2009

[Holmesy]

[Leon Roskilly]

Actually it goes like this.

 

- Fishermen are given free licences and quota to help themselves to the stock (which is the property and heritage of the people of the UK as a whole), up to limits that have been negotiated to be higher than recommended by ICES scientists because 'scientific advice needs to be "balanced" against the need for fishermen to earn a living'

 

- Those freely issued licences and quotas can then be traded netting thousands to those they were given to for free.

 

- VAT payable is reclaimed as the 'businesses' are zero rated.

 

- Fuel is taxed at a very low rate.

 

- Grants are available for things like new engines, ice machinery etc

 

- The cost of fisheries administration, science, enforcement, grants and subsidy is met out of the public purse to which fishermen contribute nothing, or very little. (maybe costing as much as £10,000 per fisherman per year)

 

- Lots of fish means having to work hard for low prices, so as well as fishing to too high quotas, the biomass can be further reduced with illegal landings and discarding. That gets the amount of fish avialable down whilst the price goes up. AS Mike says, they can then fish less for more money.

 

- When the stock goes down too far, and fishermen are denied catching opportunities, then they are compensated for stopping fishing to allow the stocks to recover, again at the expense of the true owners of the resource, the people of the UK (and/or Europe)

 

- And when they have made money from catching too many fish, showing restraint whilst stocks recover, and are back in business again for the next cycle.

 

It's been a good system up to now (for the fishermen, not the fish), but now the game has been rumbled by too many people who are rather unhappy at being fleeced in so many ways.

 

Soon it will be time to take decommissioning money and retire (or concentrate on building work etc., undertaken when the weather is bad, or the quota has been used up).

 

But (panic!) the sectors, pos/non pos are arguing about who gets what little decommisioning money is available - the pot is running dry already.

 

 

(with apologies to the real fishermen who try to keep legal and get stuffed by the system and by their 'mates')

[Zigs]

DEFRA have confirmed that I don't need to register Mike and I can sell fish to whoever I want to

Leon

 

 

theres a cure for that Leon, join the NFSA, then, like me, you wont be allowed to sell your catch.

 

sport, not profit.

 

[A Norfolk Boy]

Got it Leon. If the industry was treated like any other, operating costs would be higher, not that it would matter as there would be little or no industry and no 'free' money to keep it going. So actually, conservation groups help the industry! Even I can see that....!

[wurzel]

Hello Leon

 

What a bitter and twisted view of commercial fishermen

 

Actually it goes like this.

 

I doubt it very much

 

- Fishermen are given free licences and quota to help them to the stock (which is the property and heritage of the people of the UK as a whole); up to limits that have been negotiated to be higher than recommended by ICES scientists because 'scientific advice needs to be "balanced" against the need for fishermen to earn a living'

 

By helping our selves to the stock, do you mean we go to work?

UK fishermen are part of the people of the UK as a whole.

Fishermen do need to earn enough to make a living, no different than any other business.

 

- Those freely issued licences and quotas can then be traded netting thousands to those they were given to for free.

 

Are you jealous? You often sling this one at us, we never made the rules. It has effectively capped the fleet for the last twenty years; those who traded their licences are no longer fishermen.

 

- VAT payable is reclaimed as the 'businesses' are zero rated.

 

This the same as any other vat registered business

 

- Fuel is taxed at a very low rate.

 

Only because we use red diesel , it would not make any difference, again the same as any other business you claim it back as a expense, I mean all the diesel and the tax.

 

- Grants are available for things like new engines, ice machinery etc

 

I was turned down a grant for a new engine on the grounds that it would make me more efficient, even though it was less HP, a mate in Belgium got 40% for two on safety grounds, (new engines being safer than old clapped out ones) There are grants available for certain things , devil of a job to get though, I think you will find that not only the fishing industry has the access to grant money whether EU or other funds,

I know some one who got a grant to paint and other work on his house from some heritage fund or some thing, just because he lived in a oldy worldy part of town.

What about all the people who bought their council house at a very knock down price, who paid for that , its just being in the right place at the right time, sadly like most of you it never seems to happen to me.

