Would you consider a sea angling licence now?

[s_mac]

Im not a sea fisherman, and have read some post about licenses, and conservation and the likes. i love my coarse fishing, and would pay what ever the license was to fish, and catch fish from my local lakes and canals. as i think would be the same for every fresh water fisherman.

 

firstly, we are all asked to do our little bit to conserve in all things, from water to electric, use less power, lower power cars, use bikes or public transport. we are told that every little bit helps.

 

secondly, we as fresh water fisherman, observe strict codes, to protect and conserve. and pay to help inforce this.

 

i was from the north east, where sea fishing is a big thing. i went many times to watch my father in law fish his competitions on the weekends. there are many sea angling clubs fishing such things every week around the country.

 

i ask could the sea fishing clubs do more. it maybe not a case of trying to employ baliffs to look after the coast line. but make the coast line pay for itself.

 

most fresh water venues are looked after by fishing clubs, councils and so forth. with the clubs own baliffs looking after there own bit very well. what the baliff says we do. or the rules a club imposes. barbless hooks, no keepnets and many others that we abide by very well. and taking money through membership fees, which all help to conserve, protect.

 

cant sea angling be done the same, many towns, have clubs that fish a certain coastline. so a increase in there membership fee or even a local license to pay someone with some spare time to go out and collect day tickets.

 

i agree, that a restock programme is impossible. and charter boats cant be helped. but maybe bag limits can be, like the mackerel season. and the competitions, where fish are caught, and taken to the weigh in dead, when maybe for the duration of the compitions, people can check and record weights and fish returned.

 

take home the fish you want to eat from the pleasure fishing side. and limit this.

[steve good]

Hi Steve

 

The big difference is, course anglers don't have to compete with inshore trawlers and mile upon mile of gill net.

 

I'm happy to pay for my freshwater licence, but I'm buggered if I'd pay for a sea one as things are.

 

hi steve

 

its not the inshore boys you need worry about, its the french

 

i fish along the hampshire and sussex coastline

 

in my working day i sometimes see as many as 20 french trawlers working from the six mile to 15 miles off our coastline

 

french trawls have a mouth opening 25 to 35 fathoms plus 50 fathom spilts to the otter boards, the lower spilt is massive chain

 

french trawlers tow at 3.5 knots and do 4 hour tows which = 14 miles per tow they do trips which means they stay out fishing day and night for 5 or 6 days which means they tow there trawl on the bottom for 300 miles in one trip, times 20 fishing boats = 6000 miles of seabed has been trawled in one weeks fishing.

 

And you are worried about some one with a gillnet on the beach, I WOULD NOT WORRY TO MUCH IF I WAS YOU.

 

regards steve

[Guest challenge]

hi steve

 

its not the inshore boys you need worry about, its the french

 

i fish along the hampshire and sussex coastline

 

in my working day i sometimes see as many as 20 french trawlers working from the six mile to 15 miles off our coastline

 

french trawls have a mouth opening 25 to 35 fathoms plus 50 fathom spilts to the otter boards, the lower spilt is massive chain

 

french trawlers tow at 3.5 knots and do 4 hour tows which = 14 miles per tow they do trips which means they stay out fishing day and night for 5 or 6 days which means they tow there trawl on the bottom for 300 miles in one trip, times 20 fishing boats = 6000 miles of seabed has been trawled in one weeks fishing.

 

And you are worried about some one with a gillnet on the beach, I WOULD NOT WORRY TO MUCH IF I WAS YOU.

 

regards steve

Here is a prime example of regional differences and the fishery’s that affect that region.

I think that it’s about time that recreational anglers and there representatives took the time to look at the whole picture realistically and decide who the real enemy is.

Who is actually doing harm to there hobby? The CFP was forced on to Britain to help the lowland countries and the French. Ted heath own words stated that “the fishing industry is not worth more than the treaty” so he signed up to it.

These countries have been dragging in the rewards for years. It’s just a bit more noticeable now because the British fleet has almost gone.

Taking on the fishing industry like it is some kind if challenge is a mistake. Trying to involve all RSA in this quest is an even bigger mistake.

