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

[The doctor]

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.

 

After nearly 30 years getting to where we are now (which to my mind is probably nowhere close to were we should be - Yes I'm as impatient as the next man, and still extremely frustrated (but my sex life is of no importance here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)), things appear to be moving very slowly, however, we are on the radar screen, which is a big improvement to 2 yrs ago. The wheels of Government move very slowly indeed, we have limited resources and an unpaid, inexperienced lobby, we are coming up against an industry that is fighting for its existence and as a result is extremely vociferous, as well as extremely well supported and funded with full time professional lobbyists. Those few RSA volunteers currently in the front line are close to becoming burnt out, those we represent won’t provide the support, and those who stand to financially gain or lose more than anyone appear to be uncommitted to the cause. In an ideal world we could gain benefits and trade some of our historical rights (e.g. sea angling rod licence) however, it is not an ideal world and other than a couple of reports proclaiming the social and economic benefits of RSA we currently have very little to trade with. So we make the best of our situation and continue to beat the drum.

 

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? .

 

From a personal point of view bags limits should potentially be investigated and set as stock or population densities require, if a population or stock is in reasonable or good condition then I see no reason to implement a restriction on the recreational take. Further to this, I would want to see what the overriding cause of concern was for the population/stock, in other words the reason for decline, if it was proven that recreational exploitation was the principal or even a significant mitigating element in the decline of a stock, then it would be difficult to argue against a restriction in the recreational use of the stock or resource. However, if the principal impactor was lets say for easy reckoning commercial exploitation, I would expect measures commensurate to that exploitation being implemented to ensure sustainability of the stock/resource and the continued availability to all. As stated previously, I believe that the measures implemented to recover North Sea cod stocks are slowly beginning to show some benefit, one should consider that the decline and subsequent recovery, although as yet limited, occurred during a period when bag limits on RSA take were not in force. If cod does recover to acceptable limits why introduce a limitation on the recreational take when there is no evidence to suggest that this type of activity is impacting the stock(s)/resource and recovery is achievable from extremely low levels with out the need to resort to restricting the angling take. The problem is that this notion may be applied to broadcast spawners, but I am sceptical that it could include those species which bear live young or produce just a few eggs (predominantly the Elasmobranchs – Skate/Rays and Sharks). The reason being that if the stock/resource of the these species were at such low levels and recruitment commensurate with the population density, it would be difficult to argue against a bag limit and possibly even a total ban on the landing, although not the catching.

 

 

Will bag limits for anglers improve cod stocks ?

 

Stocks no, but localised populations possibly, but only on an extremely localised basis, e.g. individual wrecks or grounds, or even nearshore areas (Bempton, Filey Brigg etc.). I suspect that there are good arguments to be made with regard to the issue of bag limits for cod, not least the issue of mortality (cod caught in deep water), however, these fish can be returned quite easily with a minimal mortality rate. However what would be required to effect this would be the wholesale re-education of anglers and a change from heavy wrecking gears to lighter set ups to enable fish to be brought up at a slower rate, thereby negating the effects of pressure changes on their physiology. Therefore unless, all anglers went out and bought light tackle, the benefits of a bag limit on the NE charter fleets would be meaningless, as the mortality rate would be similar to the pre-bag limit take.

 

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?

 

Such bag limits would to all intents and purpose destroy the NE Charter fleet, although there are a number of reasons for this, and not just the issue of bag limits. Firstly anglers come to ports like Whitby, Hartlepool etc. for the cod, wrecking and ground fishing, to a lesser extent the haddock fishing and possible large ling, it is however, the cod which draws the anglers to these ports. Limit the number they can take, and you will significantly limit, but not exclude, the number of anglers who will visit these ports. Such an effect would be drive those part time charter skippers out of business, and those who are full time would become part time.

 

An offset to this problem may be diversification, the NE is not just a Mecca for cod, there are other species for which there may be a viable market (tope, bass, rays, pollock etc.) however, this would require investment in both time (to research) and tackle. My experience (putting my head on the block here) is that very few NE charter operators would have the inclination to diversify, they state that anglers don’t want to go toping or fishing for bass and rays they want to go codding, well in my experience many anglers travel from the north and the midlands to go toping, bassing and after rays etc., predominantly on the south coast or in Welsh and Scottish waters, because that is where they assume that the best opportunity to catch these species is, the problem is that they are driving away from some significant potential, and all the while skippers are being paid to go codding that is all they will do.

