Bass MLS Decision to be Overturned?

[stavey]

Probably the best conservation measure for bass, now that we know common sense doesn't come into it, is you lot ****ing the stocks up.

 

Hi steve

i think we all know they have already achieved this goal and not just with the bass, most of our inshore has been fcuked for a very long time now, steve g and the rest know this all to well...............

Edited September 2, 2006 by stavey

[sam-cox]

All this politics makes me sick!

 

The whole thing just seems like common sense, if you take something quicker than it can reproduce that something will soon be gone.

 

Commercial fishermen seem not to grasp that one simple point, so untilsome gutsy politician has the balls to stand up to the commercials nothing will improve.

[wurzel]

All this politics makes me sick!

 

The whole thing just seems like common sense, if you take something quicker than it can reproduce that something will soon be gone.

 

Commercial fishermen seem not to grasp that one simple point, so untilsome gutsy politician has the balls to stand up to the commercials nothing will improve.

 

But Sam you have no proof that we are takeing them quicker that it can reproduce, the amount of small fish tells us that we aint.

[Steve Coppolo]

But Sam you have no proof that we are takeing them quicker that it can reproduce, the amount of small fish tells us that we aint.

 

Hello Peter

With the favourable, (for bass), climate we've had over the last 10 years, ie mild winters, I think the survival rate of up and coming year classes has been unusually high. High enough to support what level of commercial effort there has been on mostly juvenile fish. We agree that there are more small bass in the sea now than ever before and I reckon it's these small fish that have kept most commercial fishermen going. The number of bigger bass is definately going down though.

 

The survival rate for last years bass is very low because of the long, cold winter we've just had. If we were to have 3 or 4 bad, (normal?), winters on the bounce the survival rates for up and coming year classes would drop dramatically. If that happens, in 3 or 4 years time you won't have many small bass to replace those that have been caught.

 

At the moment it's the year classes of 4 or 5 years ago that are keeping things balanced. You can only catch them once, so even their huge numbers are being reduced all the time. With low numbers of bass reaching maturity due to the ridiculously small MLS, there will come a time when you are catching them faster than they can reproduce. It's probably happening now but you won't see the effect until the future year classes fail to come through.

 

My theory is that the unusual climate has kept the bass fishery afloat for the last 10 years and if things return to normal the whole lot could collapse. The sad thing is, no one would know until it was too late. Bass won't make the same recoveries as Cod sometimes do, because they are so slow to grow and mature. If your theory about climatic conditions is right we should see a small Cod recovery this year because Cod are able to reproduce quickly. That won't happen with bass.

 

We don't have any control over the weather, and that's why we should have an MLS that gives the fish a chance to spawn before being caught to act as a buffer when conditions are not favourable.

 

Still, too late now. Whether the MLS stays at 36cm, or goes up to 40cm next year, we are depending on the climate for the future of the bass fishery.

[wurzel]

Hello Steve

 

Quote

The survival rate for last years bass is very low because of the long, cold winter we've just had. If we were to have 3 or 4 bad, (normal?), winters on the bounce the survival rates for up and coming year classes would drop dramatically. If that happens, in 3 or 4 years time you won't have many small bass to replace those that have been caught.

 

That would happen no matter what you do, unless you ban the landing of bass by any body, even then I would expect your catches would be reduced, or perhaps it would allow larger fish to get at your bait so you would catch less but bigger bass.

I think if you want a constant supply of decent fish year ofter year go to a carp puddle. I doubt it would happen naturaly at sea.

 

 

Quote

 

At the moment it's the year classes of 4 or 5 years ago that are keeping things balanced. You can only catch them once, so even their huge numbers are being reduced all the time. With low numbers of bass reaching maturity due to the ridiculously small MLS, there will come a time when you are catching them faster than they can reproduce. It's probably happening now but you won't see the effect until the future year classes fail to come through.

 

How come they are being reduced all the time ? they are still undersize,

How do you know there are low numbers of bass reaching maturity? the last large year class is still under size, even more so next year.

