Jump to content

Do Bass Nursery Areas Benefit Anyone ?

glennk

By glennk
in Conservation & Politics

 Share

Recommended Posts

Steve Coppolo Member

Steve Coppolo

Posted
Posted
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.

 

 

And I thought you, along with your representatives, would have worked out by now that the "establishment" don't take any notice of anything said at their regular, job justifying, work creating, tax wasting, meetings. I mean, it's not as if we haven't seen and heard it all before, is it? Surely, only the thickest, or most arrogant, of people would still believe that they have any influence over any of this?

 

Then again, some people just don't care about their sea angling.

DRUNK DRIVERS WRECK LIVES.

 

Don't drink and drive.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 93
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Posted Images

barry luxton Member

barry luxton

Posted
Posted (edited)

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2008-11-24a.236623.h

Written answers

Monday, 24 November 2008

Environment Food and Rural Affairs

Angling

Claire Curtis-Thomas (Crosby, Labour)

 

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what estimate he has made of the number of (a) people employed in the recreational sea angling sector and (B) businesses serving the recreational sea angling sector.

 

Huw Irranca-Davies (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs; Ogmore, Labour)

 

A DEFRA-funded study carried out by Drew Associates into the economic impact of the recreational sea angling sector in England and Wales was published in 2004. This study estimated that 18,889 people were employed in the sector, of which 5,652 resulted from shore angling, 3,092 from charter boats and 10,145 from private boat angling. We do not have an estimate of the number of businesses serving the recreational sea angling sector but the same report found that sea anglers generated some £71 million net income in England and Wales for suppliers of services to the sector. Suppliers included tackle and food retailers and accommodation-related businesses.

 

 

 

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2008-11-24a.236624.h

 

Claire Curtis-Thomas (Crosby, Labour)

 

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many meetings he has had with (a) representatives of the commercial fishing sector and (B) representatives of the recreational sea angling sector since January 2008.

 

Huw Irranca-Davies (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs; Ogmore, Labour)

Since my appointment, I have met representatives of the commercial fishing sector and the recreational sea angling sector on 22 October at a meeting with UK marine fisheries stakeholders to discuss priorities for the annual end of year European negotiations over fishing opportunities. I subsequently met representatives of the commercial fishing sector ahead of the November EU Agriculture and Fisheries Council, and I have recently accepted an invitation to meet recreational sea angling representatives to discuss issues of concern to them.

 

 

 

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2008-11-24a.236595.h

 

White Fish: Conservation

Claire Curtis-Thomas (Crosby, Labour)

 

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

 

(1) if he will review the decision not to increase the minimum landing size of bass; and if he will make a statement;

 

(2) what consideration he has given to the introduction of a system of carcass tagging for bass;

 

(3) whether he intends implementing further measures to develop the recreational bass fishery.

 

Huw Irranca-Davies (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs; Ogmore, Labour)

Scientific advice from the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea in 2004, and subsequent advice to DEFRA from the Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science, suggests that the bass stock is fished sustainably. In addition to being a prime sports fish for the sea angling sector, bass is a particularly important stock for the inshore fishing fleet. Given the pressures faced by this fleet and the relatively healthy state of the stock, I have no plans to increase the minimum landing size of bass. For the same reasons, I currently have no plans to introduce a system of carcass tagging as a means of controlling exploitation of the bass stock.

 

However, we announced last year a package of new measures that will provide increased protection for stocks of bass and more widely benefits for anglers. This includes a review of inshore netting restrictions and of 30 restricted areas around the English coast for the protection of juvenile bass. This may result in new protected areas, increased restrictions or extensions to current areas around the coast. We will consult on any proposals relating to these restricted areas in the new year. In addition, we are also funding research exploring the use of restricted areas to benefit recreational bass anglers.

 

Alongside this work, we are continuing to monitor the state of the bass stock and I do not rule out returning to an increase in the minimum landing size of bass once the effectiveness of these new measures has been assessed.

 

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2008-11-24a.236622.h

 

Claire Curtis-Thomas (Crosby, Labour)

 

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs in relation to Article 17 of Council Regulation 2371/2002, if he will institute measures governing pair-trawling for bass within 12 nautical miles applicable to foreign vessels fishing with grandfather rights.

