A bit of critisism where critisism's due.

[SpeciMan]

SACN Statement

[Fastd]

Leon.

 

Re The SACN statement.

 

A good balanced statement which IMO balances disapointment with the few positives.

 

More importantly it follows the lines of the bass statement in highlighting the disapointing number of responses from anglers. We all need to get behind any RSA proposal and make our voices heard.

 

Dave

[Norm B]

SACN Statement

Read it now, well balanced but lacking a bit of fire and brimstone. Is any one in RSA afraid to criticise the government over this?

[Steve Coppolo]

It was the lack of any statement or reaction from the NFSA that spurred me to start this thread. The SACN and BASS statements may not be ideal, in my opinion they weren't harsh enough, but at least they made a statement. The NFSA is our main representative body. Whether you are a member or not, if you are a sea angler the NFSA represents you. They should have reacted the same day the decision was announced.

 

I see there are still some people who think that this whole issue was just about bass. It wasn't. With the threat of licences looming, all eyes will be on the reaction of sea anglers to what amounted to a load of nothing. If the powers that be think that we are satisfied with this, then what can we expect in return for a licence imposed on us? Another load of nothing if we aren't careful. This decision, and the NFSA's reaction to it, will affect all sea anglers in the future regardless of what species you fish for.

[Guest CJS2]

I see there are still some people who think that this whole issue was just about bass. It wasn't. With the threat of licences looming, all eyes will be on the reaction of sea anglers to what amounted to a load of nothing. If the powers that be think that we are satisfied with this, then what can we expect in return for a licence imposed on us? Another load of nothing if we aren't careful. This decision, and the NFSA's reaction to it, will affect all sea anglers in the future regardless of what species you fish for.

 

Thats a point I can see Steve, but it did come over very strongly as 'save our bass'. Can one suggest very respectfully that the word bass be replaced with 'General Stocks' or something appropriate? Then we will know where we are coming from, what we are actually referring to. Push on general stocks and all will benefit? Get a second bite at the cherry?

 

I still find thing a little hard to follow sometimes. My brain is certainly not as agile as it used to be, and I forget a lot of small detail these days. But essentially, my feeling are, introduce nursery areas, no go grids, what ever? As has been shown where these measures have been implemented, a dramatic turn around, in a short time has been the result. I thing there is a a grid system/miles limit oporated around Norway? Have I got it right???

 

[Brian Carragher]

(I must admit, if Mr Salter is right it would have been no mean feat for Ben Bradshaw seeing as no one knows how many Bass there are or how much commercial pressure they are under).

 

I'm sorry to have to say it Steve but that one statement from you has undermined any cohesive argument you may have put forward for the BMP or the conservation of a pressured stock given the content of your previous postings on this matter

[Davy Holt]

I see there are still some people who think that this whole issue was just about bass. It wasn't.

 

If that is the case then Steve, perhaps it was a bad choice of wording naming it the Bass Management Plan. Also it would have been better if the main point had not been the increase in the MLS of Bass, but had been the removal of Gill Nets & inshore Trawling within the "Golden Mile".

 

At least that way you might have had more support, not only from the RSA sector, as that is easily seen as genuinely affecting all sea anglers and not as it has been seen, only affecting the select few.

[Norm B]

If that is the case then Steve, perhaps it was a bad choice of wording naming it the Bass Management Plan. Also it would have been better if the main point had not been the increase in the MLS of Bass, but had been the removal of Gill Nets & inshore Trawling within the "Golden Mile".

 

At least that way you might have had more support, not only from the RSA sector, as that is easily seen as genuinely affecting all sea anglers and not as it has been seen, only affecting the select few.

I got behind the BMP because BASS were the only group getting off their backsides and doing something for their sport. The NFSA were doing diddly squat except for a few vague unfulfilled promises about getting gillnets banned, which actually wasn't to get gillnets banned at all but to get illegal gillnets banned, but if they were illegal, they were surely banned already, but I digress. The BMP was a bandwagon on which anglers that wanted something done about OUR fish stocks could climb upon and have a voice, no other body or organisation was prepared to put their heads above the paprapet on this subject. As I've said before, I'm not a member of BASS or a dedicated bass angler but I could see the possibilities for angling in general so I supported it and I still do. Let's hope that the NFSA, SACN, SAMF, EFSA, Uncle Tom Cobbly and all now unite to produce their own plan now that BASS have lost theirs, but I shan't be holding my breath. Between them they don't have the will, expertise or the inclination, everythings fine and rosey as far as they're concerned.

[Steve Coppolo]

I'm sorry to have to say it Steve but that one statement from you has undermined any cohesive argument you may have put forward for the BMP or the conservation of a pressured stock given the content of your previous postings on this matter

 

Why is that Brian? It's the truth.

[steve pitts]

Norm

 

It would be remiss of BASS not to thank you at this point for your support, along with your fellow publication editors and also, of course all AnglersNet forum members, SCAN, NMC,WFSA, NFSA and non-affiliated anglers who participated and contributed to the bass mls consultation.

 

As you say - it never was just about bass and which ever way the mls decision is viewed, sea anglers have at least challenged the establishment and raised some fundimantal issues on our fish stock management.

 

Cheers

Steve