If a bass spawns once and that's a no recruitment year it won't matter if one bass or ten billion bass spawn you won't get any baby bass, if it happens 3 or 4 years on the trot, then what? Are you suggesting stopping all commercial fishing and total catch and release by all anglers just in case ?would it make any difference to your patch?

 

 

 

I know it's blowing a gale, and I'm trying to get my accounts up to date again.

[The doctor]

I know it's blowing a gale, and I'm trying to get my accounts up to date again.

 

 

Cooking da books Peter?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!LOL

 

Doc.

[Steve Coppolo]

Hello Steve

 

Quote

The survival rate for last years bass is very low because of the long, cold winter we've just had. If we were to have 3 or 4 bad, (normal?), winters on the bounce the survival rates for up and coming year classes would drop dramatically. If that happens, in 3 or 4 years time you won't have many small bass to replace those that have been caught.

 

That would happen no matter what you do, unless you ban the landing of bass by any body, even then I would expect your catches would be reduced, or perhaps it would allow larger fish to get at your bait so you would catch less but bigger bass.

I think if you want a constant supply of decent fish year ofter year go to a carp puddle. I doubt it would happen naturaly at sea.

Quote

 

At the moment it's the year classes of 4 or 5 years ago that are keeping things balanced. You can only catch them once, so even their huge numbers are being reduced all the time. With low numbers of bass reaching maturity due to the ridiculously small MLS, there will come a time when you are catching them faster than they can reproduce. It's probably happening now but you won't see the effect until the future year classes fail to come through.

 

How come they are being reduced all the time ? they are still undersize,

How do you know there are low numbers of bass reaching maturity? the last large year class is still under size, even more so next year.

If a bass spawns once and that's a no recruitment year it won't matter if one bass or ten billion bass spawn you won't get any baby bass, if it happens 3 or 4 years on the trot, then what? Are you suggesting stopping all commercial fishing and total catch and release by all anglers just in case ?would it make any difference to your patch?

I know it's blowing a gale, and I'm trying to get my accounts up to date again.

 

 

Hello Peter

I'm not suggesting anything except that the MLS should be bigger.

[wurzel]

Hello Peter

I'm not suggesting anything except that the MLS should be bigger.

 

Hello Steve

 

I agree, but in the grand sceme of things unless you ban fishing all together will it really make a difference?

[Jaffa]

Jaffa.

You should know better that 'persuading' is not a very useful term in fisheries matters. It's about pushing, bargain and compromising.

 

Maybe the French would be willing to negotiate if they had the odd choice between an increase in the mls for bass fishery in certain waters or MPAs put in place in UK zones where they have traditional (bass) fishing rights? I am sure other people (e.g. the UK commercials) could invent other and maybe better bargain schemes for the French, and maybe the Spaniards as well if that should be needed, which I don't think (majority voting in the EU Council FISH).

I agree its all about "pushing, bargining and compromising" but where on earth is the sense in giving away power of our fish stocks to other nations ; as we have effectively done with bass imo, and THEN going to the table expecting we can have some say on them?!!

 

The pair trawl restrictions on UK vessels were brought in years ago and we are still the only nation with them! . Wheres the evidence ( anything at all would be a start) that the UK pair trawl restrictions/new mls have done anything other than harm to UK interests, be they commercial or RSA?

 

Maybe the French would do a lot of things, but I'd rather have something to bargin with, and on bass, wheather its a commercial or RSA viewpoint, IMHo we seem to be giving it all away!

 

If RSA does nothing other than constantly attack the UK commercials then the endgame will be that both UK RSA and commercials will be ruined.

 

IMHO we (the UK ) got an incredibly bad deal ( RSA and commercials) when we joined the CFP; we just did't count in the scheme of things; mostly we were naive and just did not see what was coming. The same kind of ministers that are promising RSA the earth now are the same kind that quietly sold us down the rivers in 1974.

