A no take zone?

[Worms]

Totally agree there wurzel people are getting a lot richer from leasing quota to fishermen than fishermen have ever got from catching quota.

Flapper.

But as an angler my regards are for RSAs. If the commercial sector, backed by the public and RSAs find a sensible answer to the CFP i.e. no discards, no wastage, no high-grading then everybody will be happy. As for buying/selling quotas, well, no, I don't agree with that aither. Isn't that one of the reasons for the sh1t state that the UK commercial sector is in?....selling 'our' quotas to foreign boats?

 

Until then, RSAs, taking sustainable amounts of fish for the family pot will come before any commercial that argues the finer points of irresponsible/unsustainable fishing.

 

I back commercials that fight the CFP and the discard policy and high-grading. Those that don't I will fight against...and compulsory C+R anglers.

 

This is an angling forum after all.

[Worms]

Anyway, can't stay up arguing the toss all night, I'm off fishing for my supper at 04:00.....spurdog, rays and conger hopefully....yum yum

[wurzel]

They know full well there is no need for the huge discards and I can't believe how easily the RSA suck up to this nonsense.

 

Any ways we are moving away from the topic and may have Barry on our case so back to Sussex and the Kingmere?

 

Tight lines Bob

 

Thats a very bold statement Bob, I'd be interested in how you come to that assumption.

 

As for the Kingmere reef.

 

I couldn't attach the file on Lundy so I've pasted an extract.

 

Quote (From Charles bloody Clover of all people)

 

English Nature believes it will be 10 to 15 years before the full impact of the fishing no take zone can be judged.

However, it's not all good news - the divers filmed lots of damaged sea fans, and the number of Red Band fish has dwindled from 14,000 some 30 years ago, to just a handful.

 

And the Kingmere reef or any mpa will be no different.

If they were now assessing Lundy for a no take zone commercial activity and only commercial activity would be blamed for the demise of the red band fish and the damage to the sea fans.

In the future when commercial fishing has been stopped in these areas such as Kingsmere and Lyme bay the only people left to blame will be anglers with the assumed necessary precautions put in place.

 

The whole Balanced Seas Net Gain and Finding sanctuary circus is based on self righteous brain washing bull manure and they are all working to a predetermined objective and I can't believe how easily the RSA suck up to this nonsense.

[Bob Shotter]

Thats a very bold statement Bob, I'd be interested in how you come to that assumption.

 

As for the Kingmere reef.

 

I couldn't attach the file on Lundy so I've pasted an extract.

 

Quote (From Charles bloody Clover of all people)

 

English Nature believes it will be 10 to 15 years before the full impact of the fishing no take zone can be judged.

However, it's not all good news - the divers filmed lots of damaged sea fans, and the number of Red Band fish has dwindled from 14,000 some 30 years ago, to just a handful.

 

And the Kingmere reef or any mpa will be no different.

If they were now assessing Lundy for a no take zone commercial activity and only commercial activity would be blamed for the demise of the red band fish and the damage to the sea fans.

In the future when commercial fishing has been stopped in these areas such as Kingsmere and Lyme bay the only people left to blame will be anglers with the assumed necessary precautions put in place.

 

The whole Balanced Seas Net Gain and Finding sanctuary circus is based on self righteous brain washing bull manure and they are all working to a predetermined objective and I can't believe how easily the RSA suck up to this nonsense.

 

Hum just one little point the Kingmere proposal is direct from the Sussex Sea Fishing Committee a parting gift you might say to the petition brigade. It is not a part of the Balanced Sea recommendations though they will probably support it.

 

As for Lundy I have it from those involved with its creation, there was no study done prior to the closure so the Red Band fish that has dwindled these past thirty years is pie in the sky data.

 

Lyme Bay well now I think you need to check out the current data on that one as apparently that is doing very well.

 

Tight Lines Bob

[barry luxton]

Anyway, can't stay up arguing the toss all night, I'm off fishing for my supper at 04:00.....spurdog, rays and conger hopefully....yum yum

 

Middle cut for the conger Worms, give the rest to the local Chinese shop, i'm sure they would do something with it. Them rays, get the skippers mate to skin 'em for ya. Spurdogs, nice bit of rock salmon.

 

Wurzels link:

 

English Nature believes it will be 10 to 15 years before the full impact of the fishing no take zone can be judged.

However, it's not all good news - the divers filmed lots of damaged sea fans, and the number of Red Band fish has dwindled from 14,000 some 30 years ago, to just a handful.

 

And in ten or fifteen years, the answer will be, well were not sure if it's working or not lets give it a few more years. Divers, lets assume it's commercial damage or could it have been the previous set of clumsy divers, who knows. Red band fish surprise surprise, have fins, used for swimming. Have they gone somewhere else to get a feed.

