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

[SandTiger]

No, it's defined by ones ability to take fish for profit.

 

Your point being, sir?

[Steve Coppolo]

Well, a charter skipper profits from taking fish from the sea. Maybe in a different way than a commercial fisherman, but he still profits from taking a publicly owned resource. That's what I mean when I say that the line between a charter skipper who takes everything and a commercial fisherman is a fine one. Remember, those who make the rules don't see things the way we do.

 

I take it that's what you were getting at in your above post?

[SandTiger]

Well, a charter skipper profits from taking fish from the sea. Maybe in a different way than a commercial fisherman, but he still profits from taking a publicly owned resource. That's what I mean when I say that the line between a charter skipper who takes everything and a commercial fisherman is a fine one. Remember, those who make the rules don't see things the way we do.

 

I take it that's what you were getting at in your above post?

 

Nope, a charter skipper profits from consistantly putting anglers over good fish, that is part of the job description. How you appear to have a problem with that fact remains unclear to me? Given your logic, a tackle shop owner also profits from taking fish from the sea based on the rod & line they may have sold you?

 

If you wish to beat yourself up about taking fish and wrap yourself up in bureaucratic red tape than be my guest, but remember that is your choice - You're not a Catholic are you?

 

[glennk]

Catholic

 

Paul just emailed me a pic off his phone and requests you all join him for one.

 

Edited May 29, 2006 by glennk

[glennk]

So the governement are going to impose this on us anyway. Im beginning to think we would get a better deal here if the governement did set the rules for what we are going to get from the fishing organisations.

What are the fishing organisations going to do for anglers in these parts ? And who gave the nfsa the right to tell the government what rules they should impose on anglers from the north of the country. As I see it the whole thing is weighted on the side of bass fishing. I personally have lost faith in this whole bass thing. You all seem set on getting what benefits your sport to and dont want to even begin to understand how that impacts elsewhere. As soon as we say we want different things from you, you tell us change is coming whether we like it or not and you suggest we are immoral freezer fillers. Change may well be coming but I for one wont support your proposals, what benefits you guys in the south will wipe out our local charter fleets.

[Steve Coppolo]

Nope, a charter skipper profits from consistantly putting anglers over good fish, that is part of the job description. How you appear to have a problem with that fact remains unclear to me? Given your logic, a tackle shop owner also profits from taking fish from the sea based on the rod & line they may have sold you?

 

So what do they do with the good fish that he consistently puts them over? No one can deny that charter boats take fish from the sea. As you say, it's part of the job. I don't have a problem with it, but the charter skippers might in the future.

 

As for my logic, the fish are landed from the boat Davey, not the tackle shop. The same as it's the commercial skipper who lands the fish, not his net maker. Hence the skipper is required to be licenced and adhere to quotas, (don't laugh too loud), and the net maker is not.

 

If you wish to beat yourself up about taking fish and wrap yourself up in bureaucratic red tape than be my guest, but remember that is your choice - You're not a Catholic are you?

 

 

I'm not beating myself up about taking fish at all, or wrapping myself up in red tape. I take fish home to eat sometimes. I don't see anything wrong with taking fish in moderation. What I'm trying to get across is that if people are not careful, they may well find that they are faced with a whole new load of restrictions heaped upon them. A skipper who takes 12 anglers out and lets them take home 10 to 12 cod each could end up labelled semi-commercial and subject to a quota, especially if they refuse to change the way they do things. I'm not saying it will happen, but it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if it did.

 

Even if that doesn't happen, what are the chances of those skippers, or anglers, being taken seriously when they finally decide to try to do something about the cod? How seriously do you think the Tope bylaw being adopted by some SFC's would have been taken if the species wasn't seen largely as a catch and release species? Can you imagine going to your SFC and saying, "Look, I don't want those commercial fishermen killing and landing any Tope, but I want to retain my right to kill and land as many as I want"? The Tope bylaw, for what it's worth, is only being adopted because anglers have stated that they catch and release them most of the time.

 

Try thinking outside the box for a bit Dave. It's not anglers you've got to convince with your arguments, it's politicians. And if you're going to convince them you'll have to come up with a lot better than you've done on this forum.

[Steve Coppolo]

So the governement are going to impose this on us anyway. Im beginning to think we would get a better deal here if the governement did set the rules for what we are going to get from the fishing organisations.

The government ARE going to set the rules! It's not the angling organisations that are doing it. I wish it was.

 

What are the fishing organisations going to do for anglers in these parts ? And who gave the nfsa the right to tell the government what rules they should impose on anglers from the north of the country.

 

I don't know Glen, what are you going to do? You're the one up there, it's up to you to do something. You seem to think that the NFSA, have been working their nuts off to improve things for the southern angler. They haven't. It's the southern angler who's been working his nuts off. I remember having a moan about our union at work once and was told by an old hand that I was the union. It took me all of 5 seconds to realise what he meant. You've got to understand Glen that YOU are the NFSA in your part of the world. If you don't do anything, who's going to do it for you? Who would you like to sort it out for you? Leon, Tom and the others? It's not going to happen mate, they've got their hands more than full with everything else they've been doing. Remember, they are all volunteers doing it in their own time. It's up to you and other anglers in your area to do the same. The NFSA can give you advice on how best to do it and will no doubt support you, but that's about it.