 

With regard to NE shore clubs, yes it will practically destroy club match angling, but that will be the case throughout England and Wales where catch and release is not practised (yes I know its not feasible during the winter months – roving matches and all that). It’s a simple fact that the introduction of bag limits would bring about the end of club match fishing, especially coastal community clubs (Filey SAC, Whiby SAC, Scarboro SAC etc.). Its probably this fact that may ultimately deter a generic introduction of a limited (2 fish) all species bag limit.

 

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

 

I make no bones for the fact that I have always said I am willing to pay for a sea angling rod licence, there should however, be a few proviso’s attached.

 

Under 16’s don’t require one.

The money generated is used solely to manage and enhance recreational sea angling, be that through improving facilities, access, youth development and research into angling target species.

 

Whilst I appreciate your enthusiasm for NE angling (as do I (YALASA)), the bigger picture has to be incorporated, micro-management of RSA will not work in isolation, which is why YALASA is so important, we can contribute the local perspective to the national picture. Fragmentation of angling by the regions will do just that, fragment angling.

 

Best fishes

 

 

Doc.

Edited June 4, 2006 by The doctor

[Leon Roskilly]

Glenn,

 

A bag-limit by itself brings no benefit to anyone apart from the commercial fishermen who fear that unlicensed rod an line fishermen and 'hobby' netsmen take away some of their market. And a limit on anglers and hobby fishermen would mean more fish for them.

 

A licence by itself brings no benefit to anglers if it just means money is taken from anglers for what they get free now. Or worse that the licence money was used to pay towards current fisheries management purely for the benefit of the catching sector.

 

But imagine if as part of a package that included bag limits of 50 cod per day for anglers, pair trawling for cod was banned.

 

Imagine that a licence was part of a package that meant no netting or trawling within 10 miles, increased commercial mls for all species above their spawning size, closure of nursery areas and close seasons on breeding fish.

 

Who wouldn't support such a package, that included licences and bag-limits? (No doubt there will be some!)

 

None of the angling organisations will support bag limits or licences on their own, but will fight together forthe best deal possible.

 

Now it may be that the government will decide that anglers are too divided amongst themselves, are unsupportive of their organisations, and therfore they might just as wellt go ahead and impose bag limits for the sake of being fair to the catching sector who suffer from quotas, days at sea and many other restrictions, and introduce a licence pointing out that fisheries management costs the public purse and as anglers benefit from that (how ever badly they suffer through bad fisheries management in favour of the catching sector), they should pay something towards it.

 

But if anglers are seen to be broadly united, and support the major organisations, especially the NFSA, they will negotiate and ask the NFSA etc, what kind of package would be largely acceptable.

 

No, we won't get a ban on pair trawling, or a ten mile limit, but with the right people at the negotiating table, adequately resourced to present solid evidence on what would be beneficial, not only to anglers, but to the wider interests of the Country, it's possible that a package could be put together that would greatly benefit the future development of angling, with safeguards for those areas where bag limits and licence structures could be injurous.

 

It doesn't make sense to ask if bag limits and/or a licence is going to be beneficial, not until a package has been put together that we can weigh up the benefits and the negatives.

 

To get to that point, there is a tremendous amount of work to be done: research of the case for RSA, the socio-economic benefits we are looking for, how angling affects and is affected by fish stock availability and stock age/size structure, which areas are important and which species are important where etc.

 

Somone has to do that work, as well as attend the meetings, put forward proposals and negotiate them forward, putting forward counter-proposals when fait accomplis are attempted, as well as finding and consolidating political support, and preparing the ground with public relations and disemminating information.

 

If we do it right, we could improve on the angling experience more than newcomers to the sport could possibly imagine.

 

If we remain divided, our organisations largely unsupported, we will mostly get what we are given, and will be expected to be grateful for that.

 

 

There are changes coming, and every angler should be aware that things are likely to be different in future.

 

Every angler whould be working out what they want and how that can be achieved, and every part of the country should be looking at how future changes are likely to affect them and what they would want from the changes that are coming.

 

And I'm not only talking about bag limits and licences.

 

There are Marine Protected Areas coming, where anglers will not be allowed to fish.

 

Areas of the sea set aside for non-fishing use,under marine spatial planning.

 

Access to popular angling venues closed to angling because of public liability and security concerns, and simply because anglers are a nuisance.

 

And loads of other issues coming our way.

