Licenses, Bag Limits, MPAs, SFCs

[mr motorola]

I’m really looking forward to future meetings with DEFRA, of course the Environmental NGO’s (EN, WWF & WLT’s) and commercial sector (NFFO, reps from the SFC’s) will be there, each to support their own uniform ideals and targeted ends, each singing from their respective hymn sheets. I can imagine the questions now;

 

(DEFRA etc.) What is the angling perspective on a sea angling rod license?

 

(Angling Reps) “Well anglers are vehemently opposed to a sea angling rod license, full stop”.

 

(DEFRA etc.) But we’ve had acknowledgement from a number of anglers that they may be willing to pay for a sea angling rod licence

 

(Angling Reps) “Yes but that is a minority position and even that belief is only as long as benefits accrue to the sea angling sector.”

 

(DEFRA etc.) So in other words you can’t make your minds up!!

 

(NGO’s) We believe that a rod license for anglers would be of great benefit to the marine environment, revenue generated could be used to support infrastructure to manage and monitor marine protected areas with anglers getting buy in to the principals of marine conservation.

 

(NFFO etc) We agree, the recreational sector should be licensed, they take many millions of fish each year without having to pay anything towards the management or enforcement of their activities. Commercial fishermen are regulated to the hilt, they have significant costs to pay, not just before they go to sea, but also to enable them to catch a reasonable amount of fish in order to make a living. Anglers are just playing at it, if they can afford to buy fishing gear they can afford to buy a license.

 

Outcome; Implementation of a sea angling rod licence without any benefits accruing to sea anglers and RSA as a whole.

 

Anglers response; Our representatives sold us down the river!!!

 

Part 2

 

(DEFRA etc.) What is the angling perspective on Bag Limits?

 

(Angling Reps) “Well anglers are vehemently opposed to a bag limits, we can see no reason presently to restrict the angling of marine fin fish as its insignificant in comparison to the commercial take”.

 

(DEFRA etc.) But once again, we’ve had acknowledgement from a number of anglers that they may be willing to accept bag limits for sea fish

 

(Angling Reps) “We would accept that bag limits may be applicable if a particular species was under significant threat or in severe decline under threat of collapse, and similar restrictions were placed on the commercial sector.” But as with the issue of sea angling rod licenses, only as long as benefits accrue to the sea angling sector. In addition, those who are in favour of such restrictions are in the minority. Such a move would significantly impact both anglers and the economics of sea angling. We would vehemently oppose a broadscale implementation of bag limits on all species irrespective of status.

 

(DEFRA etc.) So in other words once again you can’t make your minds up!! We have been monitoring sea angling fora, and the general consensus is that marine fish are in significant decline, there are very few fish to catch, and the number of large adult fish are few and far between. What anglers at grass roots are saying is that sea angling experience is poor, but we have to be allowed to continue taking as much as we can as and when we want irrespective of the impact of our activities.

 

(NGO’s) We would welcome bag limits for anglers, especially in marine protected areas. It makes sense to impose restrictions on anglers when there is no information on the level of angler take, this is especially important when there are so many unknowns in general related to fin fish populations. We consider that such a move would be of great benefit to the marine environment, and would propose that bag limits are implemented not just in marine protected areas, but in all sites of scientific interest and with buffer zones around MPA’s to not only encourage enforcement but also to ensure that fin fish have space to migrate out of and into MPA’s. Anglers would benefit in the longer term by having access to larger fish.

 

(NFFO etc) We agree, the recreational sector take of marine fin fish is an unknown metric, and whilst there are significant restrictions on the commercial sector, unknown exploitation levels should be minimised. If there are as has been suggested 1.45 million anglers in England and Wales, if each catches just 1 cod, 1 bass and 5 whiting per year that equates to 1.5m cod, 1.5m bass and 7.5m whiting. Anglers are taking commercial magnitudes of fish without restriction or consideration. Bag limits are the only feasible way ahead and all species should be assigned a daily limit.

 

Outcome; Implementation of a bag limits without any benefits accruing to sea anglers and RSA as a whole.

 

Anglers response; Our representatives sold us down the river!!!

 

And so it goes on, the discussions on this forum have shown that there are many diverse points of view, there are those who have some foresight, there are those who have none, there are those who should know better but play to the audience, and there are those who are prepared to stand up for what they believe. Either way, and what ever your perspective, it’s a fight to the end, there was a time when alliances could have been forged, however, it’s a case now of anglers against the rest. The commercials have drawn a line in the sand, as have the NGO’s, unfortunately anglers are still arguing whether the tide is in, out or too rough to test the water, that indecision will probably cost us dearly.