 

No one gave anyone the right to tell the government what rules they should apply to anyone. Do you really believe that this government would take notice of a handful of anglers? The NFSA telling the government what rules to apply!! Mate, you've got to be joking!

Edited May 29, 2006 by Steve Coppolo

[big_cod]

Steve i am sorry mate but which planet are you really on you have no idea what goes on in the commercial sector i have lived in a sea side town all my life fished since the age of 5 and to hear people talking about bag limits on anglers litterally makes my blood boil .ANGLERS WILL MAKE NO IMPACT WHAT SO EVER ON COD STOCKS ANY BODY WHO THINKS THAT ARE WELL IMFORMED.

It sounds like some sort of crusade you guys are on WE DONT WANT BAG LIMITS AND WE DONT WANT LICENCENES THIS IS A BASS THING IF YOU WANT IT THAT KEEP IT IN HOUSE JUST DONT INVOLE EVEYBODY ELSE WE DONT WANT IT.

Edited May 29, 2006 by big_cod

[Steve Coppolo]

Steve i am sorry mate but which planet are you really on you have no idea what goes on in the commercial sector i have lived in a sea side town all my life fished since the age of 5 and to hear people talking about bag limits on anglers litterally makes my blood boil .ANGLERS WILL MAKE NO IMPACT WHAT SO EVER ON COD STOCKS ANY BODY WHO THINKS THAT ARE WELL IMFORMED.

It sounds like some sort of crusade you guys are on WE DONT WANT BAG LIMITS AND WE DONT WANT LICENCENES THIS IS A BASS THING IF YOU WANT IT THAT KEEP IT IN HOUSE JUST DONT INVOLE EVEYBODY ELSE WE DONT WANT IT.

 

Hello Paul

I've already said that as far as I know the bag limits being spoken about will apply to bass only for now and that's only if the BMP, or parts of it, get implemented by the government. It's a trade off as I see it.

 

From what I've read on this forum, yourself and Glen aren't too happy with the cod situation, and I don't blame you. What I've been trying to say is that if anglers in your part of the country aren't happy with things, then at some point they will want something done to improve things. Is that bit right so far? If it is and there comes a time when you manage to get things changed, then you will probably face the same kind of trade off. I'm not an expert but I reckon you've got two options. One is that you let things carry on the same and keep being unhappy with your lot. The other is to push for changes and accept what comes with them, but still push for the best deal you can get. That is what is happening with the bass at the moment, nothing more and nothing less.

Edited May 29, 2006 by Steve Coppolo

[SandTiger]

So what do they do with the good fish that he consistently puts them over? No one can deny that charter boats take fish from the sea. As you say, it's part of the job. I don't have a problem with it, but the charter skippers might in the future.

 

As I said, it is down to the individual - hence my example of the 1000 fish to the Caithness Comp and my example of a hypothetical angling trip - It is not your role to impose your restrictions unless you happen to know the given area that you seak to impose restrictions on - To do otherwise only shows that you are simply out to make a name for yourself and have no real understanding of conservation beyond your very small area. Maybe we should take people off fish when *we* feel they have caught enough?

 

As for my logic, the fish are landed from the boat Davey, not the tackle shop. The same as it's the commercial skipper who lands the fish, not his net maker. Hence the skipper is required to be licenced and adhere to quotas, (don't laugh too loud), and the net maker is not.

 

We are fully licenced to operate under the MGN 280 scheme, which I will email to you this week if you so wish, sod it - I'll put it up on the site for inspection, how's that? Now would you care to expand upon which fish are commercially landed from our boat, since you sought to open this little can of worms?

 

I'm not beating myself up about taking fish at all, or wrapping myself up in red tape. I take fish home to eat sometimes. I don't see anything wrong with taking fish in moderation. What I'm trying to get across is that if people are not careful, they may well find that they are faced with a whole new load of restrictions heaped upon them. A skipper who takes 12 anglers out and lets them take home 10 to 12 cod each could end up labelled semi-commercial and subject to a quota, especially if they refuse to change the way they do things. I'm not saying it will happen, but it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if it did.

 

Don't make me laugh, I've worked fish-markets where the average landing of fish twice a week is 170 tonnes per sailing, presumably this is the quotas that you seek to encourage for a slap on the back from the 'good ol' boys'? At a low average 340 tonnes of fish landed weekly at just one port your ambitions seem nothing less then pure self-indulgence or at best, misguided.

 

Even if that doesn't happen, what are the chances of those skippers, or anglers, being taken seriously when they finally decide to try to do something about the cod? How seriously do you think the Tope bylaw being adopted by some SFC's would have been taken if the species wasn't seen largely as a catch and release species? Can you imagine going to your SFC and saying, "Look, I don't want those commercial fishermen killing and landing any Tope, but I want to retain my right to kill and land as many as I want"? The Tope bylaw, for what it's worth, is only being adopted because anglers have stated that they catch and release them most of the time.

 

Again, I strongly resent your inclination that we "land" fish, given that this is a technical term which you may be asked to back up, so I will invite you to rephrase your question.

 

 

Try thinking outside the box for a bit Dave. It's not anglers you've got to convince with your arguments, it's politicians. And if you're going to convince them you'll have to come up with a lot better than you've done on this forum.

 

gee-whiz, do you really think so?

 

You really need to take some time out, lighten up and stop acting so surprised when you get a bit of a lash back for attempting to interfere in other peoples work just because you are out to make a name for yourself.

Edited May 29, 2006 by SandTiger