Jump to content

Bass in Guernsey

FishingGuernsey

By FishingGuernsey
in Conservation & Politics

 Share

Recommended Posts

barry luxton Member

barry luxton

Posted
Posted
As I understand, the third vessel was not involved in the pair trawl activity, it was called when the catch was realised to be so big in order to offload them. I will stand corrected if i am wrong, but that I understand is why they are being investigated.

 

It would mean then that the third boat needed a transshipment licence then to do that? Is that the one who decided to off load in brixham? Please keep us all informed. Many thanks.

Free to choose apart from the ones where the trust poked their nose in. Common eel. tope. Bass and sea bream. All restricted.


New for 2016 TAT are the main instigators for the demise of the u k bass charter boat industry, where they went screaming off to parliament and for the first time assisting so called angling gurus set up bass take bans with the e u using rubbish exaggerated info collected by ices from anglers, they must be very proud.

Upgrade, the door has been closed with regards to anglers being linked to the e u superstate and the failed c f p. So TAT will no longer need to pay monies to the EAA anymore as that org is no longer relevant to the u k . Goodbye to the europeon anglers alliance and pathetic restrictions from the e u.

Angling is better than politics, ban politics from angling.

Consumer of bass. where is the evidence that the u k bass stock need angling trust protection. Why won't you work with your peers instead of castigating them. They have the answer.

Recipie's for mullet stew more than welcomed.

Angling sanitation trust and kent and sussex sea anglers org delete's and blocks rsa's alternative opinion on their face book site. Although they claim to rep all.

new for 2014. where is the evidence that the south coast bream stock need the angling trust? Your campaign has no evidence. Why won't you work with your peers, the inshore under tens? As opposed to alienating them? Angling trust failed big time re bait digging, even fish legal attempted to intervene and failed, all for what, nothing.

Looks like the sea angling reps have been coerced by the ifca's to compose sea angling strategy's that the ifca's at some stage will look at drafting into legislation to manage the rsa, because they like wasting tax payers money. That's without asking the rsa btw. You know who you are..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 72
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

roryh Member

roryh

Posted
Posted
Good evening Wurzel, so if when pair trawling they say both have quota, fine i understand that, but what about the third boat or forth, fifth, for that matter? Is this where transshippment comes in use?

 

Again Wurzel, taking those fish to the mainland is not the norm then fine, but if this is normal practice, where the fish caught locally are taken out of the local ecomomy, it would be like letting tom, dick and harry fish right up to our doorstep in the knowledge that we would not benifit from them.

 

If i understand correctly, once full one of the pair heads for port while the third boat becomes the vacant half of the pair. How many vessels can proced in this manner i have no clue.

If I ever get the hang of it they'll bloody well ban it!

 

 

By the way anyone fancy sponsoring me in the WSOP?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wurzel Member

wurzel

Posted
Posted
As I understand, the third vessel was not involved in the pair trawl activity, it was called when the catch was realised to be so big in order to offload them. I will stand corrected if i am wrong, but that I understand is why they are being investigated.

 

 

Hello FishingGuernsey

 

The chances are they bent the rules a bit, I suppose the saints amongst you will think that they need hanging out to dry for it.

It's going to be hard to prove.

 

On the practical side of things, the catch had been made, the chances are that the fish would have died any way if released , It takes time to sort out a big haul, lifting it aboard in bites.

 

Are you suggesting they slip a large haul and go and search for a smaller one? Apply to defra for a job.

I fish to live and live to fish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
barry luxton Member

barry luxton

Posted
Posted
Hello FishingGuernsey

 

The chances are they bent the rules a bit, I suppose the saints amongst you will think that they need hanging out to dry for it.

It's going to be hard to prove.

 

On the practical side of things, the catch had been made, the chances are that the fish would have died any way if released , It takes time to sort out a big haul, lifting it aboard in bites.

 

Are you suggesting they slip a large haul and go and search for a smaller one? Apply to defra for a job.

 

Evenin Wurzel, i think we are all guessing at present. On a practical point, what if they were to speak to the sfc while they are still out there for guidence, surly they would have suggested something? If there is any guilt it should be pro rata based on the level of say the crime commited. If it was a slight bending then sure a slight bending fine, but if it was a conspiricy to deliberatly land say five tons and think it does not matter then sure fine them hard.

