Whitby's Law Breaking Fishermen Are Not Dishonest

[Guest Feels like Winter to me]

As with most on here your perception of the facts have nothing to do with reality.

 

 

When your part of a minority you should recheck your own percetion before questioning that of the others.

[Guest binatone]

It is to be observed that 'angling' is the name given to fishing by people who can't fish.

[wurzel]

Hello Winter

 

As for quotas I don't need to percieve anything as I have experience of them, non of you have.

 

I reckon I'm not often wrong but I'm right this time.

[Guest Feels like Winter to me]

You are protecting your livlihood and I understand that, but you shouldnt assume everyone else came down in the last shower. We are a little bit more intelligent than you award us credit for.

[Simon Everett]

The irony is that the distasteful hunting that some see whaling as, or elephant hunting for that matter, carried out by indigenous peoples is always done so in a sustainable manner. Native peoples never over harvest a resource - they know they want to be able to rely on it again the following year. It is when third parties become involved that things go out of balance. We could learn a thing or two from the so called, uncivilised peoples. They have all they need and want - do YOU have that kind of contentment, or are there things you wish you could have that are completely meaningless - like a Rolex watch or a BMW 6 series car? Not needed, but WANTED. The native peoples are far wealthier than we are, yet we see them as having nothing.

A man called Thoro once said, "A man is wealthy in proportion to the number of things he can do without."

[geffaz]

good stuff! im gana right That on the DSS toilet door!

its getting raped but if we dont do it sombody else will!

just the way of the world isnt it!

 

 

welcome to the helter skelter!

[spasor]

Simon.

As you`ve been demoted from `Mr Kayak`, to deisel engine correspondent. I guess we should take your word a gospel???

The only trouble is. The `Fat Cats` of the fishing industry have limited liability. They won`t lose their homes if their boats have to stop fishing. They`ll just have a tax write-off?

Whils`t owner skippers have to catch to pay their bills, or go under.

 

Commercial fishing has never been an easy game. Perhaps that`s why many lifeboat crew, are, or have been fishermen?

I`d like to see more fish in the seas for us `Sunday anglers`, but would rather our commercial lads were properly compensated for laying their boats up. Fat cats excluded.

 

As for the `Happy natives`, I`ve spent some time with those. The ones that have experienced some of the advantages of modern life (i.e. an elderly transitor radio) seem to want more. But that`s another gripe.

[big_cod]

Wurzul what are you rambling on about mate, all i was saying the longliners catches had dropped because it was HEAVILY trawled at the back of the rock last week it is only a small area and it soon gets cleaned up ,any commercial fisherman will tell you which part of the coast gets hammered during the winter yes you guest it the back of the rock.

Now a 3 mile limit that is puttting the cat amoung the pigiens but i think in years to come will happen .

If you are over 60ft in lenth then you have to stay aback of the 3 mile limit the reason power and so called catching caperbilities.

But 99% of trawlers working this park of the coast are so called rule brakers 59.9ft with the power of 70ft vessel which can fish right upto the beach in most areas we all know that these boats were originally built for pipe fishing work well into the north sea but what happened to the pipe fishing you guest it ,it was hammered to death and became an unviable (here comes another denile by our friend binitone) so most of the time are fishing inside often towing up and down the 1.50 mile in winter when the codlings are hard inside.

The problem is these days there isnt the quantity of fish there like there was and it soon gets cleaned up in a relertively small area so what are the small boats supposed to when its force 6 of the land its crap weather aback of 3 mile for these small boats when the trawlers can handle it no problem but if the fishing inside of 3 mile has been cleaned up by the trawlers and there jack **** left for lets say the longliners its hard cheese porsure to the smaller boats.

[Guest Feels like Winter to me]

Spasor how do you exclude fat cats from the equation when clever accountants can make their actual income look so very low, and as was the case with the 2 shetland islanders all their worldly wealth has been appropriated (quite legally) to their nearest and dearest.

 

Big cod - I once saw a trawler start its tow about 50 yards from the shore. You probably wont believe me but I swear I saw it with my own 2 eyes. I could have hit them on the head with my sinker. Right in the mouth of saltwick bay he started. Certainly wasnt 1.5 miles from the shore, I actually thought they had run aground.

I dont agree with what you say about a 3 mile limit m8. Places like Whitby and what happens here are way off the radar - Noboddy gives a **** m8.

Edited December 16, 2005 by Feels like Winter to me

[spanner]

binatone,

 

A hundred boats taking up to 100,000 stone a day....and now there are 4 or 5.

 

Sounds to me that shows how there used to be a heck of a lot more cod and just how poor things are now. Or are you saying that catches would still be 100,000 stone if there were 100 boats out there?

 

 

You are picking on the emotive use of the word slaughter.... but the point is that stocks are a fraction of what they once were, so even though catches are down it still means they are a higher percentage of the total cod biomass, not to mention the fact that they are disproportionally small. It may not be slaughter now, but it was something like in the past. What would you prefer to call it? Significant resource exploitation? Asset reduction? Or just Natural Re-alignment that had nothing to do with previous catch rates?

 

It is not the catching potential in tons of fish that is significant, its the catching potential when compared to the current stock.

 

If the stocks are low then the catching potential needs to be low as well, and that has nothing to do with why the stocks are low.

 

Understanding why the stocks are low, wheter its due to global warming, over-fishing or other factors, is important so that we can decide how to get the stocks back up, but has no bearing on the fact with less stock you have to have less taking.

 

 

Unless you deny the stocks are lower, in which case you would agree that 100,000 stone catches are still possible if only there were enough boats.

Edited December 16, 2005 by spanner