Question Aboutthe Bmp

[Jaffa]

Posted this in another thread, but it was a bit off topic.

 

 

Bass appear to be extending their range yet the BMP suggests:

 

(1) Licences

Commercial Fishermen

Provided to commercial fishermen who can provide a track record over the past three years (2001 - 2003 inclusive) of a 'significant' reliance upon bass. Such a licence would enable them to catch and retain a pre-specified NUMBER of bass, controlled via a carcass tag scheme, within the requirements of other management mechanisms. Licences may be purchased, initially for a nominal fee (with the ability to increase charges if required) or issued free of charge at the outset and reviewed later. The total number of licences would be set at commencement and could not be traded, or their numbers increased, without the specific agreement of RSAs.

 

 

I just don't get this. At a time when scientists tell us the environment is changing and bass spreading north, NE fishermen for example, won't be able to switch to bass? Which RSA's are to give the nod to any trading/change in licences? Is an organisation with a Devon or London based powerbase to dictate fishing in the NE?

 

What would this mean in terms of commercial pressure on cod stocks for instance?

 

What am i missing here?

 

Chris.

[Ryford]

Jaffa,

 

The proposed licensing scheme is only one component in the BMP. I am sure you would agree that having implemented a management strategy to ensure a more natural stock profile, any improvement or measurable progress will soon be wiped out without some form of effort control. Bag limits for anglers are also proposed so it won't be descriminatory.

 

From what I can make out, and folks that I have spoken to, the authors wished that those who have fished for bass over a number of years, using traditional, selective and environmentally sympathetic methods, should be encouraged to continue.

 

The idea of single species licenses, which this would be, is not new. Defra introduced this into the lobster and brown crab fishery as it was supposed to cap effort and limit the effects of derogation. Thats not to say that if the stock rebounded better than we think, that new licenses could not be issued.

 

An interesting part of this is the carcass tagging idea. It is hope that with their introduction, there would be much better traceability which can be used as an enforcement tool. The SW handliners introduced their own tagging scheme as a response to the pair trawl caught product and has now progressed to the point where you can take the number off the tag and view the skipper and his boat on the net. They also get a better price per kilo as it happens.

 

This would go a long way to killing off the unlicensed trade in bass, which is something that anglers and licensed commercial fishermen should agree with.

 

andyR

[Simon Everett]

Jaffa,

you are right about bass extending their range north, but not in sufficient numbers to warrant commercial exploitation. Instead of thinkng ONLY in a commercial fishing tunnel vision way, think of the benefit to the tourism of the NE instead. You would make far more by taking bass anglers out to catch the new NE bass and help to preserve the stocks - at the same time you could benefit the local guest house, pub, tackle shop, petrol station (not a lot but those visiting anglers have got to get home again).

 

The funny thing is, the bass have been present on the NE coast for about the last 10 years, but it is only NOW with the introduction of the BMP that commercial fishermen are wanting to catch them. If any of the commercials up there have been fishing for them already - and can prove this through sales receipts or merchants dockets over a number of years - then they will be able to get a license. If the bass have not been there in sufficient numbers for the commercials to bother with, then why is there the discomfort with the restrictions - it is restrictions on something that is of no interest anyway, so has no impact on the commercial fishermen but only impacts on the recreational. Surely you don't begrudge the sea angler something to angle for?

[Brian Carragher]

Jaffa,

 

The funny thing is, the bass have been present on the NE coast for about the last 10 years, but it is only NOW with the introduction of the BMP that commercial fishermen are wanting to catch them.

 

 

 

Simon

As posted on a previous thread that spawned this one I stated that I was catching bass and mullet off our coastline over 27 years ago. Are you saying I'm wrong or that the NE coast has moved

[wurzel]

Hello Brian

 

Nobody is disputing the fact that bass have always been present along the NE coast, there has not been enough to fish for commercialy if there had been they would have been fished for.

 

If the sea temps keep increaseing then bass will also increase, cod will decrease. Why as Jaffa says should the fishermen be stopped from switching over? who nows what will happen in 10 or even 20 years from now.

 

Quote

Instead of thinkng ONLY in a commercial fishing tunnel vision way

 

Anglers only look through a very narrow tunnel, and only think of an angling vision.

 

Quote

 

You would make far more by taking bass anglers out to catch the new NE bass and help to preserve the stocks

 

Not true.

 

Quote

it is restrictions on something that is of no interest anyway

 

How do you work that out?

You could say the same then about anglers, they have never realy bothered with bass in the NE or in Scotland so why should they now.

 

Quote

This would go a long way to killing off the unlicensed trade in bass, which is something that anglers and licensed commercial fishermen should agree with.

 

And it will enharnse the licensenced trade from Europe.

 

The whole thing stinks of the need to manage brigade at DEFRA.

 

We will have to wait and see.

[Brian Carragher]

Wurzel

 

I was catching bass commercially some 27 years ago but as I then thought of bass as a summer visitor only went after them during that time. Knowing what I do now about bass its obvious that they were there all year round and resident fish that had been established for some time. Grey mullet were also caught with the bass and good prices were to be had for both species. Bass have obviously been around a lot longer than the 27 years as we caught different year groups so the fish were spawning and breeding successfully.

 

The problem I have in the BMP is that I think its an eccellent regional plan for the deep south and southwest fisheries that folk want to impose nationally and the plan is so rigid in its concept and proposed implimentation that I think as a national model it leaves a lot to be desired.

