Do Bass Nursery Areas Benefit Anyone ?

[wurzel]

Thanks for taking the time to provide such a detailed analysis of my last post Steve.

If I ever need a psycho-analist, I'll know where to come .

 

 

 

 

You've mis-interpreted my words again Steve.

I'm not suggesting any commercial rod and lining within BMAs - just the opposite in fact.

 

I wrote -

 

My thoughts were that perhaps a slot size for takeable-sized fish i.e. over the MLS will ensure that juveniles must be returned (as they are now, so no change) and a realistic daily limit per angler, so people don't take the pi$$ and commercially rod and line for bass inside BNAs would open up existing BNAs to boat anglers and not impose draconian restrictions (ropes) on anglers fishing proposed BNAs.

 

We're clearly at opposite ends of the spectrum on this one.

 

Cheers

Steve

 

Hello Steve P

 

So you are thinking of extending existing BNA's creating new one where ever possible and managing them on the lines of your local trout reservoir.

 

Why not just call them angling only sites?

[Steve Coppolo]

If I had anything to hide (which I don't) then do you really think that I would be posting my personal thoughts on here Steve?

 

I'm a life-long angler and like you Steve, the sport is one of the most important things in my life.

 

 

 

 

You must be mad if you think I'm condoning any commercial access to BNAs Steve!

(BTW I know a good psycho-analist)

 

 

That was not aimed at you Steve, you are one of the few people who have been up front throughout. See here; http://www.anglersnet.co.uk/forums/Septemb...ra-t733979.html Your lifelong commitment as a sea angler has never been in doubt, either.

 

We've obviously misunderstood each other on commercial access to BNA's.

Edited November 24, 2008 by Steve Coppolo

[Steve Coppolo]

Hello Steve P

 

So you are thinking of extending existing BNA's creating new one where ever possible and managing them on the lines of your local trout reservoir.

 

I'm not doubting your word about restrictions on boat angklers within BNA's, I know you've researched the subject, but I was always under the impression that boat angling for bass within a BNA was prohibited. If you are right and it is only taking of bass caught from a boat that is prohibited, why is that? Are BNA's sportsfisheries in disguise? Is that why there are cries for more of them coming from certain quarters? Either way, BNA's are no take zones for boat anglers. Personally, I can't see the logic behind banning a boat angler from taking bass from a BNA, when the bass are getting absolutely hammered once they venture outside the area. The idea of anglers calling for more of the same, baffles me.

[steve pitts]

Hello Steve P

 

So you are thinking of extending existing BNA's creating new one where ever possible and managing them on the lines of your local trout reservoir.

 

Why not just call them angling only sites?

 

Not at all Wurzel

 

My local trout resevoir is Chew Valley Lake.

 

Bristol Water stock it with several thousand trout each year - I'm not proposing that anyone should stock BNAs

 

Chew is 'fly only' (with the exeption of a piking permit in season) - no such restrictions in my ideal BNA

 

Anglers need a rod licence to fish Chew - I'm not proposing that either

They also need to buy a day or season ticket Ditto

 

Anglers are subject to a bag limit on Chew and when they've caught their limit then they must either stop fishing or buy another day ticket - no such proposals in my posts and there never will be. I see a reasonable bag limit as an upper limit on take for personal consumption, not a limit on catch.

 

And they could hardly be called 'Angler only sites' when swimmers, boaters, dinghy sailers, windsurfers, ramblers/ hikers, birdwatchers, photographers and anglers can enjoy BNAs

 

Cheers

Steve

[glennk]

Anglers are subject to a bag limit on Chew and when they've caught their limit then they must either stop fishing or buy another day ticket - no such proposals in my posts and there never will be. I see a reasonable bag limit as an upper limit on take for personal consumption, not a limit on catch.

 

Would you call for a bag limit in BNA Steve and if so what sort of numbers would you be talking of. Please dont dip out this one with a vague answer. A rough idea will be enough.

 

Best fishes - Glenn

[H.A.]

Would you call for a bag limit in BNA Steve and if so what sort of numbers would you be talking of. Please dont dip out this one with a vague answer. A rough idea will be enough.

 

Does it matter?

I'm always enthralled by these passionate diatribes.

 

Surely Steviecops has now established that the 'establishment' takes no notice of the proletariat??

 

It doesn't matter what you think on a limited forum.

