Request that SACN withdraws from the negotiation table wrt RSA Strategy

[Leon Roskilly]

How many paid-up members do the SACN reps claim to represent.

 

 

In an official consultation response back in September, we wrote

 

The Sea Anglers Conservation Network has members throughout the British Isles, and a few beyond. Steadily growing, we have over 400 lines of membership, a number of them being angling organisations clubs and federations extending our reach to many thousands of anglers.

 

Our 'lines of membership' since then has gone to over 500, with another major RSA organisation having joined us, as well as several more clubs.

 

When submitting a response, and often when attending meetings with officials, we always advise them of our current membership, so that they have a clear idea of how many members (individuals and organisations) that SACN is directly representing.

[glennk]

Do all the members of these "MAJOR RSA ORGANISATIONS" know you are speaking on their behalf ? I was amazed to learn you represented YALASA at the last meeting. Obviously its up to YALASA if they respond through you and affiliate to SACN but I would have chose a more direct route had I known.

 

As a member of SACN and YALASA do you count me twice as a member of SACN? how many more people are in 2 or 3 of the same organisations ? Are you counting them twice ? maybe even 3 or four times ?

 

The question was how many individual members has SACN without affiliated members who may or may not be aware you are counting them into your figures and responding on their behalf. Have you worked out if you get NFSA to affiliate to sacn you could boast another 20,000 members most of whom wouldn't even know who you were ?

Edited February 28, 2007 by glennk

[Leon Roskilly]

Do all the members of these "MAJOR RSA ORGANISATIONS" know you are speaking on their behalf ? I was amazed to learn you represented YALASA at the last meeting. Obviously its up to YALASA if they respond through you and affiliate to SACN but I would have chose a more direct route had I known.

 

As a member of SACN and YALASA do you count me twice as a member of SACN? how many more people are in 2 or 3 of the same organisations ? Are you counting them twice ? maybe even 3 or four times ?

 

The question was how many individual members has SACN without affiliated members who may or may not be aware you are counting them into your figures and responding on their behalf. Have you worked out if you get NFSA to affiliate to sacn you could boast another 20,000 members most of whom wouldn't even know who you were ?

 

 

Glenn,

 

I wasn't representing YALASA

 

I was representing all SACN members including YALASA.

 

 

I think that you are worth 2 or 3 of most people

 

(but you only get counted once toward the SACN membership - and many thanks for your continued support)

 

Hmmm! That's a good idea, must speak to someone in the NFSA

Edited February 28, 2007 by Leon Roskilly

[nick]

Sorry Glenn, but whatever respect I had for your position has totally evaporated.

 

It is quite clear from your latest post that you have some sort of personal vendetta against Leon.

 

He has just clearly explained the position, which you clearly dislike.

 

Tough.

[Leon Roskilly]

How many paid-up members do the SACN reps claim to represent.

 

 

It's not simply a 'numbers game'.

 

SACN, by it's nature, probably has a higher proportion of activists than any other RSA organisation.

 

Our membership tend to be better informed than the membership of other RSA orgainsations, on a wide variety of conservation and political issues. Something we try to encourage within the general angling community through the information provided on our website, and internet forum postings (you've probably seen some of them!)

 

As well as keeping the membership informed, we also provide information to other organisations and individuals who are active in campaigning for and representing anglers (originally SACN was founded to service RSA organisations and campaigns in the early days of the internet in the UK, when few organisations had their own websites, and many people were bemused by email and forums).

 

We try to work in partnership with other organisations.

 

We also tend to mobilise faster than others when necessary.

 

(In fact as a responsible organisation we try to react proportionally to events, having seen the effect that we can have on hard pressed administrations. We have learned that a couple of phone calls can often resolve a situation without resorting to a mass email campaign)

 

It is a combination of all of these things, including the quality and depth of our submissions, that is probably more important than the numbers and structure of our membership base, in being able to influence authorities and others at all levels.

[Davy Holt]

Hiya Steve,

Hi Davy Holt

 

On my strech of coast line Hampshire/Sussex over the last 5 to 7 years gill netting has only been minmimial due to the explosion in spider crab stocks.

 

Even still at minimal what does that equate to 100m, 100,000m or more in gill nets?

 

100m of net will probably catch a lot more in the space of 4 hrs than a 100 anglers will catch in twice that time, however given my past experiance it will be a lot more than twice the amount.

