More Action By Defra

[Leon Roskilly]

See http://www.anglers-net.co.uk/sacn/latest/index.php?view=443

 

Tight Lines - leon

[Rapala]

See http://www.anglers-net.co.uk/sacn/latest/index.php?view=443

 

Tight Lines - leon

Hi Leon,

Good to hear but yet again it really does seems another paltry sum to pay.

Do you think a proper deterant would be to fine them, PLUS take their licences off them, or impound their boats for a period of time?

I think that would make a lot more sense than these gentle slaps on the wrist we occasionally hear about, don't you?

Tight Lines,

R

[Leon Roskilly]

Hi Leon,

Good to hear but yet again it really does seems another paltry sum to pay.

Do you think a proper deterant would be to fine them, PLUS take their licences off them, or impound their boats for a period of time?

I think that would make a lot more sense than these gentle slaps on the wrist we occasionally hear about, don't you?

Tight Lines,

R

 

 

DEFRA are investigating a move away from criminal prosecutions for fisheries offences towards one of 'adminstrative sanctions'.

 

There is a lot of work involved in bringing a criminal case where the presumption is that of innocence, and it is often difficult to get the high quality evidence that will be accepted by a criminal court.

 

For that reason, many are currently 'let off' with just a warning, and many of those who do reach court after a lot of resources and costs have been incurred in building a case and bringing a prosecution, are dealt with what many might think of as 'leniantly' by a justice system that is not familiar with the damage that can be done to stocks and the idustry as a whole by such 'technical rulebreakers'

 

What is envisaged is that DEFRA will be able to apply sanctions such as suspension of licence, loss of quota, reduced days at sea etc.

 

Although decriminalising of fishery offences would be welcomed in some instances by the catching sector, there is a concern with DEFRA acting as judge, jury and executioner, so the sector is looking at appeals procedures and ultimately the right of fisherman to choose to go before a court.

 

All up for consultation by 'the industry' at present.

 

Tight Lines - leon

[Rapala]

DEFRA are investigating a move away from criminal prosecutions for fisheries offences towards one of 'adminstrative sanctions'.

 

There is a lot of work involved in bringing a criminal case where the presumption is that of innocence, and it is often difficult to get the high quality evidence that will be accepted by a criminal court.

 

For that reason, many are currently 'let off' with just a warning, and many of those who do reach court after a lot of resources and costs have been incurred in building a case and bringing a prosecution, are dealt with what many might think of as 'leniantly' by a justice system that is not familiar with the damage that can be done to stocks and the idustry as a whole by such 'technical rulebreakers'

 

What is envisaged is that DEFRA will be able to apply sanctions such as suspension of licence, loss of quota, reduced days at sea etc.

 

Although decriminalising of fishery offences would be welcomed in some instances by the catching sector, there is a concern with DEFRA acting as judge, jury and executioner, so the sector is looking at appeals procedures and ultimately the right of fisherman to choose to go before a court.

 

All up for consultation by 'the industry' at present.

 

 

Thanks Leon,

Mmmm DEFRA,...The 'industry',....

As someone said to me recently, the fox is in charge of the chicken coop! ! !

Cheers,

R

 

Tight Lines - leon

[seaside]

>>

 

What is envisaged is that DEFRA will be able to apply sanctions such as suspension of licence, loss of quota, reduced days at sea etc.

 

>>

 

and how much notice would they take given that they will have already ignored one set of 'DEFRA' rules and regs/guidelines/cop outs ?

 

Seems strange to me that this particular body is so toothless and spineless.

 

It must be difficult for the honest and rule/law abiding commercials, it seems there is little incentive for them to maintain that position.