The future ?

[Cranfield]

I was wandering along Princes Parade, Hythe yesterday and there were two "old blokes" fishing near the Fishermans Beach end.

 

I made the usual, "anything happening ?" enquiry and they said that they had four decent flatfish in the bag.

They had also returned some undersized "bits and pieces".

 

I asked them what they thought about the possible sea licences and bag limits, that were rumoured to be on the way.

Neither had heard anything about them and asked how much the licence would be.

I said that I had no idea, but the freshwater one is £24.50, with a concession for over 65's, but I don't know what that is.

They both said that they wouldn't pay, "£20 odd a year to fish off the beach" and with the rise in the price of bait, tackle etc., they would just pack it in.

I told them that the idea was that steps would be taken to improve inshore fishing, in exchange for the licence fee and bag limits and their reply was unprintable, but along the lines of, "I don't believe that".

 

So, two old blokes meet up once a week in the better weather, fish off the beach and sit together nattering.

They return undersized fish and do little to deplete fish stocks, but they look destined to desert the sport.

 

I wonder how many more like them there will be ?

 

But, its all for the greater good............................isn't it ?

[nick]

but Cranfield did you also ask them what they would think if a licence was introduced only after a demonstrable improvement in sea fishing?

 

and that bag limits MAY be introduced if needed on a species by species basis?

 

Did your father ever tell you as a child that the bogey man was going to get you?

[Steve Coppolo]

I was wandering along Princes Parade, Hythe yesterday and there were two "old blokes" fishing near the Fishermans Beach end.

 

I made the usual, "anything happening ?" enquiry and they said that they had four decent flatfish in the bag.

They had also returned some undersized "bits and pieces".

 

I asked them what they thought about the possible sea licences and bag limits, that were rumoured to be on the way.

Neither had heard anything about them and asked how much the licence would be.

I said that I had no idea, but the freshwater one is £24.50, with a concession for over 65's, but I don't know what that is.

They both said that they wouldn't pay, "£20 odd a year to fish off the beach" and with the rise in the price of bait, tackle etc., they would just pack it in.

 

That is a point I made when I sent my own personal response to DEFRA regarding the last draft strategy document. Sea angling doesn't attract many youngsters. Most people who still go sea fishing are those who have always done so, and those who remember how things used to be. Most, although not all, youngsters prefer to invest their time and money into carp angling, a disclipline of the sport that provides lots of big fish. So sea anglers are already a dying breed. The average age of sea anglers is far older than those who paretake in other disciplines of the sport. When us lot are gone, there won't be many taking our place because there's nothing to attract them in the way of fish to be caught. Intoducing restrictions and management measures for the sake of it will just speed up the process. Real benefits to sea angling may slow the process down, but all the evidence so far says we won't see any. It's a sad state of affairs.

[Cranfield]

Nick, I think that for a "demonstrable" improvement in shore fishing to be scientifically proven, would be almost impossible.

So many factors influence fishing success, whilst the presence of fish is the most important one, it is only one of the factors.

I suspect we would hear what you often hear round the understocked commercial trout lakes, "the fish are in there, if you can't catch them thats not my fault".

 

For the "benefits" to be present and satisfactorily proven, before the "impositions " were levied, would mean about 10 years of quality scientific study.

Which would cost a lot more than any licence revenue and we both know this will not happen.

 

By the way, my father left home when I was three, I don't remember having any conversations with him, least of all ones about bogey men.

[Guest challenge]

Nick, I think that for a "demonstrable" improvement in shore fishing to be scientifically proven, would be almost impossible.

So many factors influence fishing success, whilst the presence of fish is the most important one, it is only one of the factors.

I suspect we would hear what you often hear round the understocked commercial trout lakes, "the fish are in there, if you can't catch them thats not my fault".

 

For the "benefits" to be present and satisfactorily proven, before the "impositions " were levied, would mean about 10 years of quality scientific study.

Which would cost a lot more than any licence revenue and we both know this will not happen.

 

By the way, my father left home when I was three, I don't remember having any conversations with him, least of all ones about bogey men.

I believe that the answer that the too old gentlemen gave you was a very good demonstration of the thoughts of the silent majority.

I also believe that your answer above was one of the more honest and realistic that I have come across.

Regards.

[barry luxton]

but Cranfield did you also ask them what they would think if a licence was introduced only after a demonstrable improvement in sea fishing?

 

and that bag limits MAY be introduced if needed on a species by species basis?

 

Hi Nick, you don't seriously believe that is going to happen do you? I would imagine that was the reason Cranfield did not ask it that way.

[nick]

I wish I could see into the future like you guys.

 

Anyone like to let me know the lottery numbers for next week?

[Cranfield]

Nick, like too many of the apologists that reply to these posts, you make the mistake of dismissing airily peoples concerns.

 

It comes across as a very condescending, "mummy knows best" attitude.

 

As someone said in an earlier post, there is a great silent majority of sea anglers out there, they don't buy fishing mags, or read Internet Forums and they don't belong to Clubs, National Federations, or Conservation Groups.

They are the ones that are going to react, as and when any of this is enacted.

 

You had better get your responses a bit better tuned before then.

[nick]

I share many of the concerns that are posted on here.

 

I have no great desire for licences

 

I have no great desire for bag limits

 

I do want a decent future for sea fishing.

 

For the first time that I ever remember the government of the day have woken up to the fact that recreational sea angling is a good thing. (Probably because they can see an earning opportunity - and I don't mean licence revenue!) I for one think that is positive. Not only that but they have even decided to try and do something to improve the lot of RSA. And they have involved RSA in the early stages of trying to do something. I am not totally naive, I don't believe in the tooth fairy or father Christmas.

 

I know that RSA is not going to be gifted everything that we would all like to see. However for once we are having a direct input into the decision making process.

 

If RSA organisations and individuals can create sufficient moment, and create enough "noise" to MPs etc. we for once have a chance to influence policy, and possibly, just possibly, make the marine environment better for sea angling than it has been for a generation (or more).

 

And in the light of all that a small but vocal minority are suggesting that some very hard working individuals are selling out anglers birthright. That is simply untrue.

 

The RSA reps are working bloody hard to try and get the best possible basis for negotiation in the RSA strategy document.

So if I am being condescending I am sorry, but there are a lot of spoilt little kids out there saying I want it all my own way and I want it now, and generally having temper tantrums because someone somewhere may have a different idea to them.

 

There are suggestions of licences and bag limits in the document as it stands. So rather than the current cries of foul against the very people trying to influence things for the best, it is time for all these concerned anglers to get their thumbs out of their backsides and do something about it when the actual consultation takes place; make their views known in an effective manner.

 

And stop attacking people that are spending a lot of time trying to make things far better than they will be if DEFRA just do it their own way.

 

Stop blaming the RSA reps, and start looking at DEFRA who is the body that is driving all this.

Edited March 11, 2007 by nick

[Davy Holt]

Well said Nick.. you pretty much hit the nail on the head with that post