A Nice Catch of Mullet

[wurzel]

But Leon the powers that be are convinced that by capping the efforts of anglers , hobby netters , mesh and mls increases they are doing just what you suggest

Quote"Now if bag limits were part of a package aimed at reducing overall mortality"

 

 

Hello Steve

 

Quote

It's a bit like them taking all your quota away just in case you exceed it.

 

They have done that on more than one occasion.

 

As you say it's a bit of a grey area that anglers often moan about, I wonder how many times I've seen " It's not you but the unlicenced part timers that are doing the damage" I'm sure you said somthing simula the first time I met you.

If you practice catch and relese as much as you all say then a bag limit won't hurt you, it will stop the others and easier to police.

[Guest challenge]

Hi Challenge,

First para, Quite right to, equally so i go out and target bass perhaps five times a year over the wrecks. I also like to take me spoils home, why try to restrict that i ask. I have asked you this before, what if derfa or commercial decide to restrict the take of cod to the rsa, it would make the far reaching trips pointless? Sorry, i'm just nasty.

 

Second para, It would not matter who blames who if they were gill tagged. No tag no sell, simple. If we stay as we are, defra will restrict the rsa, it will be pointless as it would be un-policable at an enormous cost to the rate payer, some proberly do not even eat fish. The problem of blaming who black sold would remain. Don't forget illegal back door selling as well. Gill tagging, easy to police. Easy to check from capture to being eaten don't you think?

Barry.

The far reaching trips that we had last year produced some lovely fish.

one day alone we had 6 fish over twenty lb and two over 30lb. we do catch a hell of a lot of fish on these trips when conditions are correct so it would restrict the amount of fish that our anglers could take home.

But then again I suppose it also deepens on what they would class as a day? say that 12 hours would be classed as a days fishing and an angler is allowed 10 fish per day we go away for 94 hours at a time so that would be a lot of fish that the anglers would actually be allowed.

The biggest restriction would be on the short inshore 10 hour trips where they catch a lot of small fish (again when conditions are correct) as they would be restricted to ten small fish.

On the far reaching trips a lot of our anglers do return a lot of fish when it gets hectic anyway so it would just be a matter of them selecting more than anything else.

I suppose the answer to that will only be found when the time comes. Our long reaching trips are far more than just fishing experience anyway Barry. People don’t pay all that money just to go fishing in the North Sea.

Regards.

[barry luxton]

Barry.

The far reaching trips that we had last year produced some lovely fish.

one day alone we had 6 fish over twenty lb and two over 30lb. we do catch a hell of a lot of fish on these trips when conditions are correct so it would restrict the amount of fish that our anglers could take home.

But then again I suppose it also deepens on what they would class as a day? say that 12 hours would be classed as a days fishing and an angler is allowed 10 fish per day we go away for 94 hours at a time so that would be a lot of fish that the anglers would actually be allowed.

The biggest restriction would be on the short inshore 10 hour trips where they catch a lot of small fish (again when conditions are correct) as they would be restricted to ten small fish.

On the far reaching trips a lot of our anglers do return a lot of fish when it gets hectic anyway so it would just be a matter of them selecting more than anything else.

I suppose the answer to that will only be found when the time comes. Our long reaching trips are far more than just fishing experience anyway Barry. People don’t pay all that money just to go fishing in the North Sea.

Regards.

 

Somehow i don't think the powers to be would look at it like that i would imagine they would look at it as per landing. I spent five days in alderny last year and loved it , that works out about a wonner per day so your trips are really on par. I like the idea of thirty pounders, you are getting me juices flowing.

Edited February 8, 2007 by barry luxton

[roryh]

I guess we are just arguing about a name. Both RSA and commercial wants to put a stop to the unlicensed fishermen selling fish.

 

What ever camp they are from, if they are breaking the law they should be prosecuted.

 

Have to agree again call a tosser whatever you like they're still a tosser!

