My Own Concerns

[sam-cox]

And finally it seems that Im going to have to join BASS if they will have me. That way maybe I will not be frouned upon for having my say,

[Guest CJS2]

Edited July 5, 2006 by CJS2

[Leon Roskilly]

From what I gather due to not having an commecial interest anglers are basicaly only a token at the sfc.

 

 

That is perhaps true for the anglers appointed by DEFRA to the SFC.

 

They are easily ignored because they are just a couple of blokes (in some case just one) and whereas commercial fishemen often turn up at the SFC meetings and sit in the public gallery, it's a very rare occurance for an angler to turn up and sit in the 'public gallery' in support of any issues that might be of benefit to anglers, or just to keep an eye on the SFC and see what it's doing to properly manage the fishstocks in the district.

 

If, whenever they have those meetings, there are anglers present to monitor what is going on, and there is a steady stream of correspondance from anglers raising issues and commenting on how the SFC is dealing with issues, those anglers appointed by SFCs would be much more than a 'token' presence, eagerly consulted by the Chief Fisheries Officer and the rest of the committee.

 

"What should we be doing for anglers?"

 

"What will anglers think of this?"

 

As it is, to those that decide what happens to local fish stocks, see very little interest from the districts anglers in the management of fish stocks, or what the SFC does to conserve those stocks and enforce byelaws and regulations, so why should they pay any great attention to those angling reps.

 

If you want angling representatives to have teeth, and to use those teeth, you have to supply those teeth.

 

And there is so much that individual anglers can do.

 

By taking an interest in local fishery management.

 

By writing to their MP and better still, talking to him at his surgeries.

 

By responding to all of the various consultations.

 

By writing to the press (not just the sea angling magazines, nobody of any influence reads them!)

 

Oh! and lots else.

[Leon Roskilly]

I was going to post a new subject along the lines of what Sam is saying about opinions. Why is it difficult for some people to accept that people have a right to say things without jumping down their throats? Who was it that said; "I don't agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it"? There are a lot of people, not only on this forum, but in all walks of life, that just only have their views and theirs alone! Be it on tackle, methods, fish sizes or anything else, where they cannot see anybody elses view or give them the right to have a say! Very disappointing attitudes prevail.

 

 

Nobody is denying Sam's (or anybody else's) right to say whatever they like.

 

But in a public forum if one person says something, others have a right to challenge that.

 

All we get from Sam is vague allegations that 'those at the top' are somehow not 'doing their job', 'not pressing their case', 'not using all of the information at their disposal'.

 

That's Sam's view.

 

But there is another side of the coin.

 

If I'm reading Sam's posts correctly, then those people 'at the top' who he's criticising from the comfort of his keyboard are real people with real faces and real names, and many whom I would regard as friends, who put in hundreds of unpaid hours, travel thousands of miles, spend a couple of days of study and consultation preparing for meetings, take time off work, and away from fishing and their families, to attend those meetings, then spend more time after those meetings, following up, making sure that promises are delivered, that information requested is researched and presented.

 

And they are anglers just like the rest of us, who in most cases have had their arms twisted to bite off more than they can reasonably chew, struggling to find the time to research issues, prepare papers, address hostile audiences, while they would much sooner be left to go fishing and to spend time with their kids and deal with other issues in their lives.

 

They do that because they see that something needs to be done, and if they don't do it, there is no one else who will, but often tired and dispirited, they have had enough and ready to call it a day.

 

And when they see some of the people they imagine they are working for, sitting comfortably on the sidelines, criticising their efforts, in some cases that's all they need to throw in the towel.

 

OK, you think things could be done better, things could be done more effectively then have a go.

 

At least do what you can to help.

 

Or work with those that are doing that to do those things better, or to work more effectively.

 

But just posting ill-informed negative criticism from the comfort of the sidelines, what does that do?

 

 

Do you really think it's going to spur those already engaged to greater more effective efforts?

 

Do you think that there is any possibility at all of any good coming out of that?

 

 

Instead of vague public criticism that poisons the air, saps motivation and morale, no names, no real detail no real substance, how about some help?

 

If anglers could pull together, what a formidable force we would be!

Edited July 5, 2006 by Leon Roskilly

[glennk]

Just coming at it from another angle. Please dont shoot me.

 

Like ive said some people turn Native and get frightened to address those hostile audiances. Its very difficult to present opposing points of view to a group consisting of councilours, commercial fishermen and the likes. So I think sams point is rather valid. If your not challenging these jakes then why bother spending unpaid time in their company. Better off heading to Spain for a week in the sun where the company would be a lot nicer too and a lot less irritating.

[Leon Roskilly]

From what I gather due to not having an commecial interest anglers are basicaly only a token at the sfc.

 

 

From what you gather Sam?

 

That's an excuse to throw in the towel, not get engaged, not get involved, leave it to others?

 

 

They seem to be frighted of saying booo to a goose a lot of the time. And more so frighted of puting the facts out in public so anglers can be kept up to date.

