Is it the end for charter skippers and fishing clubs? No time to bury your heads

[Jaffa]

An interesting theory and there is some sense in it... and his criticsm of some of teh standard practices such as lumping unexplained mortaility into fishing mortality is a fair comment.

 

However, he seems to make a simplistic jump to his main conclusion from the basic interpretation that lack of food is the main problem. He uses that to reason that more fishing would help reduce the competition for the food and that would help the stock recover.

 

Surely though, before being able to make a decision on the best way to manage the stock you have to understand why the feed is low. It certainly isn't low because the fish stocks are exceptionally high as there used to be enough feed to maintain much higher stock levels.

 

Plankton distribution, water temperatures, pollution, the sandeel fishery, bottom trawling, sand and gravel dredging, discards, and even the pleagic fishery will all affect the food supply.

 

Ignoring these and focussing on one simple solution is extremely short sighted in my opinion. Not that the conventional method of fishery management is any better though.

 

 

 

Is it simplistic or brilliant ? Its an interesting link anyway

 

IF its true that feed levels have fallen to the point they can longer support the stock, then surely theres some sense in harvesting it while you can ? I wonder if the Faroese management system, will all its "risk taking" protects a core of older fish in some way that ours apparently does not?

 

Genius or nutter, i wish our parliment had a few MPS that could even come close to his interest and experience in the subject

 

Like you, id like to know a lot more about whats going on with the "feed" and why. The biggest fishery in the North Sea has just "collapsed", with as far as ive seen anyway, zero evidence that commercial fishing was responsible, yet it hardly seems to get mentioned

[Jaffa]

http://www.google.com/custom?q=bass&sitese...&sa.x=11&sa.y=8

http://www.ices.dk/reports/ACFM/2003/SGBASS/SGBASS2003.pdf

 

http://www.ices.dk/reports/ACFM/2004/SGBASS/SGBASS04.pdf

 

http://ukbass.com/2005/12/bass-mls-scientific-view_09.html

 

Leon, i've read

 

 

http://www.ices.dk/reports/ACFM/2003/SGBASS/SGBASS2003.pdf

 

and

 

http://www.ices.dk/reports/ACFM/2004/SGBASS/SGBASS04.pdf

 

but my impression is that they support what Steve Good is saying, ie the Bass stock is being fished sustainably and that the bass debate is only really about politics and which group should get the benefits. What am i missing ?

 

Do you have any links to changes in the age structure of Bass over time? I have seen papers identifying the problems fishing is causing to cod stocks in that respect, but never seen one about Bass.

[Leon Roskilly]

Leon, i've read

http://www.ices.dk/reports/ACFM/2003/SGBASS/SGBASS2003.pdf

 

and

 

http://www.ices.dk/reports/ACFM/2004/SGBASS/SGBASS04.pdf

 

but my impression is that they support what Steve Good is saying, ie the Bass stock is being fished sustainably and that the bass debate is only really about politics and which group should get the benefits. What am i missing ?

 

Do you have any links to changes in the age structure of Bass over time? I have seen papers identifying the problems fishing is causing to cod stocks in that respect, but never seen one about Bass.

 

 

Sorry Jaffa, I don't have any reports that show the change in age structure, but I believe that the ICES reports confirm that the bass fishery is now a recruitment fishery.

 

(Remember that bass grow to over 20lbs, live some 20years and spawn 15 times. A commercial bass fishery was not established until the 80's since when the stock has been increasingly trimmed at mls and it is now relatively rare for anglers to encounter a good fish)

 

The benefits of increasing the average size of bass is intended to be of benefit to both commercial and recreational anglers.

 

I doubt that if I waved a magic wand and all bass now under 45cm were to magically become 45cm overnight, that anyone from the catching sector would be complaining (then again .....!)

 

If it was meant to purely benefit recreationals, as originally suggested in the Net Benefits Report, then it is likely that 45cm would have merely been a stepping stone towards 55cm.

 

The complaints from the catching sector have mainly revolved around not being able to access the stock for the time it will take to grow from 36cm to 45cm, and the cost of replacing nets for those with a bigger mesh.

 

And yes, it is politics that has caused the furore imo.

 

1. The proposals originated from Recreational Sea Anglers, and they shouldn't be given an inch

 

2. BASS never consulted with the industry or the ASFC before the proposals were discussed with DEFRA. That put a few people's noses out of joint and they have since been stirring and muddying the water like crazy!

