No Sea Angling Licence

[Steve Walker]

Labour’s Angling Spokesman Martin Salter MP has backed Fisheries Minister Jonathan Shaw in his decision not to proceed with a sea angling rod licence at the present time.

 

I had a letter from my (labour) MP telling me that there were no plans to increase road tax for cars with high fuel consumption. How far do you reckon you could throw an MP?

[wurzel]

Have a read again at what 'steveg' says in post 21.

 

Why do anglers take the slightest bit of notice about what commercials have to say on this forum?

 

They don't care about you - the angler - they have no axe to grind on your behalf.

They are in the business of making money from every fish they catch (usually as long as regulations permit!); the last thing they want is anyone stepping on their petticoat tails.

 

What are they doing on this forum? God knows.

Damned if I'd want to spend any time on a commercial fishing site.

They have nothing to say in favour of angling and nothing constructive to say about conservation and re-building the stocks of fish THEY have plundered.

 

Get uptight if you must about C&R and bag limits, but that is nothing compared to the threat that they feel to their livelihoods.

No wonder they bleat and chip away at the credibility of anglers.

 

Let them try to hold their own heads above water in the inevitable mire of more and more restrictions (reparations?), which WILL be imposed on them simply because of their bigotry and lack of foresight in the use of technology and their abuse of resources over the past decades.

 

 

When it comes to bigotry you are top of the class Ha.

You should spend more time on a commercial fishing site try "Trawler Photos" keep up to date on the Bloggs you might learn some thing.

You've never asked constructive questions on conservation to a commercial on here all we hear from you is eradicate them all as quick as possible.

The credibility of what anglers have to say about commercial fishing is usually what is questionable and the reason why commercials post on here.

You are right the inevitable mire of more restrictions will make it difficult to keep our heads above water and the same will probably apply to charter skippers, bait collectors and even the tackle trade perhaps.

 

As for the angling responses to the " would you support bag limits" all responses by anglers revolved around only if commercial effort was cut, as Challenge correctly points out commercial effort has been greatly reduced.

 

So now I'm asking a question.

 

As the restrictions and quotas have now reached a level where even a small 7 or 8 meter single handed boat is having difficulty to stay with in the law and keep his head above water, how much more capping of effort do you want from DEFRA before you will except bag limits?

 

I don't expect Ha to answer as he has never answered a direct question of mine yet.

[barry luxton]

I must say that I have to agree with glenk on this one, bag limits (if introduced) could certainly spell the end of the recreational charters angling industry (as we know it) in these parts.

I personally believe that some sort of voluntary licensing scheme introduced through local SFC, s similar to that of the recreational shell fishermen (free of charge of course) would have given RSA some form of accountability in the future negotiations that are going to take place in the future.

There is so much going on besides the marine bill e.g. http://www.seafish.org/whatsnew/detail.asp?p=ca&id=1686

RSA need to get properly organised and recognised for the trying times ahead.

 

Going back to Steve Pitt post and his answering of the question •would you support a bag limit for certain species where there is a conservation need and there are controls on commercial exploitation of the same species?

 

Steves answers where

The subject of bag limits is contentious amongst anglers, but as an individual angler I could accept the concept of bag limits as part of an overall species management plan, which also includes the capping of commercial effort.

There answer to that would simply be the commercial fishing industry has been caped to the extent of a reduction of 60% of its catching capacity in the past ten years.

I could support the implementation of bag limits, but only on the condition that similar controls were implemented on the commercial sector at the same time. To impose bag limits on anglers under any other circumstances would be to restrict anglers for the benefit of the commercial fishing sector. This would be discriminatory and would further deteriorate the angling experience.

There answer to that would be the commercial fishing industry works under a quota system that they are accountable too and that is enforced.

Regards.

Before any type of restriction is carried out on the rsa there needs to be evidence of exactly what is caught. How can anyone determin say that two cod or bass is the bag limit. It's absolutly bonkers even to think of restriction before you know what and how much you are restricting and to what effect the bag limits would have. How about the twenty eight tonne trawl last winter when the limit was fifteen for one five for the other so eight tonnes was apparently trannshipped (legaly) how many rsa and how long would it take to match that and that was only one trawl.

 

Don't forget the bass stock is being fished on a sustainable basis at the moment, apparently, so again why the need for bag limits in any event?

 

Accountability, gill tagging? That would mean no rsa, no hobby angler, no none licenced commercial could sell, whats wrong with that. Would it help to get rid of the back door seller.

 

With regards to the capping of the commercial sector Challenge, the reports of fish landings are at record levels.

Edited March 21, 2008 by barry luxton

[H.A.]

When it comes to bigotry you are top of the class Ha.

You should spend more time on a commercial fishing site try "Trawler Photos" keep up to date on the Bloggs you might learn some thing.

You've never asked constructive questions on conservation to a commercial on here all we hear from you is eradicate them all as quick as possible.

- Wurzel

 

You're partly right. I don't ask questions of commercials on here and I'm even less inclined to read or accept their opinions.

 

Several other posters within this thread have hit the nail on the head.

Picking away at anglers' rights is a pretty pointless exercise when it comes to low stocks and management of what is left.

 

I don't want to read commercial's blogs or posts and the quicker it is accepted by all, including you, that decimated stocks of our fishes is down to you lot and their bloody nets, the better!

 

Golden Mile ... nah, lets make it NO NETS within 3 miles and extend that if there is no sign of a recovery.

 

Here's one of my infrequent questions: what have I done, as an angler, to affect fish stocks the way the commercial industry has?

 

I have nothing to answer for; you and your lot have plenty!

 

Don't be surprised at my prejudice, OK?

 

[Guest challenge]

With regards to the capping of the commercial sector Challenge, the reports of fish landings are at record levels.