 

The only way to deal with all of this is for anglers, clubs, federations etc toget behind the NFSA, get involved and change the NFSA if necessary, but support and build an organisation that can take all of this on and win.

Edited June 4, 2006 by Leon Roskilly

[glennk]

mmmmmmmm,

 

I feel very dissapointed and unoptimistic about the future. I can see you all do a lot of work and Im sorry if I offended any of you, I just get so damn frustrated. The thought that my fishing club and those that Nigel mentions could come to an end depresses me to say the least, fishing is more than a hobbey to me it has become my life, I could never support any measure that would finish off our fishing clubs, and I seriously hope you wouldnt either Nigel as Im sure your as much a north east angler at heart as myself. You fish the matches and even take the occasional charter trip from Whitby whilst going under the pseudonym of Binimoan. We might not have any choice at the end of the day but we should make it very clear that we arent going to accept it lieing down. If NFSA said we will not support anything that will ruin business or fishing clubs then you might see a few north east lads get behind it. I only speak for those I know but the word coming from our club right now is no way do we back nfsa. I think Paul and the charter skippers would also be very voiciferous in opposition to any measures that would finish them off.

 

 

You say the Charter skippers should diversify. Do you think those species exist off Whitby ? My father in law was telling me how tope had been discussed as the potential saviour for the North east charter skippers. He seemed shocked when I told him only 1 had been caught here last year. I understand a few of you will be trying with Malcolm this summer. Lets hope you can show us the way.

[big_cod]

Hi IAn, Sorry. I will email you when I get back in.

Edited June 5, 2006 by big_cod

[Ian Burrett]

post removed

Edited June 5, 2006 by Ian Burrett

[glennk]

Edited June 5, 2006 by glennk

[wurzel]

Hello Doc

 

Quote

 

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.

 

 

Well there you go ! There is hope for you yet.

 

Quote

The wheels of Government move very slowly indeed, we have limited resources and an unpaid, inexperienced lobby, we are coming up against an industry that is fighting for its existence and as a result is extremely vociferous, as well as extremely well supported and funded with full time professional lobbyists.

 

 

 

This might be true of the bigger off shore sector, but far from true of the inshore small boat inshore sector, which I think is more like your description of the angler’s plight and representation. this is why I first got involved with the NSRAC, as you say it costs and I could not afford to keep up with the travelling circus that is the NSRAC ,it’s the time lost at sea more than any thing, so thankfully John , who you have met , and Tom Brown offered to help out .

We are also up against well supported and funded with full time professional lobbyists(environmentalists) who tar us with the same brush as a 42 meter 3000 hp beam trawler. We are also having the same trouble as you getting the commission no acknowledge that we even exist.

We have the added problem of fish being a commodity, and a lot of influence on decisions is from quota traders (PO's),who are not keen to end up with a commodity they can not sell or lease.

 

 

We have just finnished doing some work with CEFAS on gear selectivity, if you want any info on this I can send you some stuff I done for myself, or speak to Andy Revell at CEFAS who will be doing the main report.

[The doctor]

mmmmmmmm,

 

I feel very dissapointed and unoptimistic about the future. I can see you all do a lot of work and Im sorry if I offended any of you, I just get so damn frustrated. The thought that my fishing club and those that Nigel mentions could come to an end depresses me to say the least, fishing is more than a hobbey to me it has become my life, I could never support any measure that would finish off our fishing clubs, and I seriously hope you wouldnt either Nigel as Im sure your as much a north east angler at heart as myself. You fish the matches and even take the occasional charter trip from Whitby whilst going under the pseudonym of Binimoan. We might not have any choice at the end of the day but we should make it very clear that we arent going to accept it lieing down. If NFSA said we will not support anything that will ruin business or fishing clubs then you might see a few north east lads get behind it. I only speak for those I know but the word coming from our club right now is no way do we back nfsa. I think Paul and the charter skippers would also be very voiciferous in opposition to any measures that would finish them off.

You say the Charter skippers should diversify. Do you think those species exist off Whitby ? My father in law was telling me how tope had been discussed as the potential saviour for the North east charter skippers. He seemed shocked when I told him only 1 had been caught here last year. I understand a few of you will be trying with Malcolm this summer. Lets hope you can show us the way.