 

There are anglers who consider their own activities to be outstanding, fish a plentiful, there are those who’s local angling is dire, there are those who live inland and travel to the most prolific areas and as a consequence don’t really see the state of some coastal areas. I think it time that those lucky enough to have decent fishing on their doorsteps to stop deriding those less fortunate and put down their rose tinted glasses for just an evening to appreciate what some anglers are faced with. As fish don’t respect regional boundaries, neither should those who have currently good fishing, anglers are cut from the same cloth, and in the same way that commercial fishermen support others that may be out of area, anglers should for once consider others less fortunate. After all what goes around comes around, your fishing may be excellent at the moment, but who’s to say in a few years that the roles will not be reversed. At this moment in time we need to consolidate, not disintegrate.

 

The extremely vocal anglers who are hypercritical of those that represent them, should take time out to consider, these representatives are unpaid, largely unskilled (in terms of dealing with government) and extremely under funded in comparison to those who sit opposite. These representatives have frequently requested assistance, they’ve asked for better funding, they’ve asked anglers to attend meetings, the response from the angling fraternity has been conspicuous by its absence. There are those on here (not mentioning any names, they know who they are) who have stated that they would attend meetings, would represent RSA, would travel to London to meet with DEFRA and other officials, and……………. always pulled out at the last minute. I find it strange that these people then see fit to beat RSA representatives with a big stick, the words either put up or shut up spring to mind!!!!!!!!!!!

 

The point that the representatives often visit AN and should have a good idea of angling attitudes is well made, in fact the indecision and conflicting views only compound the problem, or are these hypercritical posters suggesting that their own point of view take president. If that was the case no consensus would ever be reached.

 

Well here’s the rub guys. I’d far rather be fishing than sat up at 02:00am in the morning writing responses to DEFRA consultations, SFC proposed byelaws etc. The persistent vitriol from some members of this forum who seem to have a singular belief that they are right and are more than willing to dismiss out of hand any opposing view, has become tiresome. The offer has not changed, if certain people who are sure they can do better would like to step forward, then please do so.

You certainly know how to copy and paste

[The doctor]

You certainly know how to copy and paste

 

Que???????????????????

[mr motorola]

Just get on with catching fish ( is that the reason you made a yourself a member on this forum in the first place?)

 

So do you think you can make a difference???

 

If so go ahead and make a change , you have my backing. (HONESTLY)

 

But as far as i can see , single individuals on this forum have about enough umf as a tramps vest ( no malice intended) the members need to get together and do something together, but unfortunately that isn't going to happen because of difference of opinon .

 

So why bother?

 

I'ts called anglers net , so leave the ANGLERS alone

 

Que???????????????????

I use my name as a joke , do you use your's as one?

[The doctor]

Just get on with catching fish (is that the reason you made a yourself a member on this forum in the first place?)

 

I do when work allows, but being at sea as much as I am doesn't mean I get to fish as much as I'd like and Yes (obviously)

 

So do you think you can make a difference???

 

I don't know, but to my mind better to have tried than not at all

 

But as far as i can see , single individuals on this forum have about enough umf as a tramps vest ( no malice intended) the members need to get together and do something together, but unfortunately that isn't going to happen because of difference of opinon

So why bother?

 

Because all the while there is the will and the opportunity to at least gain some balance and hope for the future its worth while trying. If we took your point of view there would be a ban on the collecting of green crab in the NE, there would no ban on the landing of tope in the NE, little and often, make the effort and sometimes it works.

 

I'ts called anglers net , so leave the ANGLERS alone

 

I wasn't aware I was having a go at anglers, you'll have to explain that one to me.

 

 

I use my name as a joke , do you use your's as one?

 

So your not actually a cheap mobile phone then!!!!!!!!!!!! and no

[Stoaty]

So in other words its easier to do nothing and sit on an internet forum and beat those with a big stick who are at least prepared to continuously put themselves out.

 

Thats real big of you, and makes me feel pleased to know you are on our side!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

You are the MINORITY. You are not on the side of most anglers.

 

It's us ordinary anglers that are being beaten with a big stick by people like you. The more you get on our backs about being on your (the minority) side the more your turning people like me against the conservation lobby.