 

The pitiful fishing limits we are left with are not set in stone and as commercial power weakens so they become more and more likely to be removed. Shetland now has huge dutch pelagic freezers around its coast and its sum total effective control over their activities is zero

Edited September 3, 2006 by Jaffa

[The doctor]

I agree its all about "pushing, bargining and compromising but i where on earth is the sense in giving away power of our fish stocks to other nations ; as we have effectively done with bass imo, and THEN going to the table expecting we can have some say on them?!!

 

We lost that bargaining power when we signed up to the CFP, we (Heath) forfeit our rights and resources at that time. The difference is that the French on the whole ignore regulations (CFP & CAP), with their governments support, they then fight their argument for years, in the mean time continue to flought the same regs. The UK government is a populist government, they want to be everybodies friend and to be seen to be popular, without doing anything for their own people, they value EU and world opinion more than that of their own populace.

 

If RSA does nothing other than constantly attack the UK commercials then the endgame will be that both UK RSA and commercials will be ruined.

Please correct me if I'm wrong but are you suggesting that RSA's voicing of their concerns in relation to the activities of certain sectors will be the ruin of commercial fishing, angling and the resource. Do you think that the few RSA volunteers and sea angling Fora hold that much weight, and that the commercial sector are so weak.

 

IMHO we (the UK ) got an incredibly bad deal (RSA and commercials) when we joined the CFP; we just did't count in the scheme of things; mostly we were naive and just did not see what was coming. The same kind of ministers that are promising RSA the earth now are the same kind that quietly sold us down the rivers in 1974.

 

I agree with you Chris, the CFP did nobody in the UK any favours, because we sold British fishermen and British resources down the river in return for agricultural concessions (which would benefit the tory landowners) who were the powerbase in charge at that particular moment in time. RSA was not even considered as a stakeholder then, the lobbying of the NFFO and other PO's possibly could have made a stronger argument (if indeed they were in existance). As stated above, fish and fisheries (CFP) were sold out for CAP benefits. Nothing has changed in terms of the commercial sector, as they still don't consider RSA to be a stakeholder nor worthy of their consideration. Noise from the NFFO and Pessell indicates that this is clearly the case.

 

The pitiful fishing limits we are left with are not set in stone and as commercial power weakens so they become more and more likely to be removed. Shetland now has huge dutch pelagic freezers around its coast and its some total control over their activities is zero.

The Shetland box is still in existance (for what its worth), pelagics will continue to take mackerel, herring and the like where ever they are. I think it a bit scaremongering to insinuate that the current fisheries limits can be given away further, which they can't, if that was the case we would be able to remove the historical rights (sunset) clause, which so many believe is necessary, but so difficult to do at this present moment.

 

The pair trawl restrictions on UK vessels were brought in years ago and we are still the only nation with them! . Wheres the evidence ( anything at all would be a start) that the UK pair trawl restrictions/new mls have done anything other than harm to UK interests, be they commercial or RSA?

 

But I thought that these restrictions were related to cetacean mortality as opposed to a fisheries conservation measure.

 

Maybe the French would do a lot of things, but I'd rather have something to bargin with, and on bass, wheather its a commercial or RSA viewpoint, IMHo we seem to be giving it all away!

 

Possibly, and like many others I would like to see a broadscale implementation of the measures on a EU basis, but in the short term that is not going to happen. But to suggest that doing nothing to safeguard stocks because others won't abide by it, is not the way forward in my opinion. Unilateral action is often the means to initiate multilateral action.

 

What gets so many peoples (anglers) back up is the attitude that commercial sector is the only important sector, as a consequence the various fisheries should be managed for their benefit exclusively. whilst I don't hold with the often quoted view that commercial fisheries and fishermen have had their opportunity and blown it. I do hold the view that the resource comes first and that exploitation of individual resources should be gauged on the composition and ability of that resource to maintain its condition, both as an abundant population but with the required stock composition.

 

Its not rocket science.

 

 

Best Fishes

 

 

Doc.