Request that SACN withdraws from the negotiation table wrt RSA Strategy

[Sharkbyte]

Hi Nick

 

Could you state what is the exact nature of your relationship with the SACN.

[nick]

I'm a member of SACN and a very inactive member of the exec

 

and have been since the very early days.

 

could I just ask if you are a member too?

[steve good]

I'm a member of SACN and a very inactive member of the exec

 

and have been since the very early days.

 

could I just ask if you are a member too?

 

Hi nick

 

So what brings you here then, rallying the troops to war or has there veiws of discontentment just penertrated the ear drums of there supposed representitives.

 

Your veiw of accepting the plan and then sorting out the nuts and bolts after could well be folly.

 

IRAQ has weapons of mass destruction on that basis the Prime Minster asked the country to accept the war plan.

 

Just look at what the nuts and bolts of that plan have done, and where is it still going.

 

Also how many anglers does SACN suppose to represent.

 

steve

[nick]

all comments I have made are mine alone as stated above.

 

I am not posting as a representative of sacn.

 

It is not me that says we should sort out the details later. it is simply a fact of life that this is a strategy document which is being discussed.

 

Not a policy document which will need to be developed to put into practise the strategy.

 

I am pleased that so many people think sacn are so powerful that they can dictate to DEFRA how things should be done, but it aint so.

 

As to what brings me here, I've been here for years. I just hate to see ignorance compounded, so I thought I would attempt some education regarding political processes.

[Steve Coppolo]

I am pleased that so many people think sacn are so powerful that they can dictate to DEFRA how things should be done,

 

They don't.

 

I just hate to see ignorance compounded, so I thought I would attempt some education regarding political processes.

 

So anyone who doesn't agree with Leon and SACN is ignorant, and you're going to educate us all?

 

 

[nick]

not at all Steve.

 

But clearly some people do not understand the words printed in the draft STRATEGY document, nor what a strategy document is. That is all I am trying to correct.

 

I disagree with Leon, probably more of the time than I agree with him.

 

Fortunately we're both grown ups and can still be polite to each other. In addition Leon is very good at putting to one side the finer details of his own personal beliefs and putting forward whether in writing or verbally a position agreed upon by the people that can be bothered to take part in the formulation of the SACN responses.

 

As I have said several times I don't particularly want to see a licence, and though I support bag limits in theory I have reservations about the implementation of them. But importantly that is not what the STRATEGY is about. It is about the hopes and aspirations of DEFRA for RSA. They are being guided in developing that strategy by the bodies and individuals that have responded to the consultation.

 

Yet again let me stress.

 

STRATEGY documents are not about the fine details of implementation but purely about the aims. Section2 and Section10 give the concrete information about what is the aim and how to measure success. The other sections discuss possible methods which it is possible to use in getting the desired outcomes. They neither rule in or out any course of action for achieving the aims. They simply open a discussion about possibilities. When they policies are discussed and consulted upon is the time that objections can be aired.

 

But come on folks don't you all want to see:

 

“To enhance the recreational sea angling experience in England in a sustainable, holistic and environmentally responsible way”

 

The angling experience can be thought of as all aspects that make sea angling an enjoyable activity. As well as catching more and bigger fish, this includes many un-measurable elements such as the quality and accessibility of angling sites, degree of angling knowledge and skill that is perceived as being required to catch particular species, the belief that desirable fish are in the fishing area and potentially ‘catchable’, the various levels of reward associated with catching a fish of certain size and species and other social aspects valued by individuals.

 

I certainly do

[barry luxton]

not at all Steve.

 

But clearly some people do not understand the words printed in the draft STRATEGY document, nor what a strategy document is. That is all I am trying to correct.

 

I disagree with Leon, probably more of the time than I agree with him.

 

Fortunately we're both grown ups and can still be polite to each other. In addition Leon is very good at putting to one side the finer details of his own personal beliefs and putting forward whether in writing or verbally a position agreed upon by the people that can be bothered to take part in the formulation of the SACN responses.

 

As I have said several times I don't particularly want to see a licence, and though I support bag limits in theory I have reservations about the implementation of them. But importantly that is not what the STRATEGY is about. It is about the hopes and aspirations of DEFRA for RSA. They are being guided in developing that strategy by the bodies and individuals that have responded to the consultation.

 

Yet again let me stress.

 

STRATEGY documents are not about the fine details of implementation but purely about the aims. Section2 and Section10 give the concrete information about what is the aim and how to measure success. The other sections discuss possible methods which it is possible to use in getting the desired outcomes. They neither rule in or out any course of action for achieving the aims. They simply open a discussion about possibilities. When they policies are discussed and consulted upon is the time that objections can be aired.

 

But come on folks don't you all want to see:

I certainly do

 

 

Nick without defra's help my personal angling experiance gets better year on year. It is only because i put a lot of effort in that makes it so, i really don't want defra to interfere with it but as we all know some of us will have to keep their pension funds going. That is what i think personally and it would take quite a lot to change it.

Edited February 27, 2007 by barry luxton

[nick]

but face facts, DEFRA are going to do it 'cos they believe that they can get more folks fishing which earns them more money in tax revenues.

 

So do we:

 

let 'em do what they will and suffer the consequences?

(withdraw as suggested by Glenn)

 

or do we get involved and try to make there plans as good as possible for RSA?

(keep talking)

[clem]

not at all Steve.

 

But clearly some people do not understand the words printed in the draft STRATEGY document, nor what a strategy document is. That is all I am trying to correct.

 

I disagree with Leon, probably more of the time than I agree with him.

 

Fortunately we're both grown ups and can still be polite to each other. In addition Leon is very good at putting to one side the finer details of his own personal beliefs and putting forward whether in writing or verbally a position agreed upon by the people that can be bothered to take part in the formulation of the SACN responses.

 

As I have said several times I don't particularly want to see a licence, and though I support bag limits in theory I have reservations about the implementation of them. But importantly that is not what the STRATEGY is about. It is about the hopes and aspirations of DEFRA for RSA. They are being guided in developing that strategy by the bodies and individuals that have responded to the consultation.

 

Yet again let me stress.

 

STRATEGY documents are not about the fine details of implementation but purely about the aims. Section2 and Section10 give the concrete information about what is the aim and how to measure success. The other sections discuss possible methods which it is possible to use in getting the desired outcomes. They neither rule in or out any course of action for achieving the aims. They simply open a discussion about possibilities. When they policies are discussed and consulted upon is the time that objections can be aired.

 

But come on folks don't you all want to see:

I certainly do

[barry luxton]

but face facts, DEFRA are going to do it 'cos they believe that they can get more folks fishing which earns them more money in tax revenues.

 

So do we:

 

let 'em do what they will and suffer the consequences?

(withdraw as suggested by Glenn)

 

or do we get involved and try to make there plans as good as possible for RSA?

(keep talking)

You know as i do we will talk and talk and talk, just like commercial and where will it get the rsa? More brownie points as their pension fund has just gone up, thats all.