 

Your not putting yourself out for me or Joe ordinary. Your dragging our sport into a place where it's going to be used as political football. I wish you would all just stop messing with our sport and go fishing.

Edited October 22, 2006 by Stoaty

[The doctor]

You are the MINORITY. You are not on the side of most anglers.

 

It's us ordinary anglers that are being beaten with a big stick by people like you. The more you get on our backs about being on your (the minority) side the more your turning people like me against the conservation lobby.

 

Your not putting yourself out for me or Joe ordinary. Your dragging our sport into a place where it's going to be used as political football. I wish you would all just stop messing with our sport and go fishing.

 

Whats this conservation lobby, if you call fighting for the future of angling then you are confusing the real issue. I may be conservation orientated, in that I don't kill everything I catch. But let me assure you I take fish when I or a family member wants it, I have no reservations about that and that includes cod, bass, haddock, ling, brill, lobsters, crabs whatever I get my hands on. But conservation of fish and the preservation of sea angling as we know it are two completely different things.

 

So stoaty you would rather have no representation, if thats the case then fine, but what about those who do want someone to represent them, and what about those who feel that their sport is worth fighting for and are not prepared to sit around and give it up. Yes I agree its very hard on those who don't want to read about conservation and be kept abreast of whats happening with the sport.

 

I suggest you DON'T F******* READ THE POSTS, even better turn any posters like myself or any other concerned anglers off, its a simple matter of a button. If you didn't want to read about it you wouldn't, neither would you post any responses to it.

 

Lets put this into perspective, there are those who don't eat fish, there are those who won't kill fish, there are those who kill everything, but I'm more concerned with whether we are able to go out and catch fish in the future. The issue of whether to kill or release is a personal issue which at the present is not on the governments agenda, sea angling rod licences, bag limits and closed MPA's are, don't confuse the two.

[Ken Davison South Wales]

I have just caught up with the last couple of pages on this thread and find it very sad that someone who is giving so much time is being shot to pieces for trying his best to make sure that all RSAs have something to go fishing for.

 

If every RSA who is sixty plus was 100% honest he / she would have to state that todays angling is very poor compared to years gone by.

 

I am not concerned with my days remaining on earth but I am concerned for the oportunities left behind for future generations to become RSAs.

 

There seems to be far to much of "I alright Jack and f*** the rest" attitude on this forum and I am surprised that people like the Doc keep visiting after getting so much abuse.

 

Yes it is nice to go angling, far better than sitting with a load of people trying your best to sort something out knowing that you are onto a hiding for nothing on both sides of the fence.

Edited October 22, 2006 by Ken Davison South Wales

[Stoaty]

I have just caught up with the last couple of pages on this thread and find it very sad that someone who is giving so much time is being shot to pieces for trying his best to make sure that all RSAs have something to go fishing for.

 

If every RSA who is sixty plus was 100% honest he / she would have to state that todays angling is very poor compared to years gone by.

 

I am not concerned with my days remaining on earth but I am concerned for the oportunities left behind for future generations to become RSAs.

 

There seems to be far to much of "I alright Jack and f*** the rest" attitude on this forum and I am surprised that people like the Doc keep visiting after getting so much abuse.

 

Yes it is nice to go angling, far better than sitting with a load of people trying your best to sort something out knowing that you are onto a hiding for nothing on both sides of the fence.

 

I posted this on another thread.

 

I enjoy my fishing today as much as I did 40 years ago. Sure for some species the fish are smaller and fewer, but I still enjoy my fishing. I reckon if there was one fish in the sea I would still enjoy trying to catch it. I am in it for the challenge I suppose. Probably like most anglers.

 

What I am saying is I still enjoy my fishing. Like millions of others. I don't need any changes thank you.

 

As for abuse I have had more than my fair share of abuse for daring to doubt the few that wish to change my fishing.

Edited October 22, 2006 by Stoaty

[Ken Davison South Wales]

I posted this on another thread.

What I am saying is I still enjoy my fishing. Like millions of others. I don't need any changes thank you.

 

As for abuse I have had more than my fair share of abuse for daring to doubt the few that wish to change my fishing.

 

How do you know that so many of the others support your views?

[Jim Roper]

If our self-appointed representative wants to raise money to spend on angling conservation, 1% on VAT on angling goods and services will 'net' more than a £20 sea angling rod license.