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

[glennk]

In your opinion, who are the majority of anglers and what do they want? Is it the whole country that depend on just cod, or just whitby?

 

 

Steve I could quite easily turn that around and add the words South and bass.

I was annoyed with what I read there from this new nfsa gadge. Once again fish are talked of as a whole and discussion of gill nets is irrelevent here, they arent used to be honest I'd swap them for the trawlers tomorrow. Why arent the NFSA trying to get pair trawling banned on a national level?.

Edited June 4, 2006 by glennk

[Steve Coppolo]

Trying to get anything banned is a painfully slow process, and something that the NFSA or any other sea angling organisation haven't managed to achieve yet. To get the bass proposal as far as it's got took 30 years, and we haven't actually got anything yet!

 

I think the fact that the bass MLS proposal got looked at in the first place, and got a lot of publicity, has made people believe that sea anglers can now start making all sorts of demands. We can't. Well, we can, but we probably won't get far with them.

 

I'd like to see pair trawling banned too, as would most sea anglers, but I reckon we're years away from anything like that yet. Remember with the bass MLS all we asked for is an increase of 3.5 inches, and an increase in mesh size of 3/4 of an inch. ASt the moment even that seems too much to ask.

[glennk]

Point taken Steve. I guess I just expect everything all at once. I'm annoyed there isnt a big voice reaching government from the north east. We have as many hardcore anglers as anywhere yet people dont even know or understand anything about or fishing, the points raised here prove it. Yes there are a few bass around up here now, some of the lads I know do pretty well but that isnt really what the north east is about. Were about winter cod fishing, large open boundaried roving competitions, people fishingmiles from anywhere in the dead of night. If bag limits, licences, no gill nets and open access made that type of fishing better than id be jumping for joy with what is being proposed. Truth is IMHO not one of those measures will assist cod stocks in any way. Do you know of any research that proves me wrong ?

[Steve Coppolo]

Cod fishing used to be big in the south east too Glenn. Dungeness, Reculver, Aldeburgh, Orford to name but a few famous cod beaches down here, used to be lit up along their lengths with anglers' tilley lamps. Now we have to fish for little codling of about 1-2 lb mostly. A 3lb codling had become a good fish from the beach, which is pityful. The Cod fishing down here has deteriorated so much that I don't bother fishing for them any more.

 

At the same time, most people never fished for bass. There were a few specialists, but most anglers were only interested in winter cod. It is no coincidence that we now have lots and lots of bass anglers down here. People are fishing for what is available, and right now that is bass.

[Ian Burrett]

I suspect Big Cod will get much support for fighting bag limits if the story I was told today is common throughout the fleet.

 

A group of my regulars fished from Whitby 2 weeks ago and the skipper started swearing at them because they were putting fish back. His exact words were "I haven't brought you all the fxxxxxxg way out here for you to put fish back"

 

He was even insisting they kept the Codling at a pound weight. The Skipper ended up with two boxes of Cod and Ling which he presumerably sold illegally.

 

Ironically the skipper has lost a booking off these boys as they will not sail with him again.

[glennk]

Well that is bad news Ian. Surely after paying 40 quid you have the right to decide what you wish to do with your fish. The skipper deserves to loose a booking. I would not want to fish on the boat of someone who dictates to their customers, its bad practice.

However that does not detract from my belief that if you want to keep the cod you catch for the pan then you should be able to.

 

Will you be letting us know which skipper it was ?

Edited June 4, 2006 by glennk

[The doctor]

To coin an often used phrase; 'you get the level of representation you deserve' or to put another slant on it, 'you get the level of representation you are willing to pay for'. If you are not prepared to pay for representation why expect anything in return, after all if you are not a member of a union, would you expect that union to represent you personally in an industrial dispute?? This is often where the problem occurs, in that those who openly criticise the NFSA are not members, have limited understanding of what the NFSA are actually doing, by being hypercritical are deterring others from joining, thereby reducing the funds available to represent the sea angling fraternity, and of course what the snipers tend to forget is that those who represent RSA in England and Wales are unpaid volunteers, who pay their own expenses (between £1,000 and £1,500 per annum), and have to use their own holiday entitlement to represent sea anglers. A vicious circle which is probably doing more harm to the aim of improving the lot of sea anglers in England and Wales, the likes of Wurzel, Binatone and Steve Gathergood must be laughing in their fish holds, or in the case of wurzel his net bin. All of this has been said before, yet the point seems to get wasted on those who persist in denigrating the efforts of a very small group of dedicated anglers who have the best interests of sea angling and anglers in general, at heart.

 

Whether you like it or not, the facts and figures quoted are all we have at present to support the importance of our sector other than some anecdotal evidence, and given our limited financial income (NFSA Conservation Group), we have to be realistic in what we can achieve. There is absolutely no point in going to DEFRA and demanding that the commercial exploitation of cod be stopped with immediate effect, if ICES, WWF, Sea at Risk, Greenpeace et al are unable to achieve this then why do we expect that we can. We have to be realistic and give recovery measures time, there are certainly good indications that effort reductions are having a beneficial effect, provided effort is not significantly increased. Include technical conservation measures which will aid the recovery (discards etc.), and the plight of cod may not be so bleak in 5 years time, as was mooted back in 2000.

