches, collect size information, and get questionnaires completed, covering spring, summer, autumn and winter fishing seasons. Total number of trips by contract staff across 10 IFCA areas: 120 (12 per month @ 1.5d per trip) stratified by area, season, day/night/weekend.

 

Data entry and progress updates by contractors (10 d)

 

Interim steering group update meeting (video link).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Contractor days: 190

Cefas days: 15

 

 

Data analysis and reporting phase 3 (January-March 2012):

Analysis of questionnaire and activity data to derive catches, effort, and other socioeconomic data, and linking with results of MMO project adding questions on recreational fishing activities to the ONS “omnibus” survey of households in 2011, to derive raising factors for the on-site survey data.

 

Consultation with Defra, IFCAs and Angling Trust to evaluate results

 

Final report to Defra

 

 

Inputs of Cefas socioeconomists: Phase 1 to design the socioeconomic questions; Phase 2 in 2011 to look at the quality of data coming in or attend steering gp meetings; Phase 3 (2012) to do the analysis and write-up (35 days total included in above)

 

Other work

 

We could also look at the “new” technologies such as the idea for a mobile phone app, which could allow some self-sampling data from anglers.

DRUNK DRIVERS WRECK LIVES.

 

Don't drink and drive.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

looks just like a very healthy exercise in management for managements sake, i have no doubt whatsoever the likes of our governing body will be jumping through hoops to join in. Wouldn't surprise me to learn that the trust has something to do with loading the gun for them.

 

quote:

It is proposed that the survey and sampling work required for meeting the DCF and Control regulation requirements are split between Cefas MF1203 and the MMO. It is also proposed that the new IFCAs from April 2011 onwards are encouraged to become involved in regional data collection, using their detailed local knowledge. The proposed division of responsibilities and resources is indicated below.

 

had to pick this bit out, don't know what use this bit of info collection will be as most rsa fishing of significance is carried out from 0-30 mile on the charter boats. Yet the ifca's are 0-6 mile. What detailed knowledge will they have as the new org's will only have one angling rep aboard at best. I'm aware of two orgs who have one angler and one charter skipper aboard, with one other org having an angling rep who certainly don't do offshore angling.

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

Ahh, inconsistency. If i was defra, i wouldn't pay cefas a penny for the work they have done. I haven't read the documents in detail, yet inconsistency is the watch word. You can drive a double decker bus through without touching the sides. It states that future management decisions will be based on the findings, yet cefas doesn't even know what a charter boat looks like, let alone been aboard. Sampling fishing from the shore, yet again using that as a tool for management of say the charter fleet. Telephone sampling, really. How can cefas relate the American fishing dream and link it to the uk scene, that a joke.

 

As for the trust, if they acted as well as they talk about the rsa, they should be complaining from the rooftops how crappy these reports appear to be. Dissecting and very much more to follow on this lot of dirge. I can also feel some emails coming on to cefas.

 

Any rsa reports of hake being caught.

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

I have just received the following from Alan Charlton, which he has asked me to add to this thread:

 

Hi Elton

 

have just recieved permission to put this statement on the web, could you put it on Anglers Net on the thread about MF1203, It is a statement from Mike Armstrong (CEFAS) and cleared by DEFRA, I have also has assurances from DEFRA that there will be nothing on the survey about bait collecting.

 

Alan

 

STATEMENT

 

Thanks for your interest in this. The surveys that were discussed at the ministerial meeting in London on the 25th are still at an early development stage (irrespective of what you may have read on the web) and we are considering a number of options and designs to ensure we get the most reliable data. At this stage it would be premature to release details that may change. Once we have a firm set of proposals in the coming weeks it is our intention to liaise with sea angling bodies to discuss the objectives and plans, and hopefully get your support. I would appreciate your patience, and will let you have the details when available.

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

I have just received the following from Alan Charlton, which he has asked me to add to this thread:

I take it "sea angling bodies" will be the AT?

Eating wild caught fish is good for my health, reduces food miles and keeps me fit trying to catch them........it's my choice to do it, not yours to stop me!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I take it "sea angling bodies" will be the AT?

 

It would have been if the NFSAS Northern Federation of Sea Angling Socities, which i am a member and on who's behalf I contacted DEFRA and CEFAS about the survey, and to see what was going on, the e mail was their reply. I have assurances that this means all angling bodies, I also have been given an assurance that the survey will have nothing to do with bait collecting.

I would like to put you all right on one matter the AT only dropped out of the last survey process, simply because it wasn't going on then, the NFSAS had already advised their members, the area where the survey was mainly going on, not to fill in any survey until the NFSAS gets certain Q's answered. Angling bodies will not be able to comment on the content of the survey until the actual survey documents have been finalised and then sent out for comments.

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

×
×
  • 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.