Compromise

[steve good]

If it was that letter, I am curious if steve would like to apologize to Mike Pawson as wurzel did, or more interestingly CAN steve excuse like wurzel did? I think not. Steve's bass-tag hostility seems more deep and lasting than wurzel's. Steve writes in the Fishing News: 'I have dozens of bass tags that I have removed from fish and not returned as I believe that scientific evidence taken from fishermen is only used against them'.

 

That is a very profound statement from steve showing clearly one of the biggest problems with commercial fishermen of yesterday and today, the lack of confidence in anything else than their own emotional, anecdotal based 'knowledge' about the state of the fishstocks and fisheries management.

 

Hi Fishingsfine

 

It is not illegal, not to return bass tags. it is a matter of choice. The goverment and pawson are behind the anglers one hundred percent, to me thats fair enough, and i fully understand the anglers case and the points raised on AN. Pawsons supportive evidence for the BMP has been supplied by anglers and commercial fisherman. Commercials will be disadvantaged by the 45 cm size in being made less compeditive with regard to the french and if bass are elected to the presure stock it will lessen our track record thus reducing our entiltment to what will be our quota. I feel that the evidence that pawson has used is going against us commercials and thats my believe. I also believe that people like pawson should have a buget large enough to enable them to be more independant. What gets me is that only half the evidence has only been presented

 

I will not apologize I see no reason to, when I see evidence supplied for an increase in mls that explores the positives as well as the negitive so as good management decision can made then, I will gladly do my bit to support the gathering of information.

[steve good]

Mike Pawson may be a bass specialist and he undoubtedly has access to more data than most. I'm still concerned by some of the things he says though. As a scientist you would think that his remit is to provide science, but he has often given his own personal opinions on certain things. Providing science is one thing, but giving personal opinions is totally different.

 

It would be interesting to hear Graham Picket's and Donavon Kelly's opinions as well as Mike Pawsons, but whether the outcome of this consultation should be based on them us another matter. The science provided should be just one factor of many that is used to decide whether the 45cm MLS will be implemented or not.

 

Hi steve

 

This is the best post that i have seen you do it is fair and objective, as you say there are alot of factors to be considered. The most important one is the science, if the science is good, then the management decision is good, which makes the fishery good, if the science is imcomplete you may have no fishery at all.

 

steve

[Guest binatone]

Hi Binatone,

I do know Jens, but not well – but I agree with your comments.

 

He is a friend of my father’s. They sat on various committees together. However, Jens did point me in the right direction regarding wreck and ground information when I first got my present boat, so I have a lot to thank him for.

 

By the way, I think all the good hard/rough ground areas aback of thirty miles should be kept on a need-to-know basis.

 

JB

Well that’s no problem John. Just don’t want them to ever say I did not offer.

Will be in Peterhead in the morning, then home for a few days. Have you managed to get any trips in? I see that big cod has been getting a fish or two.

Glad that you met Jens, great man in his day, still is come to that. Not bad climbing Everest to raise some money for charity when it’s that time of life to start taking it easy.

[wurzel]

Hello fishingsfine

 

Quote

I believe that scientific evidence taken from fishermen is only used against them'.

 

This is why I doubt the French skippers did not return any tags.

 

Steve G raises some valid points, this is the only time as far as I am aware that anglers have used informaition from scientists in such a way.

Most of the work CEFAS do has no interest what so ever to anglers,

I'm not so sure Mike pawson does agree on 45 cm, has he acually said so, I know his comments did not go down so well at a meeting in Gernsey or was it Jersey?

I feel Steve is being a bit harsh on them , it was the work done by CEFAS that helped get a large increase in the sole quota for the southern fishermen, they might be our only hope for the sole fishery in the North Sea, they are doing work on monk fish and the prawn fishery all for commercials benifit.

Like I said god help us if there was only ICES

[JB]

Have you managed to get any trips in? I see that big cod has been getting a fish or two.

 

Hi Binatone,

No, we haven’t been off; our first trip is booked for mid-March. We don’t generally bother much in the winter; there is always plenty of maintenance to keep us very busy. An 80-foot steel boat provides ample work for us in our ‘off-season’.

 

Yes, BC has been getting off occasionally, and judging from his posts he is doing ok. However, the other charter boats hardly seem to have moved this winter. Because of that, the fish will have collected up on the wrecks and BC will have them all to himself. And, rightfully, he is taking advantage of the situation.

 

JB

[Toerag]

The most important one is the science, if the science is good, then the management decision is good, which makes the fishery good, if the science is imcomplete you may have no fishery at all.

 

steve

 

So why haven't you returned your tags? By not returning the tags you are depriving CEFAS of valuable data, and in your own words above, "if the science is incomplete you may have no fishery at all" The last tagging scheme was done well before the BMP was started up, so don't even try to say that that scheme was for the anglers benefit. It was for YOUR benefit, and by all accounts you've f***ed it up!

 

So, I am now confused, enlighten me!

Edited January 27, 2006 by Toerag

[steve good]

So why haven't you returned your tags? By not returning the tags you are depriving CEFAS of valuable data, and in your own words above, "if the science is incomplete you may have no fishery at all" The last tagging scheme was done well before the BMP was started up, so don't even try to say that that scheme was for the anglers benefit. It was for YOUR benefit, and by all accounts you've f***ed it up!

 

So, I am now confused, enlighten me!