 

Looks like it's all based on assumption. Yet the favorite word being banded about is precautionary and the fear is the new ifca's have been instructed to use this word a lot more.

 

Worms your post 31, just reminded me of what this mcz project is all about. Fiddling while Rome burns. Another point re the mcz projects including the org that's pushing for them, eu, all they have in their armory is more legislation and bans, they haven't got any other ideas regarding improvement, sustainability, habit creation. See a 'news' item last year where the divers think they had done a good job clearing rubbish from the sea bed. I did notice on the items a lot of new growth etc, that they had brought ashore to dry out. Who is right.

Edited February 12, 2011 by barry luxton

[flapper]

Middle cut for the conger Worms, give the rest to the local Chinese shop, i'm sure they would do something with it. Them rays, get the skippers mate to skin 'em for ya. Spurdogs, nice bit of rock salmon.

 

Wurzels link:

 

English Nature believes it will be 10 to 15 years before the full impact of the fishing no take zone can be judged.

However, it's not all good news - the divers filmed lots of damaged sea fans, and the number of Red Band fish has dwindled from 14,000 some 30 years ago, to just a handful.

 

And in ten or fifteen years, the answer will be, well were not sure if it's working or not lets give it a few more years. Divers, lets assume it's commercial damage or could it have been the previous set of clumsy divers, who knows. Red band fish surprise surprise, have fins, used for swimming. Have they gone somewhere else to get a feed.

 

Looks like it's all based on assumption. Yet the favorite word being banded about is precautionary and the fear is the new ifca's have been instructed to use this word a lot more.

 

Worms your post 31, just reminded me of what this mcz project is all about. Fiddling while Rome burns. Another point re the mcz projects including the org that's pushing for them, eu, all they have in their armory is more legislation and bans, they haven't got any other ideas regarding improvement, sustainability, habit creation. See a 'news' item last year where the divers think they had done a good job clearing rubbish from the sea bed. I did notice on the items a lot of new growth etc, that they had brought ashore to dry out. Who is right.

http://www.parliament.uk/documents/post/postpn310.pdf

 

By reading this I would say that the new IFCA, s have no choice Barry. I would imagine that it would be to everybody’s interest to participate in any consultation that is going because instead of looking for some one to blame if things don’t go according to what you want then at least you could air your views

Flapper.

[barry luxton]

Of course you don't have to. Seeing you have had chance to get your feet under the table, give us a clue as to where and who you are. I don't really like talking to mr a n onymous. Here's a start, your from the north east and your not a fisheries officer.

 

Do you catch codling with the odd cod thrown in or do you catch other specis, foto would be nice.

[flapper]

Of course you don't have to. Seeing you have had chance to get your feet under the table, give us a clue as to where and who you are. I don't really like talking to mr a n onymous. Here's a start, your from the north east and your not a fisheries officer.

 

Do you catch codling with the odd cod thrown in or do you catch other specis, foto would be nice.

I am an active angler. I am not from the north east.

Sorry if that is a disappointment to you Barry.

Flapper.

[steve good]

What aload of rubbish, the Sussex Sea Fisheries should be ashamed of themselfs just shows how inept they are, Firstly, they are in cohorts with the dredging company and are quoting from their paper work.

 

The main thing here is that they are protecting nothing, bloody nothing at all, the chart showing the close area is meaningless you cannot trawl over that rocky ground, the area that is pair trawled where the bream spawn is from the north line on the chart going inshore, bloody clueless thats what these so called fisheries managers are or is it a case of being seen to be doing something that looks and sounds good when in fact its completly and utterly useless.

 

If any one wants to send this to the Regional Stakeholders Group then you can, I have only been a commercial fisherman for 33 years and I know just tad about this area, If black bream are to be protected then it should be done right a near miss is not good enough

 

PS Kingmere Ledge/rocks as shown in the chart is only fishable with pots and rods

Edited February 12, 2011 by steve good

[76jerry]

To be honest I don,t give a toss about the plight of our Commerical fishing fleet most of are fish is bought from aboard the only concession Iwill make is I,d rather a British boat than a foreign one fish around our coastline.

Worms pionts out that returning fish by us Bass/Mullet huggers is cruelty , tiring them out before returning them just plain cruel, does this apply to Carp fishermen or Barbel fishermen or Match anglers coarse fish don,t feel pain like seafish ?

 

As I understand it no take zones will mostly be Estuarys can,t wait the sooner the better, then us Bass/Mu;llet huggers will sleep more soundly at night and not have to worry about some **** with a gillnet riuning our fishing.

 

Quorn Burgers anyone