Free to choose apart from the ones where the trust poked their nose in. Common eel. tope. Bass and sea bream. All restricted.


New for 2016 TAT are the main instigators for the demise of the u k bass charter boat industry, where they went screaming off to parliament and for the first time assisting so called angling gurus set up bass take bans with the e u using rubbish exaggerated info collected by ices from anglers, they must be very proud.

Upgrade, the door has been closed with regards to anglers being linked to the e u superstate and the failed c f p. So TAT will no longer need to pay monies to the EAA anymore as that org is no longer relevant to the u k . Goodbye to the europeon anglers alliance and pathetic restrictions from the e u.

Angling is better than politics, ban politics from angling.

Consumer of bass. where is the evidence that the u k bass stock need angling trust protection. Why won't you work with your peers instead of castigating them. They have the answer.

Recipie's for mullet stew more than welcomed.

Angling sanitation trust and kent and sussex sea anglers org delete's and blocks rsa's alternative opinion on their face book site. Although they claim to rep all.

new for 2014. where is the evidence that the south coast bream stock need the angling trust? Your campaign has no evidence. Why won't you work with your peers, the inshore under tens? As opposed to alienating them? Angling trust failed big time re bait digging, even fish legal attempted to intervene and failed, all for what, nothing.

Looks like the sea angling reps have been coerced by the ifca's to compose sea angling strategy's that the ifca's at some stage will look at drafting into legislation to manage the rsa, because they like wasting tax payers money. That's without asking the rsa btw. You know who you are..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
roryh Member

roryh

Posted
Posted
Hello FishingGuernsey

 

The chances are they bent the rules a bit, I suppose the saints amongst you will think that they need hanging out to dry for it.

It's going to be hard to prove.

 

On the practical side of things, the catch had been made, the chances are that the fish would have died any way if released , It takes time to sort out a big haul, lifting it aboard in bites.

 

Are you suggesting they slip a large haul and go and search for a smaller one? Apply to defra for a job.

Must admit that i'd rather see the rules bent a bit than 5 tonne of fish wasted, that would make no sense at all!

If I ever get the hang of it they'll bloody well ban it!

 

 

By the way anyone fancy sponsoring me in the WSOP?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
barry luxton Member

barry luxton

Posted
Posted
Must admit that i'd rather see the rules bent a bit than 5 tonne of fish wasted, that would make no sense at all!

They go back into the food chain Roryh

Free to choose apart from the ones where the trust poked their nose in. Common eel. tope. Bass and sea bream. All restricted.


New for 2016 TAT are the main instigators for the demise of the u k bass charter boat industry, where they went screaming off to parliament and for the first time assisting so called angling gurus set up bass take bans with the e u using rubbish exaggerated info collected by ices from anglers, they must be very proud.

Upgrade, the door has been closed with regards to anglers being linked to the e u superstate and the failed c f p. So TAT will no longer need to pay monies to the EAA anymore as that org is no longer relevant to the u k . Goodbye to the europeon anglers alliance and pathetic restrictions from the e u.

Angling is better than politics, ban politics from angling.

Consumer of bass. where is the evidence that the u k bass stock need angling trust protection. Why won't you work with your peers instead of castigating them. They have the answer.

Recipie's for mullet stew more than welcomed.

Angling sanitation trust and kent and sussex sea anglers org delete's and blocks rsa's alternative opinion on their face book site. Although they claim to rep all.

new for 2014. where is the evidence that the south coast bream stock need the angling trust? Your campaign has no evidence. Why won't you work with your peers, the inshore under tens? As opposed to alienating them? Angling trust failed big time re bait digging, even fish legal attempted to intervene and failed, all for what, nothing.

Looks like the sea angling reps have been coerced by the ifca's to compose sea angling strategy's that the ifca's at some stage will look at drafting into legislation to manage the rsa, because they like wasting tax payers money. That's without asking the rsa btw. You know who you are..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FishingGuernsey Member

FishingGuernsey

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
Hello FishingGuernsey

 

The chances are they bent the rules a bit, I suppose the saints amongst you will think that they need hanging out to dry for it.

It's going to be hard to prove.