[spasor]

Sorry Leon, but Gordon Brown doesn`t have to justify any of his tax impositions. He got clean away with imposing VAT on insurance policies that affected just about everyone in the land. Do you think that he`d shy away from instructing DEFRA to start a sea angling licence, because he`d upset a few million anglers?

[seaside]

Sorry Leon, but Gordon Brown doesn`t have to justify any of his tax impositions. He got clean away with imposing VAT on insurance policies that affected just about everyone in the land. Do you think that he`d shy away from instructing DEFRA to start a sea angling licence, because he`d upset a few million anglers?

 

I'm sure you're right in as much as he wouldn't shy away from doing it, but what might give him second thoughts is how to collect it. That's easy enough with VAT on policies as it's a direct add at source, but sea angling licences would need physical enforcement - they can't even get drivers with mobile phones and all you have to do to catch them is stand at any point by the road and they'll come to you.

 

Some official wanders across ploughed fields in mid-winter to some remote shore mark and asks a bunch of anglers if they are licensed -- imagine the response !!

 

Tax recreational sea anglers - it would not be popular - and right now, the labour parties in Scotland and England don't need to be any less popular.

Edited May 28, 2006 by seaside

[glennk]

No need to wander across ploughed fields and down cliffs etc seaside. You wait in the car parking areas for them to return.

A visit to sandsend car park on an Autumn night and you could easily find 30 anglers (mostly catching sod all, but that is another matter entirely) Sit around and wait for those who went off to fish the rock marks to return and you could get yourself another 20. Its not that difficult and if you hit them hard enough in the Pocket the word gets around and people start watching their backs and thinking if I pay 20 quid I'm free of the anxiety and worry of wondering whether or not the officials are going to nab me.

[Leon Roskilly]

Seaside,

 

We do have a successful freshwater licence scheme in the UK, and the miles of bank far, far exceed the miles of coast, with much of it in hard to reach places often on private land, with anglers hidden in vegetation that comes right down to the bank, then reedbeds extending into the water, and with many anglers fishing all night for carp, catfish etc.

 

A totally different situation to checking licenses along Chesil beach and most public piers, jetties and harbours etc.

 

Also many other countries have a sea angling licence and seem to manage OK.

 

I'm not arguing that a licence is a good thing, it's just that the obstacles you see to enforcement and collection of licence fees are something of a red herring.

 

Anyway, it's not enforcement, but compliance that will make it successful

 

And as with most licensing systems you'll find a small hard core risking it, but as with car tax, a sufficient number of people prefer to pay up and have the peace of mind that comes with being 'legal, to make the scheme worthwhile.

Edited May 28, 2006 by Leon Roskilly

[seaside]

Seaside,

 

We do have a successful freshwater licence scheme in the UK, and the miles of bank far, far exceed the miles of coast, with much of it in hard to reach places often on private land, with anglers hidden in vegetation that comes right down to the bank, then reedbeds extending into the water, and with many anglers fishing all night for carp, catfish etc.

 

I'll skip the sea licence debate, but I am familiar enough with the freshwater licence to know it is not a UK licence - one is not needed in Scotland.

[SandTiger]

As for bag limets and how charter boats would deal with a lisence for anglers well a charter boat could just pay one lisence to cover the boats anglers all year. There are always common sense answers that DEFRA will need educating by charter skippers.

 

Why, it's not as if charter skippers/operators really have much else to spend their money on after all, maybe they could apply for a dispensation on being SOLAS compliant by way of a trade off?

 

 

 

... If I could have a little tiny piece of what they have in the states, I'd happily pay for a licence and adhere to a 2 fish daily bag limit. If you want to carry on catching small codling, pouting and whiting while the commercial boats fill their boots, you carry on whinging.

 

 

 

Again, I can't help but think that you have hold of the wrong end of the stick here and have allowed yourself to become blinded by some political notion that a '2 bag limit is the way forward' mentality just because it may be applicable to your given area.

 

 

 

Example: 12 geezers come out on my boat and catch say 10-20 Cod each and then choose to keep them for them and theres, then what is the problem – I know those fish have been caught in a sustainable (and selective) manner, ie rod & line without the impact of netting. I also know that 12 anglers will not be buying commercially caught fish.

 

 

 

Can you please explain to me which is the right way forward?

[Steve Coppolo]

Can you please explain to me which is the right way forward?

 

I already have, you've just read it!

 

Well, that's my idea of the right way forward anyway. You'll have to ask someone else if you want a different view.