 

Huw Irranca-Davies (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs; Ogmore, Labour)

In 2004 we banned pelagic pair trawling for bass by UK vessels within 12 miles of the south-west coast of England (within the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) area VIIe) as this fishery was shown to have relatively high levels of cetacean by-catch. The UK asked that the ban on pelagic pair trawling for bass be extended (under Article 9 of Council Regulation EC No 2371/2002) to the vessels of other member states, who are currently permitted to fish between six and 12 miles off the south-west English coast. However, as this request was rejected by the European Commission, we could only take unilateral action in relation to our own vessels out to 12 miles.

 

The UK report on 2006-07 observed cetacean by-catch levels, as required by Council Regulation (EC) 812/2004, has been submitted to the European Commission, and is available on our website

 

www.defra.gov.uk.

 

It is important for us to consider reports provided by those member states which have vessels permitted to fish in our waters in order to understand the overall level of cetacean bycatch. Once we have done this we will consider whether to make further representations to the Commission.

 

Scientific advice from ICES in 2004, and subsequent advice to DEFRA from the Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (Cefas), suggests that the bass stock is fished sustainably. Given this assessment, I currently have no plans to institute any measures governing pair trawling for bass for the purposes of stock conservation.

 

 

Hot off the press, thank you Leon for keeping us informed. :) don't think i put the two smilies in it as i only put me highlight bar on the post. I think.

Edited by barry luxton

Free to choose apart from the ones where the trust poked their nose in. Common eel. tope. Bass and sea bream. All restricted.


New for 2016 TAT are the main instigators for the demise of the u k bass charter boat industry, where they went screaming off to parliament and for the first time assisting so called angling gurus set up bass take bans with the e u using rubbish exaggerated info collected by ices from anglers, they must be very proud.

Upgrade, the door has been closed with regards to anglers being linked to the e u superstate and the failed c f p. So TAT will no longer need to pay monies to the EAA anymore as that org is no longer relevant to the u k . Goodbye to the europeon anglers alliance and pathetic restrictions from the e u.

Angling is better than politics, ban politics from angling.

Consumer of bass. where is the evidence that the u k bass stock need angling trust protection. Why won't you work with your peers instead of castigating them. They have the answer.

Recipie's for mullet stew more than welcomed.

Angling sanitation trust and kent and sussex sea anglers org delete's and blocks rsa's alternative opinion on their face book site. Although they claim to rep all.

new for 2014. where is the evidence that the south coast bream stock need the angling trust? Your campaign has no evidence. Why won't you work with your peers, the inshore under tens? As opposed to alienating them? Angling trust failed big time re bait digging, even fish legal attempted to intervene and failed, all for what, nothing.

Looks like the sea angling reps have been coerced by the ifca's to compose sea angling strategy's that the ifca's at some stage will look at drafting into legislation to manage the rsa, because they like wasting tax payers money. That's without asking the rsa btw. You know who you are..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
barry luxton Member

barry luxton

Posted
Posted (edited)
So, a few links to politicians' stock answers, available to anyone, is keeping you informed then, is it Barry?

 

I think not.

 

I was actually quite pleased to see the question being asked re gill tagging (can't say that i agreed with the reply) and also seeing that the mls has not been dismissed out of hand, apart from that the rest of the news was pretty much mundane and a stock reply, so i will agree with you on that, but at least i have the current 'news' from this guy who is running the fishery. :) and if the bass fishery goes tits up at least we will have someone in the line of fire.

 

When also i see reference to bag limits on the rsa, as sfc's are enthusiatic for, we can always quote the ministers latest comments regarding the stock etc. Great help indeed.

Edited by barry luxton

Free to choose apart from the ones where the trust poked their nose in. Common eel. tope. Bass and sea bream. All restricted.


New for 2016 TAT are the main instigators for the demise of the u k bass charter boat industry, where they went screaming off to parliament and for the first time assisting so called angling gurus set up bass take bans with the e u using rubbish exaggerated info collected by ices from anglers, they must be very proud.

Upgrade, the door has been closed with regards to anglers being linked to the e u superstate and the failed c f p. So TAT will no longer need to pay monies to the EAA anymore as that org is no longer relevant to the u k . Goodbye to the europeon anglers alliance and pathetic restrictions from the e u.

Angling is better than politics, ban politics from angling.

Consumer of bass. where is the evidence that the u k bass stock need angling trust protection. Why won't you work with your peers instead of castigating them. They have the answer.

Recipie's for mullet stew more than welcomed.

