Someone Is Listening

[M.P]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,...1604953,00.html Edited October 31, 2005 by M.P

[Leon Roskilly]

And see:

 

http://www.anglers-net.co.uk/sacn/latest/index.php?view=418

 

Tight Lines - leon

[wurzel]

Trouble is gullible people believe that rubish.

[wurzel]

If half of it was true it would not be possible for me to earn a living. or any other fisherman for that matter and as yet nobody has been able to prove me wrong.

pahaps some body could explain how it's possible to catch the very last fish.

[Ken Davison South Wales]

pahaps some body could explain how it's possible to catch the very last fish.

Hi Wurzle,

 

The real question is would you like to be remembered as the person who caught the last fish??

 

Someone once said to me when I was a good deal younger and prone to being somewhat stubborn with my views

There is a little truth in all statements, even yours

 

I took that as a hint to look deeper into things before declaring them as total rubbish.

 

I guess no one can be 100% correct on fish stocks, certainly not all species, but if you put the question of quantity out of the equation and look at other aspects such as weather, temperature lets be honest

things they are a changing

 

Now if just by chance these changes are reflecting on existing fish stocks to some extent, couple that with current fish landed and even an idiot like me can see that something has got to give.

 

Let us all hope the result is not the last fish on earth

[Davy Holt]

pahaps some body could explain how it's possible to catch the very last fish.

 

The same as it was possible to kill the last Dodo, Great Auk, Passenger Pigeon.. the list goes on and on and on

[Pugs]

Well, read most of that report but gave up after reading it was Greenpeace.

 

Why? Because they would love to ban angling as much as any other activity connected to the sea.

 

Be carefull on supporting such organisations! (probably get knocked down here but I do have conservation knowledge (not connected to the seas) and I do know the ones who are very political and would 'turn on you' before you could say boo to a goose!).

 

I think everyone should read 'Hook, Line and Thinker - Angling and Ethics' give you an idea on what we could be up against

[DoubleShotDamo]

If half of it was true it would not be possible for me to earn a living. or any other fisherman for that matter and as yet nobody has been able to prove me wrong.

pahaps some body could explain how it's possible to catch the very last fish.

 

Are you blind, Wurzel? How come the East coast has seen a decline in commercial fishermen? How come they all are banging on about Government subsidies and shrinking quotas? It's a shame you won't be around to see your great grandchildren grow up and decide the family tradition is not worth pursuing anymore! Or is it not a family tradition? Maybe you are in it for a quick buck? Sounds like it to me!!

[Guest binatone]

This thread is getting as daft and going the same way as many sadly before it.

I have to admire you wurzel for putting up with all this crap.

I call it internet jargon. They think of a subject (manly ante commercial) put it in a search engine then post it on this forum, half the time not even reading properly what they have posted. Then they expect you to reply to what they have dug up? Then when you reply to what they have dug up they say you are short sighted or whom are you to comment in such a negative way?

How boring it would be for you or I to dig up things regarding recreational anglers in a negative way then sit back and expect them to answer all before them.

They accuse us (commercial fishermen) of being short sighted? When someone goes to work do they ever think what they may get in there wage packet at the week end? And if they can (by effort) adjust that would they not try? Is that classed as being short sighted?

I only comment at what I see on a daily basis, and what I have seen over the last thirty odd years at sea.

Why should we lie on a forum where we have nothing to prove? We don’t have to defend ourselves but at times fell that a kind of injustice is being done by some who can only comment on what they have heard or read.

O yes by the way for whoever asked we do work 120 mil square mesh panels in our twin rig trawls, we are not legally required to do this but do.

Someone on another thread was talking about super trawlers and how they have the ability of catching large amounts of fish. This is true, but the reason that they spend most of the year in port is because regardless of what they are capable of catching they can only catch what amount of quota they are given. As for decommissioning when someone said that the fishermen get compensation for an old floating coffin that they have had decommissioned then go out and purchase a super trawler as a replacement?

I suggest that you go and read a bit more internet jargon, am sure somewhere it will explain to you how wrong you are.

[Guest @AUTUMN@]

Best way to deal with a theory formed from research is to find an opposing one in research. They do exist because these things are not exact science. Telling someone they are wrong because you know best isnt the way forward.

 

On a slightly different note whilst your on Binatone I spoke to a friend today and quizzed him on blinders. He's been finished several years now so this probably dont apply now???? but he said tyres were often used as blinders and he also described a rope contraption being used as something called a choker. He said a few years ago several boats who specialised in catching small crap as he termed it used these methods. He added that it was difficult to prove someone was using blinders as it is easy to say oh dear look we caught a tyre in the net.