 

It would not matter who blames who if they were gill tagged. No tag no sell, simple. If we stay as we are, defra will restrict the rsa, it will be pointless as it would be un-policable at an enormous cost to the rate payer, some proberly do not even eat fish. The problem of blaming who black sold would remain. Don't forget illegal back door selling as well. Gill tagging, easy to police. Easy to check from capture to being eaten don't you think?

Yup that's pretty much what i was getting at the other day.

[Jim Roper]

If the mls had gone up to 450mm then I would agree we would have little argument, perhaps thats the way to go

 

Whatever the MLS is set at, if it is the correct one, then there should be no need for bag limits, tags or any other control measures.

The correct MLS, whatever that is, should leave enough youngsters to grow up.

There appears to be plenty of young Bass at present, by all accounts, though the average size of all landed bass appears to have dropped over the last 30 years, from what I hear.

Edited February 8, 2007 by Jim Roper

[Steve Coppolo]

But Leon the powers that be are convinced that by capping the efforts of anglers , hobby netters , mesh and mls increases they are doing just what you suggest

Quote"Now if bag limits were part of a package aimed at reducing overall mortality"

 

If they had made the new MLS 45cm for a start, then I doubt you'd see any objections to bag limits for bass from RSA. But they didn't, they bowed to pressure from the commercial sector and made it 40cm instead. That's why there is stiff opposition to bag limits.

 

As you say it's a bit of a grey area that anglers often moan about, I wonder how many times I've seen " It's not you but the unlicenced part timers that are doing the damage" I'm sure you said somthing simula the first time I met you.

If you practice catch and relese as much as you all say then a bag limit won't hurt you, it will stop the others and easier to police.

 

O.K, maybe I/we should have put it another way. It's not you, it's those that net right up to the beaches, inside estuaries and small creeks, that have the biggest effect on anglers. The fact is that most of those doing it are unlicenced, part time commercial fishermen, although there are a few licenced part time commercial fishermen who do it too, like Whiskers and Sams mate. Get the nets out of the estuaries and away from the beaches and again, we could probably agree to bag limits.

 

Why should innocent and responsible anglers be penalised because of these unlicenced commercial fishermen, and the local SFC's and DEFRA's inability to stop them? It's complete nonsense and it's not right. You can't impose blanket restrictions on everyone, regardless of whether they sell fish or not, just because the authorities can't catch the real culprits. That isn't just an erosion of anglers rights, it's the erosion of all our rights. Where would they draw the line if they got away with doing that? Banning all motorists because they can't catch the drink drivers? Locking everyone up for 6 weeks of the year because they can't catch the real criminals? I will fight any such measures because I don't believe that innocent people should be penalised due to someone elses incompetence.

 

As you say, bag limits wouldn't really effect me because I only take a couple of bass at a time, but that's missing the point by a mile. If bag limits were imposed I would make damn sure that I took my full limit every time I went out. In fact I'd cram my boat with as many anglers as I could and make sure they all took their limit. Then I'd give the bloody things away to the local pubs and restuarants. I would also write to all the fishing media and urge every bass angler in the country to do the same too.

 

This sorry government have demonstrated their inablity to address the real issues many times with the likes of congestion charges, green taxes, proposed mileage charges and bloody identity cards. This bag limit issue, although not quite as important, is just another example of the same thing. If you can't address the real issue, f*ck it, hit everyone.

[barry luxton]

If they had made the new MLS 45cm for a start, then I doubt you'd see any objections to bag limits for bass from RSA. But they didn't, they bowed to pressure from the commercial sector and made it 40cm instead. That's why there is stiff opposition to bag limits.

O.K, maybe I/we should have put it another way. It's not you, it's those that net right up to the beaches, inside estuaries and small creeks, that have the biggest effect on anglers. The fact is that most of those doing it are unlicenced, part time commercial fishermen, although there are a few licenced part time commercial fishermen who do it too, like Whiskers and Sams mate. Get the nets out of the estuaries and away from the beaches and again, we could probably agree to bag limits.

