Compromise

[Leon Roskilly]

Hi Andy,

Firstly, the only thing I know about bass comes from the few posts I have read on here. I have never caught a bass, nor seen one actually caught. I’ve only ever seen a few on our local fish market. So I apologise if my question seems stupid. However, they say, never be afraid to ask a stupid question.

 

What was the starting size when negotiating the minimum bass size of 45 cm? Was it 60cm, 75cm, or what?

 

JB

 

Hi John and Michele,

 

Firstly let me emphasise that the Bass Management Plan was a document produced by BASS in response to enquiries from DEFRA on how best to support the recomendation made in the 'Prime Minister's Strategy Unit's Net Benefits Report'

 

As a BASS document it is only a number of recommendations to DEFRA for their consideration, and it is generally recognised that all of the options suggested in the BMP do not have to be implemented to achieve the overall aim. Rather it as 'pick and choose' menu that DEFRA and CEFAS, in consultation with stakeholders can use, perhaps choosing other options not even mentioned in the BMP.

 

It is not until DEFRA and the Minister have decided what options that it wants put before stakeholders that any option is anything more than a suggestion by BASS.

 

And it is not until the options have been consulted upon with all stakeholders, and recommendations from the consultation process laid before the Minister, and accepted by the Government that anything has any force.

 

(I thought that I needed to say that as so many seem to regard the BMP as something already cut and dried!)

 

 

Anyway, back to your question.

 

In the B M P it says:

 

The objective is to try to protect the abundant 2002 bass year class to maximise its value as above by the introduction of phased MLS increases up to a maximum 55cm MLS.

 

B.A.S.S. would propose that the following bass MLS increases are adopted:

 

45 cm MLS - 1st January 2006

50 cm MLS - 1st January 2007

55 cm MLS - 1st January 2008

 

 

The idea being that the mls should be raised to the next stage each time that the 2002 year class is about to become vulnerable at the previous mls, so that when the 2002 year group hit 45cm, rather than entering the fishery, they are then protected to the next stage at 50cm.

 

Indeed it is one of the options in the consultation to do this, but that is unlikely to get general support.

 

Now, if the 2002 year class does get to 45cm and enter the fishery, it may well be that many evade capture and grow on to become 50cm 55cm 60cm etc, in which case there will be no need to implement a higher mls.

 

But if they get to 45cm and get hammered at that size so that few bigger fish are available to the fishery (both catching sector and recreational) thereafter, there is likely to be a powerful argument to raise the mls once more.

[Steve Coppolo]

What was the starting size when negotiating the minimum bass size of 45 cm? Was it 60cm, 75cm, or what?

 

JB

 

I believe it was 55cm and bass designated as a wholly recreational sportsfish John. I didn't have anything to do with the writing of the BMP or any negotiating, so Leon will correct me if I'm wrong.

Edited January 23, 2006 by Steve Coppolo

[Steve Coppolo]

We're going round and round in circles with arguments between commercial and recreational fishermen. We are never going to change each other's minds, the difference of opinion is just too great. As I've said before, we'll know exactly who it is that runs the fishery when the decision is made. Until then I'm keeping an open mind on what the outcome may be.

Edited January 23, 2006 by Steve Coppolo

[Guest binatone]

We're going round and round in circles with arguments between commercial and recreational fishermen. We are never going to change each other's minds, the difference of opinion is just too great. As I've said before, we'll know exactly who it is that runs the fishery when the decision is made. Until then I'm keeping an open mind on what the outcome may be.

If you’re looking for someone to blame for the demise of cod fishing in the North Sea you are too late.

They are retired millionaires who caught all the big cod (that’s caused all the damage) twenty odd years.

One of them climbed Everest not so long ago; I bet he still had a smile on his face when he got to the top. I bet he would have a bigger smile on his face reading this forum and watching you go round and round in circles.

[JB]

I believe it was 55cm and bass designated as a wholly recreational sportsfish John. I didn't have anything to do with the writing of the BMP or any negotiating, so Leon will correct me if I'm wrong.

 

Thanks Leon and Steve for your answers. Much appreciated.

 

JB

[Steve Coppolo]

If you’re looking for someone to blame for the demise of cod fishing in the North Sea you are too late.

They are retired millionaires who caught all the big cod (that’s caused all the damage) twenty odd years.

One of them climbed Everest not so long ago; I bet he still had a smile on his face when he got to the top. I bet he would have a bigger smile on his face reading this forum and watching you go round and round in circles.

 

[big_cod]

If you’re looking for someone to blame for the demise of cod fishing in the North Sea you are too late.

They are retired millionaires who caught all the big cod (that’s caused all the damage) twenty odd years.

One of them climbed Everest not so long ago; I bet he still had a smile on his face when he got to the top. I bet he would have a bigger smile on his face reading this forum and watching you go round and round in circles.

[JB]

One of them climbed Everest not so long ago; I bet he still had a smile on his face when he got to the top. I bet he would have a bigger smile on his face reading this forum and watching you go round and round in circles.

A nicer, quieter, more unassuming man you could never wish to meet. Yet his knowledge of the North Sea and cod fishing is phenomenal. He was getting 5000-stone hauls of cod, averaging between 2 and 4 stone apiece, while the rest of us were merely playing at the job by comparison.

 

JB

[steve good]

Steve,

 

Pawson has worked for CEFAS for many years.

 

He is known and respected by fisheries scientists around the world.

 

DEFRA listen closely to what he has to say

 

He is the acknowledged expert on bass, which he has closely studied for a long time now.

 

I'm sure that if he was some kind of charlatan who makes it all up, he wouldn't be in the position that he is now.

 

And don't forget it isn't just Pawson, when I've had the opportunity to meet with Mike, it's never just been Pawson but always with colleagues as well

 

Why don't you call CEFAS to tell them of your concerns, and why you think that the BMP will turn out to be a joke?

 

If you know better than what they are saying, and can back that up, then you can't just sit back and wait for Pawson to get round to reading something you wrote in Fishing News, and deciding it's worth responding, it's too important for that.

 

(ps I haven't always liked what Pawson has to say, so don't assume that I'm necessarily a fan!)

 

hi leon

The letter i wrote pawson and bradshaw was a open letter in the fishing news i also emailed them a copy they have not answer it and they will not answer it. because they know what i say is right. I am not knocking the reserch that they done in support of the bmp it is good stuff. What i am asking for is the reserch that they have not done which is important and needed so as to make a balance management decision. Read my letter see what i am asking for and ask yourself do you want the bmp regardless of all the evidence that may effect the bmp from ever being fruitful.

 

steve

[steve good]

I have seen this old postpone trick in use too often by the commercials 'we need more scientific evidence before you can do that'. No we don't. We have reached a point where it doesn't matter what new evidence you put into the calculation machine, it'll come out with the same result, which is 'we have to start now to be able to judge'. Remind you that 1 January was the proposed date by UK BASS for an MLS increase to 45 cm to grow the 2002 stock. We cannot wait much longer - and that you know, of course.

 

hi fishing lines

 

postpone trick??? I think think not.

 

There are 3 ways that the bmp can go. 1 a good number of bass will reach the 45 cm 2 about the same amount will reach 45 cm 3 hardly any will reach the 45 cm.

 

For the bmp to work it is important that item 3 is looked into. My knowlegde and experience has made me raise questions to prevent or mitigate item 3. You should realise that I am the voice of logic and reason I am not emotional, tunnel visioned like alot of anglers are.

 

This is not a case of me resisting change for the sake of it. It is about getting it RIGHT or not.

 

As i have said before i ACT in the best interest of the bass fishery and my head is not buried in thhe sand

 

regards steve