 

- The cost of fisheries administration, science, enforcement, grants and subsidy is met out of the public purse to which fishermen contribute nothing, or very little. (maybe costing as much as £10,000 per fisherman per year)

 

Again this is not fishermen’s doing, 99.99% of it is not needed

What the hell do you mean contribute nothing or very little?

 

- Lots of fish means having to work hard for low prices, so as well as fishing to too high quotas, the biomass can be further reduced with illegal landings and discarding. That gets the amount of fish available down whilst the price goes up. AS Mike says, they can then fish less for more money.

 

What a load of boloney! Do you honestly believe it’s engineered? Supply and demand, good and bad seasons it’s all in the laps of the gods and nothing else. Where is the amount of fish available down, I think the price for most fish is down at the moment, every body is eating burnt burgers and raw sausages, the prices will come up again when the weather cools down.

As for Mike, Leon you are clockwork.

 

- When the stock goes down too far, and fishermen are denied catching opportunities, then they are compensated for stopping fishing to allow the stocks to recover, again at the expense of the true owners of the resource, the people of the UK (and/or Europe)

 

When, where, and what stock? I think it was all talk, never implemented. it applied to a hand full of Scottish and Irish white fish boats working on cod. Most other stocks are fine.

Fishermen are people of the UK, you refer us as a sub species

 

- And when they have made money from catching too many fish, showing restraint whilst stocks recover, and are back in business again for the next cycle.

 

So stocks must have recovered then.

 

It's been a good system up to now (for the fishermen, not the fish), but now the game has been rumbled by too many people who are rather unhappy at being fleeced in so many ways.

 

The only people fleecing you is DEFRA and the EU commission

 

Soon it will be time to take decommissioning money and retire (or concentrate on building work etc., undertaken when the weather is bad, or the quota has been used up).

 

I wish

 

But (panic!) the sectors, pos/non pos are arguing about who gets what little decommissioning money is available - the pot is running dry already.

 

The pot has probably got enough money to retire all the fishermen in the UK; it is only the amount they are willing or not willing to release.

 

 

(With apologies to the real fishermen who try to keep legal and get stuffed by the system and by their 'mates')

 

That applies to 99.99 % of us

You have a very low opinion of commercial fishermen these days Leon mostly unjustified, it is no wonder you get nothing but hostility back.

You also have a very over inflated opinion of RSA

[Mikec]

Hello Leon

 

What a bitter and twisted view of commercial fishermen

 

Actually it goes like this.

 

I doubt it very much

 

- Fishermen are given free licences and quota to help them to the stock (which is the property and heritage of the people of the UK as a whole); up to limits that have been negotiated to be higher than recommended by ICES scientists because 'scientific advice needs to be "balanced" against the need for fishermen to earn a living'

 

By helping our selves to the stock, do you mean we go to work?

UK fishermen are part of the people of the UK as a whole.

Fishermen do need to earn enough to make a living, no different than any other business.

 

- Those freely issued licences and quotas can then be traded netting thousands to those they were given to for free.

 

Are you jealous? You often sling this one at us, we never made the rules. It has effectively capped the fleet for the last twenty years; those who traded their licences are no longer fishermen.

 

- VAT payable is reclaimed as the 'businesses' are zero rated.

 

This the same as any other vat registered business

 

- Fuel is taxed at a very low rate.

 

Only because we use red diesel , it would not make any difference, again the same as any other business you claim it back as a expense, I mean all the diesel and the tax.

 

- Grants are available for things like new engines, ice machinery etc

 

I was turned down a grant for a new engine on the grounds that it would make me more efficient, even though it was less HP, a mate in Belgium got 40% for two on safety grounds, (new engines being safer than old clapped out ones) There are grants available for certain things , devil of a job to get though, I think you will find that not only the fishing industry has the access to grant money whether EU or other funds,

I know some one who got a grant to paint and other work on his house from some heritage fund or some thing, just because he lived in a oldy worldy part of town.