 

I mentioned how long ago I was catching bass and mullet just as an example(even back then local people had difficulties accepting that the fish we were catching were bass and mullet because we'd been conditioned into believing that they could'nt survive or breed this far north up the coast) so if a viable sustainable fishing area develops then under the BMP local boats would not be able to fish for them. Licences could be bought from the RSA's whoever they would be ( recreationals charging commercials for the licence to fish for profit) and where would the money go, would a RSA committee be formed for every area or would some southern RSA determine northern fishing licences. Seems crazy to me. Those who berate the current system of tradeable quota licences and call fishermen greedy for selling something that they were given for nothing now seem to want to set up another tradeable licence but this time it's ok because the RSA's are involved.

 

As for taking anglers out and catching bass instead of landing them then that too is not always possible as local council licencing restrictions mean that this may not always be possible. Beach boats will not be able to get the required local authority licence due to health and safety concerns and there may not be any demand in that area for a local bass charter business anyway. If a boat has to wait untill there was sufficient demand from anglers to target bass they may just have starved themselves into financial suicide waiting for anglers who have never shown any interest in going afloat to catch bass.

 

I think we think along the same lines as far as the imposition of a BMP is concerned as like yourself and others on here I don't see how a one sized glove fits all the fingers that make up the UK fishery as a whole

[Simon Everett]

Brian,

the thing contained within the BMP that you overlook is the possibility of obtaining a license to fish for bass even without historical proof of bass landings making up a SUBSTANTIAL part of the fish return - but these applications will be reviewed on a case by case basis.

 

The other thing is, the licenses have been SUGGESTED by RSA input, but will either be managed by the Fisheries Office, or by the Environment Agency - that has yet to be decided and is nothing to do with us. That decision will be down to the civil servants.

 

That RSA has made demands and suggested a way of implementing those requirements does not mean we shall be running it. We shall also have to observe the measures that are put in place.

 

Personally, the thought of a commercial fisherman making 4 times as much money from one fish (because it has been given a chance to get bigger before it is caught) does not worry me provided there are plenty left for me. The whole crux of the BMP is that by leaving the brood stock alone and by giving the new recruits a chance to breed there will be more, bigger bass for everyone. THAT is what we are trying to achieve.

 

Commercials will make more money from the same number of fish - a 2lb fish is worth more than a 1lb fish, but it is the same fish. Is it really that difficult a concept to grasp?

[wurzel]

Quote

Commercials will make more money from the same number of fish - a 2lb fish is worth more than a 1lb fish, but it is the same fish. Is it really that difficult a concept to grasp?

 

So all that is needed is a rise in mesh and mls, why all the other crap that smells of the need to manage brigade.

 

Hello Brain

 

An interesting and good post, I was aware of bass on the NE coast, at Whitby the locals told of a few boxs being caught in the salmon nets once in a while when the water was dirty, we tried with the trolling rigs in some likely looking areas with no success, I wonder if your idea of commercial catches are the same as mine bareing in mind I'm quite greedy or is that needy.

As you say they are there and probably increasing as they are other places, I should imagine a bass entitlement licence would cost between 10 and 15 grand, as you say, difficult for a small beach boat to justify or even find.

[Fastd]

I post this as someone who has only ever caught about 20 bass. Every one of these was caught off Flamborough head on mackerel spinners off a 12' inflatable in 1979/80. I did not even know what they were. i dont know if this was a pure seasonal fluke or are they resident fish. I have never had one since

 

I came across a report today about year 1 grade fish being caught just north of their by a survey vessel, this means they have bred in the area.

 

They are moving north and me and snatchers gonna prove it next summer

 

Dave

[Jaffa]

Jaffa,

 

The proposed licensing scheme is only one component in the BMP. I am sure you would agree that having implemented a management strategy to ensure a more natural stock profile, any improvement or measurable progress will soon be wiped out without some form of effort control. Bag limits for anglers are also proposed so it won't be discriminatory.

 

From what I can make out, and folks that I have spoken to, the authors wished that those who have fished for bass over a number of years, using traditional, selective and environmentally sympathetic methods, should be encouraged to continue.

 

The idea of single species licenses, which this would be, is not new. Defra introduced this into the lobster and brown crab fishery as it was supposed to cap effort and limit the effects of derogation. That's not to say that if the stock rebounded better than we think, that new licenses could not be issued.

 

An interesting part of this is the carcass tagging idea. It is hope that with their introduction, there would be much better traceability which can be used as an enforcement tool. The SW hand liners introduced their own tagging scheme as a response to the pair trawl caught product and has now progressed to the point where you can take the number off the tag and view the skipper and his boat on the net. They also get a better price per kilo as it happens.

 

This would go a long way to killing off the unlicensed trade in bass, which is something that anglers and licensed commercial fishermen should agree with.

 

andyR

 

Hi Andy,

Fair point with your first paragraph, though the whole issue of a "a more natural stock profile" could lead to a lot of conflict between RSA and Commercials surely? Which "natural stock" are we aiming for here?

 

Okay, the authors have spoken to various local fishermen, built up a picture of the commercial bass fishery as it has been in their area and decided it would be good to let certain ones continue. I have a big problem with this based on what i understand - nothing stays the same, the environment does, and always has, changed a great deal. Most commercial fishermen are very aware of this but may anglers are not IMHO. I worry about inflexibility and room for change

 

The carcass tagging is a whole other can of worms IMHO. Yes its a great idea for those fishers to differentiate their product and get a better price - similar to diver caught scallops, but making it a blanket rule will lead to a host of negatives and I don't believe for one minute that it would make much difference to the unlicensed trade. It really deserves a thread of its own.