 

Vote with your feet for the BIG CONTROLLER (if you can); stateside seems able to do this and to their credit they once had a 'controller' who knew a lot about peanut farming.

 

I know you lot here (and on WSF) love a good rant and debate.

But believe me; it counts fer koof all in the real world.

 

Sorry, carry on Sgt Coppolo ...

 

Edited November 24, 2008 by H.A.

[glennk]

 

Does it matter?

I'm always enthralled by these passionate diatribes.

 

Surely Steviecops has now established that the 'establishment' takes no notice of the proletariat??

 

It doesn't matter what you think on a limited forum.

 

Vote with your feet for the BIG CONTROLLER (if you can); stateside seems able to do this and to their credit they once had a 'controller' who knew a lot about peanut farming.

 

I know you lot here (and on WSF) love a good rant and debate.

But believe me; it counts fer koof all in the real world.

 

Sorry, carry on Sgt Coppolo ...

 

 

 

The question was for Steve Pitts as Im interested on his personal stance on the issue.... So if you dont mind.........

 

.

 

I try not to do the conservation forum on WSF, its full of nutters. The regional forums are more sensible though.

Edited November 24, 2008 by glennk

[wurzel]

Not at all Wurzel

 

My local trout resevoir is Chew Valley Lake.

 

Bristol Water stock it with several thousand trout each year - I'm not proposing that anyone should stock BNAs

 

Chew is 'fly only' (with the exeption of a piking permit in season) - no such restrictions in my ideal BNA

 

Anglers need a rod licence to fish Chew - I'm not proposing that either

They also need to buy a day or season ticket Ditto

 

Anglers are subject to a bag limit on Chew and when they've caught their limit then they must either stop fishing or buy another day ticket - no such proposals in my posts and there never will be. I see a reasonable bag limit as an upper limit on take for personal consumption, not a limit on catch.

 

And they could hardly be called 'Angler only sites' when swimmers, boaters, dinghy sailers, windsurfers, ramblers/ hikers, birdwatchers, photographers and anglers can enjoy BNAs

 

Cheers

Steve

 

Hello Steve

 

I'm thinking you give the management industry an inch they will take a mile and before you know it what you describe for Chew could become reality for sea anglers.

 

Your ideal BNA would not protect many bass, do you not think?

[steve pitts]

Would you call for a bag limit in BNA Steve and if so what sort of numbers would you be talking of. Please dont dip out this one with a vague answer. A rough idea will be enough.

 

Best fishes - Glenn

 

Hi Glenn

 

Firstly, I see no real value in bag limits for anglers as a management tool, where there are no reciprocal restrictions on commercial fishermen.

 

Notice that I didn't use the words CONSERVATION tool, because angler bag limits (for bass) on their own would have little if any conservation benefit imo.

 

However - when combined with other management measures, which do have a conservation value e.g. BNAs, MLS set at or above adult-size, then I think that bag limits could be used in specific areas such as BNAs to provide anglers with the opportunity to catch and take home a reasonable number of fish (bass) for the table.

 

My opinion is that bag limits have some management value in drawing a line between the genuine angler who wants to take fish home and the chancer who decides he'll fish a BNA and take large numbers of fish, perhaps for back-door sale or for sale through his business.

 

As to the actual number?

I would suggest that 4 or 5 legally takeable-sized fish would constitute a reasonable feed for a family, with a few for the freezer or to give away, whilst this sort of number may make it commercially unattractive enough for the cowboy to bother.

I guess that there will always be those who will fish and sell small numbers of bass, but someone in posession of say 30 bass in a BNA could be more easily identified and be prosecuted.

 

Cheers

Steve

Edited November 25, 2008 by steve pitts

[wurzel]

 

Does it matter?

I'm always enthralled by these passionate diatribes.

 

Surely Steviecops has now established that the 'establishment' takes no notice of the proletariat??

 

It doesn't matter what you think on a limited forum.

 

Vote with your feet for the BIG CONTROLLER (if you can); stateside seems able to do this and to their credit they once had a 'controller' who knew a lot about peanut farming.

 

I know you lot here (and on WSF) love a good rant and debate.

But believe me; it counts fer koof all in the real world.

 

Sorry, carry on Sgt Coppolo ...

 

 

But HA does that really matter, surely forums like these are just an extension of the pub, club house or the banter on your average charter trip.

 

I wonder how many high ranking meetings and debates with the Controller count for more in the real world, I doubt many if any.