What about all the people who bought their council house at a very knock down price, who paid for that , its just being in the right place at the right time, sadly like most of you it never seems to happen to me.

 

- The cost of fisheries administration, science, enforcement, grants and subsidy is met out of the public purse to which fishermen contribute nothing, or very little. (maybe costing as much as £10,000 per fisherman per year)

 

Again this is not fishermen’s doing, 99.99% of it is not needed

What the hell do you mean contribute nothing or very little?

 

- Lots of fish means having to work hard for low prices, so as well as fishing to too high quotas, the biomass can be further reduced with illegal landings and discarding. That gets the amount of fish available down whilst the price goes up. AS Mike says, they can then fish less for more money.

 

What a load of boloney! Do you honestly believe it’s engineered? Supply and demand, good and bad seasons it’s all in the laps of the gods and nothing else. Where is the amount of fish available down, I think the price for most fish is down at the moment, every body is eating burnt burgers and raw sausages, the prices will come up again when the weather cools down.

As for Mike, Leon you are clockwork.

 

- When the stock goes down too far, and fishermen are denied catching opportunities, then they are compensated for stopping fishing to allow the stocks to recover, again at the expense of the true owners of the resource, the people of the UK (and/or Europe)

 

When, where, and what stock? I think it was all talk, never implemented. it applied to a hand full of Scottish and Irish white fish boats working on cod. Most other stocks are fine.

Fishermen are people of the UK, you refer us as a sub species

 

- And when they have made money from catching too many fish, showing restraint whilst stocks recover, and are back in business again for the next cycle.

 

So stocks must have recovered then.

 

It's been a good system up to now (for the fishermen, not the fish), but now the game has been rumbled by too many people who are rather unhappy at being fleeced in so many ways.

 

The only people fleecing you is DEFRA and the EU commission

 

Soon it will be time to take decommissioning money and retire (or concentrate on building work etc., undertaken when the weather is bad, or the quota has been used up).

 

I wish

 

But (panic!) the sectors, pos/non pos are arguing about who gets what little decommissioning money is available - the pot is running dry already.

 

The pot has probably got enough money to retire all the fishermen in the UK; it is only the amount they are willing or not willing to release.

(With apologies to the real fishermen who try to keep legal and get stuffed by the system and by their 'mates')

 

That applies to 99.99 % of us

You have a very low opinion of commercial fishermen these days Leon mostly unjustified, it is no wonder you get nothing but hostility back.

You also have a very over inflated opinion of RSA

 

Way to go Wurzel!

 

No mention of the August Sea Angler report of 30 tope and a Porgie killed by Sea Anglers. Now if they were landed by fishermen. Total hypocrisy. Leon wants to get his own house in order before trying to take bread off my family's table.

[Leon Roskilly]

Way to go Wurzel!

 

No mention of the August Sea Angler report of 30 tope and a Porgie killed by Sea Anglers. Now if they were landed by fishermen. Total hypocrisy. Leon wants to get his own house in order before trying to take bread off my family's table.

 

Not my house Mike. If you knew anything you would know that!

 

And it's not the bread on your family's table (do I hear the sound of a sad violin in there somewhere?) that I'm concerned about.

Edited August 1, 2006 by Leon Roskilly

[sam-cox]

Could I also ask any anglers out there to quantify the following bass benchmarks -

 

Schoolie

A fish for the table

Medium-sized bass

Big Bass

 

A schoolie in the so called good old days was a bass of two to three and a half pounds.

 

I have a photoe of my Dad on my landing unhooking a bass of around half a pound. The reason for photoegraphing the bass was it was the smallest bass they had ever seen at the time, I think it was taken around 1973.

 

The photoe of that bass now has lost its shock factor as 99% of bass caught by anglers are of that size.

[wurzel]

hello Sam,

 

Quote

have a photoe of my Dad on my landing unhooking a bass of around half a pound. The reason for photoegraphing the bass was it was the smallest bass they had ever seen at the time, I think it was taken around 1973.

 

The photoe of that bass now has lost its shock factor as 99% of bass caught by anglers are of that size.

 

Just shows you how much bass have increased.