Angling sanitation trust and kent and sussex sea anglers org delete's and blocks rsa's alternative opinion on their face book site. Although they claim to rep all.

new for 2014. where is the evidence that the south coast bream stock need the angling trust? Your campaign has no evidence. Why won't you work with your peers, the inshore under tens? As opposed to alienating them? Angling trust failed big time re bait digging, even fish legal attempted to intervene and failed, all for what, nothing.

Looks like the sea angling reps have been coerced by the ifca's to compose sea angling strategy's that the ifca's at some stage will look at drafting into legislation to manage the rsa, because they like wasting tax payers money. That's without asking the rsa btw. You know who you are..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Coppolo Member

Steve Coppolo

Posted
Posted
I was actually quite pleased to see the question being asked re gill tagging (can't say that i agreed with the reply) and also seeing that the mls has not been dismissed out of hand, apart from that the rest of the news was pretty much mundane and a stock reply, so i will agree with you on that, but at least i have the current 'news' from this guy who is running the fishery. :) and if the bass fishery goes tits up at least we will have someone in the line of fire.

 

When also i see reference to bag limits on the rsa, as sfc's are enthusiatic for, we can always quote the ministers latest comments regarding the stock etc. Great help indeed.

 

Your last point is a good one Barry. Let's just hope RSA doesn't continue to shoot itself in the foot with more sensationalist headlines, etc.

 

Re: stock answers and being kept informed; there are important issues being discussed now that we aren't being told about. At best, some of it will lead to more opportunities for yet more stock answers, ie, we are doing this study, that review, such and such consultation, etc, etc, blah, blah, blah. All the time doing nothing except dream up more ways of sticking it up sea anglers, with the blessing of our so called representatives. At worst, it could screw our fishing for good. Still, who are we to ask questions, eh?

DRUNK DRIVERS WRECK LIVES.

 

Don't drink and drive.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
barry luxton Member

barry luxton

Posted
Posted (edited)

Another reason that i'm gratefull Leon provided the link is yet another newer ices report (thanks again Leon) that the minister has not read or he wishes to ignore the fact that it even exists. I haven't even read it yet so i certainly don't have an opinion, only so far as why the minister has not used it as a current point of reference as opposed to one that is now four years old?

 

The full reports relating to sea bass are worth reading

 

 

see:

 

http://www.ices.dk/reports/ACOM/2008/WGNEW/WGNEW_2008.pdf

 

Given the fact that no assessments have been undertaken for other areas and stock status is unknown, the WG suggests that again effort should not be allowed to increase and that additional data that could be used for assessments should be collected.

 

http://www.ices.dk/reports/ACOM/2007/WGNEW/WGNEW07.pdf

 

1. Section 4: Sea bass

 

The WG reiterates the recommendation of SGBASS 2003 that

implementation of ‘input’ controls (preferably through technical

measures aimed at protecting juvenile fish, in conjunction with entry

limitations into the offshore fishery in particular) should be promoted,

and that ‘output’ controls (such as TACs) are inappropriate. This is

because bass is, in general, a bycatch species caught in mixed fisheries

and TAC limitation may induce discards in such fisheries.

 

2. Section 4: Sea bass

 

There are many uncertainties within both the SURBA analysis of the

international dataset and the analysis of the UK dataset, one of the most

important being a lack of knowledge on the catches of recreational

fishers. Therefore the WG also reiterates the recommendation of

SGBASS 2003 that due to these uncertainties, the precautionary

approach indicates that effort should not be allowed to increase.

3. Section 4: Sea bass

 

Finally, the WG re-iterates the recommendation of SGBASS, namely to

maintain and improve monitoring of 0-group and pre-recruitment

abundance, and to improve our understanding of environmental effects

on bass distribution and abundance.

Edited by barry luxton

Free to choose apart from the ones where the trust poked their nose in. Common eel. tope. Bass and sea bream. All restricted.


New for 2016 TAT are the main instigators for the demise of the u k bass charter boat industry, where they went screaming off to parliament and for the first time assisting so called angling gurus set up bass take bans with the e u using rubbish exaggerated info collected by ices from anglers, they must be very proud.

Upgrade, the door has been closed with regards to anglers being linked to the e u superstate and the failed c f p. So TAT will no longer need to pay monies to the EAA anymore as that org is no longer relevant to the u k . Goodbye to the europeon anglers alliance and pathetic restrictions from the e u.

Angling is better than politics, ban politics from angling.