 

The other point that your arument falls down on is for an angler to catch the fish the fish need to be feeding, for a commercial to catch the fish just have to be the area.

 

Most of the net buffs you see are marking whelk pots.

I'd need really good glasses to see them from up here

But since you brought up the subject.. what about the fish taht are caught to bait the pots with.. I take it that is not having an impact on the Stocks ?

 

In my area very few anglers practice catch and release.

 

That may well be so however I have a feeling it may not be true, how many commercials practice catch and release ?

 

The local anglers bring back loads of large bass, pollock, skate, smothounds, conger ect, ect

Hmm I take it these anglers are all keeping quiet about their catches then, given the lack of large catch reports on the forums or the Press.

 

The local chartfleet do practice catch and release regarding tope

 

Yet the numbers of Tope are still dropping.. that kinda points the finger at the only other exploiter of Top does it not ?

 

Anglers do collectively take loads of fish home which is there right and choice however it is wrong of you to go around telling everybody that all anglers release their catch when in fact they dont, thats what your post infers

 

Not quite so, remember Angler catch a lot of undersized fish which are returned alive, as are a good percentage of sizable fish, certainly the numbers of fish returned alive by anglers outweighs the numbers released by Commercials by far.

 

So really .. yes anglers do have an impact on fish stocks, but it is no where near what you are trying to infer

[stavey]

They're worth more per kilo than milk!

 

Now thats just silly jim

[steve good]

Look at it another way. Did input from the RSA sector achieve any real benefit to RSA, or bass stocks? A 40 cm bass is no more exciting to catch than a 36cm one, and at 40cm it still hasn't spawned, so the answer has to be no.

Got to disagree there Steve. The only thing likely to make the bass stocks collapse is commercial fishing.

 

 

Hi Steve

 

QUOTE// Got to disagree there Steve. The only thing likely to make the bass stocks collapse is commercial fishing.

 

Angling reps got the mls increase from 36cm to 40cm the french uptake on that size range will increase and Englands discard rate will also increase.

 

The net benefit to the bass stocks will be ZERO well MINUS in fact, the 40cm mls is meaningless

 

steve

 

Look at it another way. Did input from the RSA sector achieve any real benefit to RSA, or bass stocks? A 40 cm bass is no more exciting to catch than a 36cm one, and at 40cm it still hasn't spawned, so the answer has to be no.

Got to disagree there Steve. The only thing likely to make the bass stocks collapse is commercial fishing.

 

 

Hi Steve

 

QUOTE// Got to disagree there Steve. The only thing likely to make the bass stocks collapse is commercial fishing.

 

Angling reps got the mls increase from 36cm to 40cm the french uptake on that size range will increase and Englands discard rate will also increase.

 

The net benefit to the bass stocks will be ZERO well MINUS in fact, the 40cm mls is meaningless

 

steve

[Steve Coppolo]

Angling reps got the mls increase from 36cm to 40cm the french uptake on that size range will increase and Englands discard rate will also increase.

 

The net benefit to the bass stocks will be ZERO well MINUS in fact, the 40cm mls is meaningless

 

steve

 

So who will be throwing back all these dead bass? Commercial fishermen or anglers? As I said, the only thing likely to make the bass stocks collapse is commercial fishing. I'm also struggling with what happened to all the bass over 36cm that you used to catch. Were they thrown back? If not, I can't see how the MLS increase will lead to a collapse in bass stocks, but if the MLS had stayed at 36cm everything would have been fine. You used to take those 36 to 40cm bass, so they ended up dead anyway. In fact you used to take bass of all sizes above 36cm, so how is the MLS increase going to make you kill any more or any less bass than you did before? You may land slightly less for a short period of time, but you won't kill any more than you used to. So how will it lead to a collapse of the stock? The gill net mesh increase will actually lead to more small bass surviving.

 

I just think you're being a bit naughty again Steve.

 

I agree about the 40cm being a waste of time though.

Edited February 28, 2007 by Steve Coppolo

[barry luxton]

The net benefit to the bass stocks will be ZERO well MINUS in fact, the 40cm mls is meaningless

 

steve

 

 

Hi Steve good, can you tell me that on sorting a trawl are all the discards dead or do some go back alive.? Cheers.

Edited February 28, 2007 by barry luxton