 

On the practical side of things, the catch had been made, the chances are that the fish would have died any way if released , It takes time to sort out a big haul, lifting it aboard in bites.

 

Are you suggesting they slip a large haul and go and search for a smaller one? Apply to defra for a job.

 

Hi Wurzel,

 

I don't know if the rules were bent, broken or not at all. That's what the investigation will look at. I know that ths was reported by other commercials as the commercial house here is starting to break down due to the activities of a very small minority of them. If another commercial deemed it necessary to report, he knows more than I do about what they are allowed to do, he must have felt something wrong to do this against some powerful opposition.

 

I can perfectly understan that the fish not be wasted, it's more the big picture I am concerned about than an isolated (hopefully) incident. The landing limit laws seem to need improving and discard bans introduced to stop mindless catching. Surely you know when trawling if there is an extra 8 tonne or whatever being pulled? Technology nowadays is superb.

 

I am suggesting they keep to catching only what they need to bring the level to their landing limits and then don't catch any more of that species (edit: Accidental bycatch accepted).

 

As for DEFRA, no thanks, I'd have to work for commercials.

Edited by FishingGuernsey

www.gbass.co.uk - The Guernsey Bass Anglers Sportfishing Society

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Coppolo Member

Steve Coppolo

Posted
Posted

I believe there is a system in place in Iceland, or at least there used to be, whereby if a commercial boat catches fish he's not supposed to, ie, undersize or exceeding quota, he still has to land it but doesn't get paid anything for it. The aggro involved with no money to show for it is enough of a deterant to stop commercial skippers deliberately exceeding quota and also stops the mad situation where a commercial skipper will shovel 4 boxes of undersize fish over the side, for example, in order to land one box of sizable fish.

 

Who's got the best fishery, us or Iceland?

DRUNK DRIVERS WRECK LIVES.

 

Don't drink and drive.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Toerag Member

Toerag

Posted
Posted

A couple of facts for those that don't know - there is a finite Guernsey market for fish & crab, a lot is exported to the continent in much the same way that there's a finite market in the Shetlands for mackerel and cod so most is exported elsewhere. Consequently Guernsey prices paid for fish are low, so any boat landing large quantities lands directly to france, which in the case of Guernsey is about 2-6 boats depending on species and time of year. The 2 boats involved land the vast majority of their catches in Cherbourg (they belong to the Cherbourg fishermen's co-op) - in winter it's bass and bream caught pelagic pair trawling, in summer it's rays & flats caught singletrawling on the banks.

As to trans-shipment - you certainly can't trans-ship across the 10m mark ie. an over 10m can't tranship to an under 10m and vice-versa. However I'm not sure about any other laws, but don't the russian Klondykers still visit cornwall and scotland? That's trans-shipping at it's most basic.

I do agree though, what's the point of a landing limit when you can just call up another boat to take part of your catch? From previous stories, this was truly an exceptional haul, the biggest they've had previously has been 12 or 17 tonnes (unconfirmed). As Wurzel said, they don't do this every time they go out, last year they had 38 tonnes of bass in total, so they don't hit paydirt very often.

Oh, and the boats run a 5/15 limit between them to allow 20 tonnes per single week with a total of 35 for the month, thus giving themselves the biggest total quota (15/15 gives a total of 30, 5/5 gives a total of 40, but due to the probability of getting a 10 tonne+ hit this is unworkable.)

Like Fresh coffee? www.Bean14.com

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wurzel Member

wurzel

Posted
Posted
I believe there is a system in place in Iceland, or at least there used to be, whereby if a commercial boat catches fish he's not supposed to, ie, undersize or exceeding quota, he still has to land it but doesn't get paid anything for it. The aggro involved with no money to show for it is enough of a deterant to stop commercial skippers deliberately exceeding quota and also stops the mad situation where a commercial skipper will shovel 4 boxes of undersize fish over the side, for example, in order to land one box of sizable fish.

 

Who's got the best fishery, us or Iceland?

 

 

We've got a better bass and dover sole fishery, they have not managed them very well have they.

I fish to live and live to fish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We and our partners use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences, repeat visits and to show you personalised advertisements. By clicking “I Agree”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies. However, you may visit Cookie Settings to provide a controlled consent.

  I accept