I totally agree with STEVE WALKER the idea that the licence should exit to buy RSA influence is a sick joke. The concept does stink of corruption steve.

So what’s this all about?

Welcome to the real world.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml.../19/nfish19.xml

Edited August 30, 2006 by challenge

[smudgertoo]

so whereabouts are these "20 french trawlers a day" that you see then ??

we fish the Hampshire/Sussex coast at least once a week weather permitting and I can't remember ever seeing 20 trawlers in a day or even a month. plenty of potters, or are you getting confused ?

I find that to be quite strange, if they are out there in the numbers and doing the mileage that you say they do than where the hell are they ?

[Sharkbyte]

No. Like bag limits this kind of legislation would be putting the cart before the horse.

 

Until sea anglers start to see some commitment towards serious fisheries protection it would not be so much a licence as yet another tax!

[Jaffa]

No. Like bag limits this kind of legislation would be putting the cart before the horse.

 

Until sea anglers start to see some commitment towards serious fisheries protection it would not be so much a licence as yet another tax!

 

I like the "cart before the horse" cliche. From my view it means how come anglers demand so much when they don't pay a penny to organisations to represent their views, yet seem to expect their demands to be met.

 

 

I guess that until the government/commercials start to see the sea anglers getting serious, from everything from seeing where they are screwing up on fish protection, to actually having represntatives to talk too little will change.

[Sharkbyte]

I like the "cart before the horse" cliche. From my view it means how come anglers demand so much when they don't pay a penny to organisations to represent their views, yet seem to expect their demands to be met.

Jaffa

 

I'm glad you enjoyed the cliche because there's plenty more where that came from.

 

If anglers didn't pay a penny toward anglings representitive bodies, how do they continue to survive, Government subsidies, grants etc???

 

I guess that until the government/commercials start to see the sea anglers getting serious, from everything from seeing where they are screwing up on fish protection, to actually having represntatives to talk too little will change.

 

Strange, for the Fishing News will soon contain more column inches on rod and line fishing than Sea Angler. They must be worried about something?

[Jaffa]

Jaffa

 

I'm glad you enjoyed the cliche because there's plenty more where that came from.

 

If anglers didn't pay a penny toward anglings representitive bodies, how do they continue to survive, Government subsidies, grants etc???

Strange, for the Fishing News will soon contain more column inches on rod and line fishing than Sea Angler. They must be worried about something?

 

 

I can believe you have a never-ending supply of anti commercial cliches

 

I doubt the FN is "worried" . Read it for long enough and you realise its journalists know what they are talking about (unlike all the angling rags ime ) and its not afraid to air any opinion sent into it. The under 10m/rec charter fleet both have reason to read it and no doubt respond to the same adverts. With the price of fuel many commercials must be looking at other methods.

 

The people that have chosen to write into the FN had their views published but wheres the weight? who do they represent? If they put up an arguement that other readers can understand then even if small they get somewhere. If they write in with some ideaology and little fact, no backing, then they are unlikely to be taken seriously.

Edited August 31, 2006 by Jaffa

[Steve Coppolo]

I must admit, I had to smile when I read some of the recent rants in the FN about the bass MLS. I admire their passion.

[JRT]

I'm sick of the commercials blaming the French (Not that the french are blameless). They hate the french for catching 'their' bass, not because of any interest in conservation.

 

Casing point; some friends and I have a banker mark that has produced year on year. This year a commercial rod&liner discovered it. As soon as day breaks he truddles out anchors 40ft in front of where we are fishing and livebaits. Regardless of our protests.

He sits there catching/killing 10+ fish a tide and then bitches about a poor year for bass. I argue that him killing probably 100+ fish a week doesn't help! No answer.

 

Commercials will systematically fish out a mark until there is nothing left, no constraint. Then when fishless they move on. Now as bass return to the same area year on year this guy has seriously impacted this mark not just this year but for years to come. YET they refuse to even accept ANY blame for poor inshore catches!

 

The inshore commercials I see are nothing more than Peduncles in boats... F*** the lot of them!

 

JRT

Edited September 1, 2006 by JRT