 

Glenn,

 

just to reassure you, as I'm sure you are aware through YALASA, I personally would fight tooth and nail to oppose any measures that would bring about the demise of angling clubs or charter fleets, not just in the NE but anywhere in the UK. This stance is in line with that of the NFSA, who have not said at any point that they will support a broadscale bag limit, although in line with B.A.S.S, bag limits may have a place in future management practices for sea bass. However, the introduction of bag limits should be viewed as one component of a long overdue, structured program, aimed at restoring both the numbers and size ranges of the European sea bass stocks. I've neither seen nor heard anything from the NFSA that states they would support bag limits on any species other than bass, and personally I would walk away from it if they did other than for sound ecological reasons.

 

I would refer you to the YALASA policy statement, why write such a statement of intent and then try to undermine it. I reiterate my earlier thoughts, bag limits may be appropriate for some species (rays, large flats, dogs etc.) but only if there are sound ecological reasons and or proof that angling is the principal cause of the population decline. As I stated earlier, there are signs that the cod recovery programme is beginning to work, angling did not cause the decline, neither has it deterred the recovery (thus far), therefore why introduce bag limits on a species which is clearly not impacted by angling pressure.

 

Back in 1999, many anglers said we were crazy to target tope, it was a waste of time as they weren't around in large enough numbers, its a good job we persevered, otherwise we would have missed some awesome fishing with tope to 77lb, quite a few in the 70lb bracket, and many many fish over 60lb. These fish are not restricted to east Yorks, they are present throughout the area, Tut Utterly was catching them back in the late 80's and early 90's (Robin Hoods Bay and Tuts Garden). All it takes is a bit of effort and once identified, theres another string to their bow, the rise of the pollock on wrecks off whitby is a case in point. The problem is that there has to be the will.

 

I guess you have spoken to Paul, the look on his face for a fleeting second, when I introduced myself was brilliant, if only I'd had a camera.

 

Best Fishes

 

 

Doc.

[glennk]

Thank you Nigel that clears it up for me. I am happy with that. If I felt putting my shore caught cod back would have made the slightest difference then every last one would go back, of that you can be sure (mackerel is much nicer eating anyways). I totally agree anglers have not caused the problem and if there is currently an increase in cod numbers then they have played no part in that either (other than a bit of pressure on governement). My point in this topic has always been that the same does not run true for cod as it does for bass. I see that putting bass back could be beneficial to stocks and that getting netters outside of a mile could also be very useful. I have read the resaech on Bass and their territorial behaviours and it all makes sense. I understand that 90% of them never leave Brittish waters. Its a shame a lot of people have no insight into the cod situation, when they talk about banning nets outs of a mile they just dont seem to appreciate that noone nets inside of a mile in these parts (except the odd idiot).

 

I hope you are right about the cod recovery plan working, I understand from the guys down your way that it was one of the best cod seasons for many a year last winter and spring. However I did not witness that locally. I hope that was down to me being a crap angler rather than there not been a recovery this far up the coast. When I told Paul that the guys were saying there was a recovery he looked at me as if I was stupid, I hope he too is a crap angler.

Edited June 5, 2006 by glennk

[Guest binatone]

Doc.

I have read your posts on this subject with great interest. I admire you for all the hard work that you put into doing what you believe in.

Could you please give the estimation on what % of sea anglers you actually represent when you attend all these meetings? What sort of numbers (percentage wise) are we talking about doc?

You say there has to be the will. What will is that then doc? The will of the masses or the will of a few? Why do you think that RSA have so many in numbers, yet such a weak lobbying front? Is it that RSA don’t have the right representation and need organising? Or is it that the majority are just happy to be able to do something that is (at present) free and not under the strict guidelines of the over bureaucratic society that we live in?

As you must know doc, the bureaucracy that is now well established into the commercial fishermen’s way of life, has become just that, a way of life.

As long as a government department (DEFRA) can un-stable a working population by convincing them that governments previous bad management can only be sorted out by there own professional departments, then there will always be a need for employees in them said departments.

Some of the bureaucratic blunders that have been placed on the commercial fishermen’s shoulders over the last few years, I would not whish on my worst enemy.

I certainly would not whish it on any RSA or anyone associated with them.

So please don’t help the government destroy the RSA way of life, like they have the commercials.

 

Leon.

You say that having a bag limit and rod licence may not sound that attractive at the moment, but if they where used as a tool for the eventual banning of pair trawling they would be a small price to pay. Or words to that effect.

Is this a strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles? The conduct of RSA affairs for private advantage?

Instead of giving DEFRA the keys to our hobby and sport, it might be better to change the locks Leon.

Edited June 5, 2006 by binatone