 

Why should innocent and responsible anglers be penalised because of these unlicenced commercial fishermen, and the local SFC's and DEFRA's inability to stop them? It's complete nonsense and it's not right. You can't impose blanket restrictions on everyone, regardless of whether they sell fish or not, just because the authorities can't catch the real culprits. That isn't just an erosion of anglers rights, it's the erosion of all our rights. Where would they draw the line if they got away with doing that? Banning all motorists because they can't catch the drink drivers? Locking everyone up for 6 weeks of the year because they can't catch the real criminals? I will fight any such measures because I don't believe that innocent people should be penalised due to someone elses incompetence.

 

As you say, bag limits wouldn't really effect me because I only take a couple of bass at a time, but that's missing the point by a mile. If bag limits were imposed I would make damn sure that I took my full limit every time I went out. In fact I'd cram my boat with as many anglers as I could and make sure they all took their limit. Then I'd give the bloody things away to the local pubs and restuarants. I would also write to all the fishing media and urge every bass angler in the country to do the same too.

 

This sorry government have demonstrated their inablity to address the real issues many times with the likes of congestion charges, green taxes, proposed mileage charges and bloody identity cards. This bag limit issue, although not quite as important, is just another example of the same thing. If you can't address the real issue, f*ck it, hit everyone.

 

This bag limit proposel is very important to me, again it will not impact to a large extent but i do not want the b........ds controlling me when i am innocent. It's worse because the welsh assembly will not agree to 40mm at all and they was the b..... .ds who initally complained to defra about us rsa, that's why it stinks and i will not go along with it. I wonder if the commercial guys on the committee vote for it on monday? Don't hold yer breath.

[roryh]

Why should innocent and responsible anglers be penalised because of these unlicenced commercial fishermen, and the local SFC's and DEFRA's inability to stop them? It's complete nonsense and it's not right. You can't impose blanket restrictions on everyone, regardless of whether they sell fish or not, just because the authorities can't catch the real culprits. That isn't just an erosion of anglers rights, it's the erosion of all our rights. Where would they draw the line if they got away with doing that? Banning all motorists because they can't catch the drink drivers? Locking everyone up for 6 weeks of the year because they can't catch the real criminals? I will fight any such measures because I don't believe that innocent people should be penalised due to someone elses incompetence.

 

Yes but we will be as the track record from other sports suggests, remember that loony going mad in hungerford with an assault rifle? the govornment restricted legal shotguns.

 

Another nutter went bezerk in a primary school in Scotland (despite the police being warned about him but he was a mate of a chief constable so that was ok) they further restricted shotguns and banned pistols.

 

Foxhunting, did the powers that be even listen for a moment to the people who actually have some knowledge of the subject? .......... not a bit of it!

 

Bow hunting, apparently causes unneccessary suffering.... funnily enough a bow used properly kills as efficiently as a rifle, but that small fact got ignored.

 

The fact is that they will restrict us out of existence if they can.

[Jim Roper]

Yes but we will be as the track record from other sports suggests, remember that loony going mad in hungerford with an assault rifle? the govornment restricted legal shotguns.

 

Most of the victims at Hungerford were killed with a 9mm pistol, but AK 47 made a better story for the media.

The women who headed the forore after Dunblane, didn't have a child at the school and lived nowhere near the place.

Do the people who claim to represent rsa's ever fish for cod?

[roryh]

Most of the victims at Hungerford were killed with a 9mm pistol, but AK 47 made a better story for the media.

The women who headed the forore after Dunblane, didn't have a child at the school and lived nowhere near the place.

Do the people who claim to represent rsa's ever fish for cod?

 

My point exactly, (although i had forgotten a couple of the facts you mentioned) mis ifnormation and mis representation will mess us all up.