 

Similarly, for anglers (NFSA) to push for a total ban on pair trawling would tie up all of our resources for the next 10 years with little promise of a favourable outcome. It is clear, to me anyway, that any proposal must be based on sound scientific fact (deleterious: to fish populations or localised stocks, habitat and environment, endangered species, etc.), if there are sound socio-economic reasons then this data may also be used to build our case, however, in the absence of such data we should not waste our efforts and limited resources by requesting for such restrictions on a whim. It is not just a case of saying we want this, now give it to us, there has to be a prolonged dialogue, we have to show why such a proposal will benefit the environment, the biological resource, our sector and not significantly impact any other user group/exploiter.

 

The problem is that many anglers set the standard for cod as that of 30 years ago, this is never going to happen, the ‘Gadoid Outburst’ was a one off, it had never been recorded before, and is unlikely to happen again, it was a coincidence of high environmental and ecological values that produced optimal conditions leading to massive recruitment, significant growth due to high prey availability, and limited predation (low herring stocks), all of these factors led to a never before seen explosion in gadoid species (cod, haddock, coalfish etc.). It is unrealistic to try to restore stocks to this level again.

 

Being a NE angler I understand Glenn's frustration, it was for that reason I got involved with angling politics and the NFSA; in other words there was no good reason to stand on a beach, rock ledge and or boat bemoaning the fact that there was very little to catch, and then doing nothing about it. I decided that I couldn't continue moaning about the poor state of inshore fish populations without being actively involved, and of course the perceived imbalance between the north and the south was also a key point I wished to redress. Having taken the initiative and joined the NFSA and ultimately asked onto the Conservation Group, it became clear that there is no North – South divide, there is certainly a stronger influence from the south, purely because they have a significantly higher number of members. The perception of the North – South divide appears to be one that pervades from the north, probably as an excuse to justify anglers lack of commitment to the NFSA, again, if you perceive a problem, work from the inside to change it, slagging off others from the outside will achieve nothing.

 

The main problem we have is not just related to the lack of input or understanding of the issues by anglers, but more importantly it is a total unwillingness by those who ply their trade in the sector, to get involved or support the few who are responding on their behalf. The tackle trade have done very little if anything, to assist or support RSA in its dialogue with the powers that be, and they are the ones, along with other beneficiaries (charter boat operators, tackle shops, etc.) who stand to make either a benefit or loss on the outcome, surely you would expect these people to support moves for the integration of angling requirements into management principals.

 

I guess it all boils down to if you are not happy with what’s currently going on in RSA, get involved, RSA always needs new activists, those who have a clear and coherent thought process and are capable of a bit of tub thumping. From a personal point of view, being actively involved has reduced my fishing by probably 4/5ths, I’d much rather be fishing than sat at a computer or in meetings with commercial fishermen/DEFRA officials. If we are making such a fist of it, as is being suggested, then I’ll quite happily stand down and go back to fishing, which is all I really wanted to do in the first place.

 

Those who can change the world can happily take my place, one word of warning; you’ll need to support yourself financially to the tune of at least £1k per annum (without recompense), write off 2 weeks of your annual holiday entitlement, forget about fishing other than just the occasional trip, spend long hours reading boring documents, and at times writing even more tedious documents and finally be very thick skinned, because the flack that comes your way is unbelievable.

 

We do what we do because we have a passion for sea angling, it appears we are in the minority because everyone else just wants to either put the boot in, or quite obviously doesn’t care enough.

 

End of rant

 

 

Best Fishes

 

 

Doc.

[Ian Burrett]

Well that is bad news Ian. Surely after paying 40 quid you have the right to decide what you wish to do with your fish. The skipper deserves to loose a booking. I would not want to fish on the boat of someone who dictates to their customers, its bad practice.

However that does not detract from my belief that if you want to keep the cod you catch for the pan then you should be able to.

 

Will you be letting us know which skipper it was ?

 

You have PM

[The doctor]

Nigel Proctor participates on the North Sea RAC (Regional Advisory Council) on behalf of the European Anglers Alliance. This is one important forum where cod talks take place. Pre-meetings take place between anglers from various countries but more people with knowledge about fish, fisheries and locations are always more than welcome to join in and support e.g. via email discussions before RAC meetings take place. Talk to Nigel.

 

 

I'm more than happy to discuss any issue regarding angling or the fishery as a whole with anyone, although as stated the NSRAC is for the North Sea only, and whilst I can discuss issues relating to other RACs, it is not something I can take directly to the NSRAC. I can however, relate such issues to the other RSA reps on the other RAC's.

 

Cod is an issue that regularly arises, however, the RAC can only comment on current measures and offer reasonable advice to the commission, although given that the RAC's are dominated (2/3rds majority) by the commercial sector, with the others (greens (WWF etc.), north sea womens network, coastal communities etc.), RSA is allowed one member to represent all the anglers in the EU. So don't expect to get too much if any benefits through the NSRAC, the principal idea is to be included and not sat outside looking in.

 

best Fishes

 

 

Doc.

[glennk]

Fair point Nigel, I realise you put a lot in and I do not knock any of you for that. My impatience gets the better of me I admit that much. But I am afraid I still believe what I have said. I believe there is a north south devide, to me it is clear. But thats my perception, different to yours I now realise but none of us are the same, and I always say what I think.

 

I would be interested in your thoughts on the original points Nigel.

 

Do you support bag limits for cod in the north east? and if so at what level should they be set?

 

Will bag limits for anglers improve cod stocks ?

 

How do you see bag limits impacting on the north east charter fleet and the numerous fishing clubs along our coastline? Do they have a future?

 

Do you think a licence for North east anglers would be beneficial, and if so why ?