Consumer of bass. where is the evidence that the u k bass stock need angling trust protection. Why won't you work with your peers instead of castigating them. They have the answer.

Recipie's for mullet stew more than welcomed.

Angling sanitation trust and kent and sussex sea anglers org delete's and blocks rsa's alternative opinion on their face book site. Although they claim to rep all.

new for 2014. where is the evidence that the south coast bream stock need the angling trust? Your campaign has no evidence. Why won't you work with your peers, the inshore under tens? As opposed to alienating them? Angling trust failed big time re bait digging, even fish legal attempted to intervene and failed, all for what, nothing.

Looks like the sea angling reps have been coerced by the ifca's to compose sea angling strategy's that the ifca's at some stage will look at drafting into legislation to manage the rsa, because they like wasting tax payers money. That's without asking the rsa btw. You know who you are..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Coppolo Member

Steve Coppolo

Posted
Posted
Another reason that i'm gratefull Leon provided the link is yet another newer ices report (thanks again Leon) that the minister has not read or he wishes to ignore the fact that it even exists. I haven't even read it yet so i certainly don't have an opinion, only so far as why the minister has not used it as a current point of reference as opposed to one that is now four years old?

 

The full reports relating to sea bass are worth reading

 

 

see:

 

http://www.ices.dk/reports/ACOM/2008/WGNEW/WGNEW_2008.pdf

 

Given the fact that no assessments have been undertaken for other areas and stock status is unknown, the WG suggests that again effort should not be allowed to increase and that additional data that could be used for assessments should be collected.

 

http://www.ices.dk/reports/ACOM/2007/WGNEW/WGNEW07.pdf

 

1. Section 4: Sea bass

 

The WG reiterates the recommendation of SGBASS 2003 that

implementation of ‘input’ controls (preferably through technical

measures aimed at protecting juvenile fish, in conjunction with entry

limitations into the offshore fishery in particular) should be promoted,

and that ‘output’ controls (such as TACs) are inappropriate. This is

because bass is, in general, a bycatch species caught in mixed fisheries

and TAC limitation may induce discards in such fisheries.

 

2. Section 4: Sea bass

 

There are many uncertainties within both the SURBA analysis of the

international dataset and the analysis of the UK dataset, one of the most

important being a lack of knowledge on the catches of recreational

fishers. Therefore the WG also reiterates the recommendation of

SGBASS 2003 that due to these uncertainties, the precautionary

approach indicates that effort should not be allowed to increase.

3. Section 4: Sea bass

 

Finally, the WG re-iterates the recommendation of SGBASS, namely to

maintain and improve monitoring of 0-group and pre-recruitment

abundance, and to improve our understanding of environmental effects

on bass distribution and abundance.

 

That's all well and good, but I've had a gut full of what scientists, poiticians and civil servants have to say. It's all meaningless tripe that goes around, and around, and around, getting nowhere.

 

What does interest me, however, is what certain people are saying at meetings with them, about the future of RSA, and what plans they are devising together. Because of the reluctance to tell us what has happened at the last few meetings, I get the feeling that something underhand is going on. I suppose we'll find out what it is when it's too late to do anything about it.

DRUNK DRIVERS WRECK LIVES.

 

Don't drink and drive.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
glennk Member

glennk

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Another reason that i'm gratefull Leon provided the link is yet another newer ices report (thanks again Leon) that the minister has not read or he wishes to ignore the fact that it even exists. I haven't even read it yet so i certainly don't have an opinion, only so far as why the minister has not used it as a current point of reference as opposed to one that is now four years old?

 

The full reports relating to sea bass are worth reading

 

 

see:

 

http://www.ices.dk/reports/ACOM/2008/WGNEW/WGNEW_2008.pdf

 

Given the fact that no assessments have been undertaken for other areas and stock status is unknown, the WG suggests that again effort should not be allowed to increase and that additional data that could be used for assessments should be collected.

 

http://www.ices.dk/reports/ACOM/2007/WGNEW/WGNEW07.pdf

 

1. Section 4: Sea bass

 

The WG reiterates the recommendation of SGBASS 2003 that

implementation of ‘input’ controls (preferably through technical

measures aimed at protecting juvenile fish, in conjunction with entry

limitations into the offshore fishery in particular) should be promoted,

and that ‘output’ controls (such as TACs) are inappropriate. This is

because bass is, in general, a bycatch species caught in mixed fisheries

and TAC limitation may induce discards in such fisheries.