 

hi toeag

 

why should i return tags, now let me see durrrr, that science is increasing the mls which if you have not realised is going to reduce my income. I like living so i am not going to put a gun to my head and pull the trigger. And don't give any of that crap about i will be better off because those 36cm bass just won't get to 45cm in the numbers that you think. and i have not fxxxed any thing up

[Toerag]

hi toeag

 

why should i return tags, now let me see durrrr, that science is increasing the mls which if you have not realised is going to reduce my income. I like living so i am not going to put a gun to my head and pull the trigger.

 

Steve,

 

Neither you or I know what conclusions would have resulted from you returning the tags. The science may have come down in your favour, or the BMP's favour. If the MLS gets raised then you'll whinge and say that the science wasn't good enough, how can anyone make decisions on such poor tag returns. If it stays as it is then you may find that bass get wiped out (from a commercial standpoint), and again you'll whinge because the science wasn't good enough. If you read the BMP you'll see that the plan was to raise the MLS to 50cm or thereabouts (can't remember exactly). The Defra proposal has come about from CEFAS looking at their data and the BMP, and deciding that the anglers aren't correct, and that the 45cm MLS actually gives the best yield from the fishery. This size is purely based on the science, it is not based on what the commercials or anglers say. If the science is flawed, then you only have yourself to blame. If the science is good, then no-one can argue with it. Good science may tell us that there's no problem with bass, or that there should be a total ban. Either way, the results for all of us should be good. With bad science, we may shoot ourselves in the feet, and by then it'll be too late for you. Have you seriously thought about what you'll do if you can't catch bass?

 

You have stated that you keep on having to find new bass marks - have you asked yourself why this is? Bass are on a mark for one reason only - food. when you fish a mark you're not removing the food, it's always there. All you do is catch all the bass. Until there're none left. Then you move on, and do the same again. When do you think it will end? The number of marks is finite, it's only a matter of time until there're none left.

 

All that aside, you still dicarded tags, yet complain that bad science is no good to anybody. I don't get it. Heck, you would have made even more money by returning the tags at £6 a pop!

 

And don't give any of that crap about i will be better off because those 36cm bass just won't get to 45cm in the numbers that you think.

 

Why won't all those 36cm bass hit 45cm? What do you know that we don't? CEFAS reckon they will.

 

As an aside, what do you think the MLS should be and why? Are you landing the same tonnage of bass every year, and is the size staying constant? You must catch way more bass than all the anglers on here put together, so your views & Wurzel's are important to us. We need to see the bigger picture, as do you, and both sides can only do that by discussions such as this.

Edited January 28, 2006 by Toerag

[Steve Coppolo]

Hi Steve

 

I've read several times now that you don't think the 36cm bass will make it to 45cm. That seems to be the main sticking point for you, from what you are posting. The only reason I've seen you write is that you think the bass will all get caught by French pair teams as soon as they reach 36cm to 45cm. Is there any evidence to support this? Again, I seem to recall you saying that more research is needed. What research exactly?

 

I've read roughly what your theories are, but haven't seen anything you've posted that backs them up. I'm not doubting what you are saying, but I'd like to understand why you are saying it. Perhaps you could you answer a couple of questions?

 

How many months of the year does the pair trawl fishery last? And when it finishes, are there any bass between 36cm and 45cm left? What happens to those that are? How big are most of the bass that you catch?

 

Cheers

Steve

[steve good]

Hi Steve

 

I've read several times now that you don't think the 36cm bass will make it to 45cm. That seems to be the main sticking point for you, from what you are posting. The only reason I've seen you write is that you think the bass will all get caught by French pair teams as soon as they reach 36cm to 45cm. Is there any evidence to support this? Again, I seem to recall you saying that more research is needed. What research exactly?

 

I've read roughly what your theories are, but haven't seen anything you've posted that backs them up. I'm not doubting what you are saying, but I'd like to understand why you are saying it. Perhaps you could you answer a couple of questions?

 

How many months of the year does the pair trawl fishery last? And when it finishes, are there any bass between 36cm and 45cm left? What happens to those that are? How big are most of the bass that you catch?

 

Cheers

Steve

 

hi steve

 

There are three main sticking points two are science related and one is not.

 

1. Discards, there is a discard problem now when the mls goes up to 45 cm it will be a far greater ploblem.

2. French catch rate of 36-45 cm bass. My main bass trawling ground is in the 6-12 mile zone from the back of the I of Wight to Brighton. I have learnt from the french where to tow. During the summer (may -september) there is allways 6-12 french trawlers (not pair trawlers) in this area after bass. About 65% of what I catch on the same ground as them is under 45cm. I can not prove this to you with evidence, mind you nor can mike pawson. By what I have seen and know makes me doubt whether or not there will be the amount of bass reaching 45cm that people are expecting. This is why I have raised my concerns.

3. Losing the 36-45 range of bass (about 65% of catch) will lessen my historical track record too the bass stock. If bass were to be elected to the presure stock list the, French would end up getting 90% of the quota allocation and in affect become the owners of the bass stock, which in turn would give them more management control than any other EU member state. (letter in next weeks fishing news on this subject).

 

You ask what research be should done, Discards and french catch rates of 36-45cm bass are the 2 things that may reduce or take away any benifit that that a mls of 45cm may bring Mike pawson in my veiw has produced the positive side of the science without paying attendtion to the negitive side and that worries me.

I would like to see evidence on mortality rates of discards and how efficient the french are at catching 36-45 cm bass.

 

I am not an expert on pair trawling, i think that it lasts for about three months and i don't know much about what size fish they catch. I omly really know about what the french do in my area.

 

steve