I wondered why they were all getting so small!

[Leon Roskilly]

www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?...p?id=ns99992505

 

Tight Lines - leon

[Ken L]

OK so in the world of the computer model, the suggested changes might take place but, in the real world, fishing practices kill everything and the undersized fish get chucked back dead.

 

So much for computer modeling....

[spasor]

Leon. I`ve seen the piece and agree with Ken. A computer model is fine, but that`s all it is !!

Reality dictates that commercial netters can only weed out small fish via minimum mesh sizes. Big fish will always be caught by nets!!

We all know that the answer is a complete ban on all net fishing for decades. Just as we all know that no government will implement it.

It`s something we have to live with until the day that commercial fishing becomes economically unviable and the commercials start crying in their beer.

By the time that day arrives we`ll be used to eating genetically modified food anyway.? And pleasure angling will most probably be subject to horrendous license fees.

But as I`ll be compost by then why worry. None of the general public do. It`s only us anglers, some dedicated conservationists and a few scientists who bother to voice concern of the fishing crisis. Joe public more worried about the form of his football team or the price of his beer and fags?

Paul.

I`m of to Weymouth in a couple of hours for a weeks charter fishing. I won`t be bringing many fish back. No matter how many I catch.

I will however, be saying `NO`! To those tossers who always say,"I`ll have it if you don`t want it"!!!

[Leon Roskilly]

spasor:

Leon.  I`ve seen the piece and agree with Ken. A computer model is fine, but that`s all it is !!

Er, it wasn't a computer model, it was real fish in tanks that were used for the experiment.

 

I sent details to the editor of one of the commercial fishing papers, this is his response:

 

------------------------------------------

Many thanks Leon.

 

I saw a fairly complex article some years ago describing this phenomenon, but this does seem to show there is something in it.

 

Back to the drawing board eh?

 

------------------------------------------------

And I got this from Malcolm Gilbert:

 

Bob Cox is ahead of his time! He's been arguing this for years with regards to the bass fishery.

 

Here in European waters, we've systematically removed most of the really large adult populations for many species such as cod and bass and then we continue to subject the remnants to intense fishing mortality targeting them the moment they become legally retainable.

 

For cod the MLS (36 cm) is so low (a 36 cm cod weighs less than 500 grms and averages 18 months old) and the discarding of fish below 36cm so appallingly high that the remaining stock consists almost exclusively of tiddlers.

 

At three years of age cod average 2700 grms (6 lbs) but only 25% will be mature even then.

 

It's not really rocket science to understand why cod stocks are in such trouble! Some CEFAS scientists are now trying to cloud the issue by claiming that cod are in trouble because of climatic changes.

 

The climate may well not be helping the situation but certain scientists need to go back to school and learn the fundamentals about the birds and bees --- remove all the mums and dads and ---- well you know the rest!

 

Contrary to official opinion, I am of the firm opinion that a very significant proportion of older and larger bass stocks have been removed by the offshore fishery and if this latest warning from the 'newscientist' is sound, the repercussions are terribly serious.

 

If the message from Dave Conover, New York becomes generally accepted by the scientific community, it will add much needed weight to those who are campaigning along the biodiversity argument.

 

Malcolm Gilbert