 

2. Section 4: Sea bass

 

There are many uncertainties within both the SURBA analysis of the

international dataset and the analysis of the UK dataset, one of the most

important being a lack of knowledge on the catches of recreational

fishers. Therefore the WG also reiterates the recommendation of

SGBASS 2003 that due to these uncertainties, the precautionary

approach indicates that effort should not be allowed to increase.

3. Section 4: Sea bass

 

Finally, the WG re-iterates the recommendation of SGBASS, namely to

maintain and improve monitoring of 0-group and pre-recruitment

abundance, and to improve our understanding of environmental effects

on bass distribution and abundance.

 

Yes Barry. Leon excells at posting Links. He must have his rss reader full of fishing related sites, he doesnt miss a trick. Sadly there is no substitute for spending time going fishing when it comes to knowledge of sea angling though.

Kayak Fishing Launch Sites

 

COD COD COD COD COD

 

50lb Shore Cod

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
H.A. Member

H.A.

Posted
Posted
What does interest me, however, is what certain people are saying at meetings with them, about the future of RSA, and what plans they are devising together.

 

Loosen up Steve ....

it's beginning to grate.

 

Best thing is for you to get involved again and say your piece.

 

Here it's worth nothing.

 

I fish 4 or 5 times a week. I know my patch; and I'm not happy with what I see happening nor with the regulation (or not) by SSFDC or Defra. But I see no advantage as an individual or as a group (sea fishermen) to keep whining on about the way 'the management' (Gov ... Defra and EU) handle these matters.

The small influence of hobbyist anglers (not just sea) is a phart in the dark.

 

But I still enjoy my pastime/hobby 'thingy'.

 

It's no good chuntering on about personality conflicts or suggesting policies/strategies on these forums.

 

Get a life, OK?

 

<_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites
barry luxton Member

barry luxton

Posted
Posted (edited)
Yes Barry. Leon excells at posting Links. He must have his rss reader full of fishing related sites, he doesnt miss a trick. Sadly there is no substitute for spending time going fishing when it comes to knowledge of sea angling though.

 

 

Just had to scroll back to the top of the page and check that we are on the conservation and politics section.

 

I have noticed that you certainly copy and paste when it suits so you have your title on an article, can't see the problem in that,if it's in the right context. As this is the correct section i can't see a problem in providing a political link. I note of interest in the links provided by Leon that the bass take for example by the french is five times as much as in the uk. The previous link was a report that replaced one that was four years old, job done as far as i was concerned. I didn't know that, so i would certainly prefer to read that compared with the continual derogation of one guy.

 

I also note on your forum you will not allow criticism of other peoples posts, does that include for personal criticism?

Edited by barry luxton

Free to choose apart from the ones where the trust poked their nose in. Common eel. tope. Bass and sea bream. All restricted.


New for 2016 TAT are the main instigators for the demise of the u k bass charter boat industry, where they went screaming off to parliament and for the first time assisting so called angling gurus set up bass take bans with the e u using rubbish exaggerated info collected by ices from anglers, they must be very proud.

Upgrade, the door has been closed with regards to anglers being linked to the e u superstate and the failed c f p. So TAT will no longer need to pay monies to the EAA anymore as that org is no longer relevant to the u k . Goodbye to the europeon anglers alliance and pathetic restrictions from the e u.

Angling is better than politics, ban politics from angling.

Consumer of bass. where is the evidence that the u k bass stock need angling trust protection. Why won't you work with your peers instead of castigating them. They have the answer.

Recipie's for mullet stew more than welcomed.

Angling sanitation trust and kent and sussex sea anglers org delete's and blocks rsa's alternative opinion on their face book site. Although they claim to rep all.

new for 2014. where is the evidence that the south coast bream stock need the angling trust? Your campaign has no evidence. Why won't you work with your peers, the inshore under tens? As opposed to alienating them? Angling trust failed big time re bait digging, even fish legal attempted to intervene and failed, all for what, nothing.

Looks like the sea angling reps have been coerced by the ifca's to compose sea angling strategy's that the ifca's at some stage will look at drafting into legislation to manage the rsa, because they like wasting tax payers money. That's without asking the rsa btw. You know who you are..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We and our partners use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences, repeat visits and to show you personalised advertisements. By clicking “I Agree”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies. However, you may visit Cookie Settings to provide a controlled consent.

  I accept