 

So what does that tell you?

1/ the government got it right in there decommissioning scheme?

2/ there is much more fish in the sea than was first anticipated?

3/ there are less boats so more fish to go round?

4/ fishermen are now better fishermen?

5/ the enforcement of quotas in conjunction with decommissioning are paying dividends?

6/ a smaller and more efficient and accountable fleet are catching more fish?

7/ the demand for fish are out stripping the supply so prices are at record levels?

8/ or was wurzel right all along when he said what crisis?

Regards.

[barry luxton]

With regards to the capping of the commercial sector Challenge, the reports of fish landings are at record levels.

 

So what does that tell you?

1/ the government got it right in there decommissioning scheme?

2/ there is much more fish in the sea than was first anticipated?

3/ there are less boats so more fish to go round?

4/ fishermen are now better fishermen?

5/ the enforcement of quotas in conjunction with decommissioning are paying dividends?

6/ a smaller and more efficient and accountable fleet are catching more fish?

7/ the demand for fish are out stripping the supply so prices are at record levels?

8/ or was wurzel right all along when he said what crisis?

Regards.

 

Despite the apparent constraints that are (strangling) the commercial sector it is still doing remarkably well with the landings. I do hope that defra have got it right regarding the stocks and quota balance, they certainly spend more than enough of the taxpayers money in doing so.

[wurzel]

- Wurzel

 

You're partly right. I don't ask questions of commercials on here and I'm even less inclined to read or accept their opinions.

 

Several other posters within this thread have hit the nail on the head.

Picking away at anglers' rights is a pretty pointless exercise when it comes to low stocks and management of what is left.

 

I don't want to read commercial's blogs or posts and the quicker it is accepted by all, including you, that decimated stocks of our fishes is down to you lot and their bloody nets, the better!

 

Golden Mile ... nah, lets make it NO NETS within 3 miles and extend that if there is no sign of a recovery.

 

Here's one of my infrequent questions: what have I done, as an angler, to affect fish stocks the way the commercial industry has?

 

I have nothing to answer for; you and your lot have plenty!

 

Don't be surprised at my prejudice, OK?

 

 

I'm not surprised at your prejudice, I don't understand it, despite your claims of decimated stocks and being surrounded by gill nets you also claim to be a quite successful angler by your own admission you caught bass to 13lb several plaice with some over 3lb from the shore you enjoyed the odd boat trip catching bream and smooth hounds last year.

 

I agree picking away at anglers rights is a pointless exercise when comes to conservation of stocks low or otherwise, nothing to do with me you'll have to take that up with DEFRA.

 

To answer your infrequent question.

As an angler you've done nothing to effect stocks compared to the commercial industry but then nor have I compared to other parts of the industry.

 

The main problem I have with you and with others of the same mind is that I don't know of a decimated stock.

 

Quote from Barry

 

"the reports of fish landings are at record levels."

 

How is that possible with decimated stock levels?

[H.A.]

The main problem I have with you and with others of the same mind is that I don't know of a decimated stock.

 

Don't know or don't want to know?????

 

You waste my time with your refusal to acknowledge anything which your industry's destructive and unsustainable methods and insatiable greed have on global fish stocks and those who would choose to catch them. I guess we could call it a kind of commercial fishermans' hari-kari pact.

 

Let me tell you of a decimated stock not far from you ... they're called herrings, remember?

 

The greed of those in the East Coast unsustainable fishery not only wiped them out, but did a reasonable job on the thousands of workers made up of those involved with processing and thousands of ancillary workers and their families too.

 

I suppose I will be subjected to your wimpering about 'It wasn't me; I wasn't there?' or 'no, the N Sea herring fishery was the victim of some mid-60s/70s climate change' or a catastrophic epidemic or there wasn't enough plankton or ..... or .....

 

ah, give it a rest Wurzel!

 

[Jaffa]

Don't know or don't want to know?????

 

You waste my time with your refusal to acknowledge anything which your industry's destructive and unsustainable methods and insatiable greed have on global fish stocks and those who would choose to catch them. I guess we could call it a kind of commercial fishermans' hari-kari pact.

 

Let me tell you of a decimated stock not far from you ... they're called herrings, remember?

 

The greed of those in the East Coast unsustainable fishery not only wiped them out, but did a reasonable job on the thousands of workers made up of those involved with processing and thousands of ancillary workers and their families too.

 

I suppose I will be subjected to your wimpering about 'It wasn't me; I wasn't there?' or 'no, the N Sea herring fishery was the victim of some mid-60s/70s climate change' or a catastrophic epidemic or there wasn't enough plankton or ..... or .....

 

ah, give it a rest Wurzel!

 

 

Interesting example to pick HA ; maybe one one that cuts through a lot of the politics, spin and other flluff

 

I take it you don't accept oceanographic conditions have changed between the time you and i were born and now?

 

The plankton community of the north sea has indeed altered dramatically since the 60's but if you have information to contradict the findings of the scientists then please do post it, rather than your usual hate filled bigoted posts.

 

ICome on HA, tell me about the history and demise of east coast herring, tell me how it relates to changes in the technology, about the changes in the ocean, and all the rest.

 

I doubt you know or care?

[obe1]

Well 'm not getting into any of the arguments, there's already been too many of them over the licence, I'm just enjoying the victory, for the time being anyway.

I will say this though, steve Coppolo is right, we still face all sorts of rubbish and make no mistake the licence will be back. I don't believe for one second that Martin Salter is backing Jonathan Shaw because he wanted this licence so badly, it will be back so lets be ready for it but for now let's just spend some quality time enjoying some peaceful, free fishing and a big congrats and an even bigger thank you from me to every one who contacted MPs, signed petitions, responded to the consultations and generally made a noise.

 

WOOHOO

 

Joe