 

 

Why don't you go along to your SFC meetings Sam, there's only four each year.

 

You could help try to make a difference, you could note down what goes on, and you could come and post on here, "putting out the facts in public so anglers can be kept up to date".

 

 

Anglers who have been appointed to SFCs have a problem in that they have to work within guidlines, and to legal codes of conduct. Theyt have to try to work with the rest of the committee to get anything at all done (and you can see that has paid off in some instances), avoid being sidelined and ostracised from having any influence at all.

 

But anglers who go along to observe, so long as they report back obectively and truthfully, are far less constrained in what they post on public forums.

 

And can not only report what they see and hear, but also their opinions, giving other anglers the benefit of learning what is happening to their fish and why.

[Leon Roskilly]

Just coming at it from another angle. Please dont shoot me.

 

Like ive said some people turn Native and get frightened to address those hostile audiances. Its very difficult to present opposing points of view to a group consisting of councilours, commercial fishermen and the likes. So I think sams point is rather valid. If your not challenging these jakes then why bother spending unpaid time in their company. Better off heading to Spain for a week in the sun where the company would be a lot nicer too and a lot less irritating.

 

 

 

Hmmmm!

 

 

You think that they are not being challenged?

 

 

Why then has the NFSA been spending members money on solicitor's fees to back anglers confronting attempts to gag them?

 

 

Is that the advice, throw in the towel and go to Spain for some sun, whilst our fish stocks continue to be hammered?

 

 

Better than that, why not go along to the SFC meetings, mmet up with the angling reps, get your club's members involved, and work out how you can best support them.

 

"Some people get frightened to address those hostile audiences"

 

Not with dozens of friendly faces in the public gallery they don't, in fact the boot then is to be found on the other foot!

 

Am I being overly cynical in thinking that it's far easier to criticise those who do at least attempt to make a difference, especially from the comfort of a keyboard at home, rather than to go along and give them the support, and the teeth, to do what they set out to do?

 

And that having taken the moral high ground, nothing at all will change because so many people who could make a difference simply couldn't be bothered to do anything other than criticise those who have tried?

[Leon Roskilly]

.....the impression that I got from the tone of the e-mail was that the information on the discussing could not be discussed as if COMMERCIAL FISHERMEN got hold of it they could use it against us.

 

Please tell me if I am wrong, but shouldn’t any information that the bass restoration team have be able to stand up to any commercial fisherman’s arguments. If this is not the case then to my mind that information isn’t worth a toss.

 

Information that is needed to fight a battle like this where campaigners are meeting politicians needs to be at least correct, then the commercial fisherman will not have so much to argue.

 

 

Sam, it seems that you got a garbled, third hand version of what is going on.

 

You also seem to be confusing 'information' with 'strategy'.

 

To explain, let's take a hypothetical situation.

 

20 charter boat owners have decided to block a fishing port in protest against the overfishing of stocks upon which recreational anglers depend. The news companies have been informed and will keep the plans secret.

 

- On the day, none of the fishing boats can get out of port because of an effective blockade, there's plenty of scenes for the camera men to record, it makes the national news, and MPs already lined up make statements supporting the charterboat skippers actions in fighting for their livelihoods which feed and clothe their children.

 

- A week before, there is an NFSA press release saying what is about to happen, the authorities move to make sure that none of the charter boats sail, there is nothing on the news except a brief interview with a fishing boat skipper condemning the proposed action that endangers his livelihood which feeds and clothes his children.

 

Are you honestly saying Sam, that we should reveal such 'information'?

 

 

The correct information is out there, its been gathered by the likes of Donavan Kelly, Graham Picket and my farther (as well as lots lots more people) for over thirty years.

 

And that information has been used and publicised Sam, every shred of it, taken and presented as high up the heirarchy as we have been able to, all the information, all the arguments, and all of the information needed to rebut the spurious arguments put forward by others.

Edited July 6, 2006 by Leon Roskilly

[Leon Roskilly]

there have been studies and tagging programs ever since I was a young kid so its out there,

the trouble is crap like only small bass up to 40cm are caught inshore is now being bannded about, WHY ISNT THE EVEDECE BEING PUT THE MR BRADSHAW!

I have pics on my hard drive of 4lb plus fish lying on rack weed caught less that ten feet away from the sea wall, 7lb bass caught from piers, would it help if I sent them to him?

 

 

The evidence has been given Sam including this:

 

http://www.anglingsites.com/bass_film_5.5mb.wmv

 

(And much more!)

Edited July 6, 2006 by Leon Roskilly

[Newt]

Sam - have you done anything to help? Not some one-shot thing but a concerted effort of any sort?

 

I know of some things Leon does. Not all by any means but he has a long time record of spending time, effort, and money. I regularly get updates via SACN News - http://www.anglersnet.co.uk/sacn/latest

for one thing.

 

How about any of the other responders to this thread who share Sam's feeling that the folks at the sharp end aren't doing enough - are you DOING anything constructive or are your efforts confined to belittling the efforts of others?