Shore angers $ CFP

[loopy]

Sheryll Murray: .......Will my hon. Friend confirm that he will not apply any restrictions to recreational sea anglers who fish from the shore around our coastline?


Richard Benyon:

The short answer to my hon. Friend’s first question is yes.

The Government recognise the value of recreational sea angling, and we want to encourage it.

We are running a specific project to identify sea anglers and their numbers, and to support their work for both tourism and the natural environment.

Sea angling from the shore has no connection with the common fisheries policy, and will remain our national responsibility.

We hope to see more sea anglers fishing onshore and from vessels......

So much happening at the moment with the CFP , Sea Angling 2012 data collection and the conclusion of the stakeholder consultation stage of Net Gain next week, 2 days at Hull. If I owned a small boat I might be worried, stage one, boat registration, stage 2 implementation of Article 55.
Please read the link below. Will update you soon on NG.


DEFRA Collection of DATA ‘Sea Angling 2012’

Questions and answers

Will you guys be participating ?
I am against the project as is the Northern Fed and RSA-UK who have voiced our opinion to CEFAS at a meeting last week.

Les

[Stores]

Hi Les and thanks for your post. My reply, sadly, does nothing to clear things up and certainly leaves me looking like a floundering flounder type thing in the middle of a miriade of political documents that purport to say one thing but might mean the complete opposite.

Back to proper English:

1. Richard Benyon: "The short answer to my hon. Friend’s first question is yes."

Very positive on the face of it but if MCZs have to have a Reference Zone then he can't be telling the truth as there will be no extraction of any sort in that area. Do we believe the honourable gentleman or has he started off on the wrong foot?



2. "Sea angling from the shore has no connection with the common fisheries policy, and will remain our national responsibility."

So why do we need to go through the process in the first place? Either we are in charge of our own shores or we aren't and the weight of evidence may say that, at the end of the day, we do as we're told by Brussels.


3. Quote from the MMO:

"But sea anglers just want to go fishing. Do they have a significant impact on stocks?

Sea Angling 2012 should give sea anglers the chance to improve fisheries management and help conserve stocks locally and nationally. It will allow better informed, evidence-based decisions to be made on issues which are of importance to sea anglers – at both local and national level. It will also provide more accurate information on sea anglers’ activity so their interests can be better represented in the marine conservation zones (MCZs) and marine spatial planning."

As far as I'm aware the only way anyone proposes to preserve stocks is to limit, to some degree or another, the amount of fish caught, either from the shore or boat. Perhaps the initial sentence should have "by limiting where they fish and how much they catch, as dictated by us" on the end of it.


4. So far I'm on your side Les but I still can't work out the opposition to DEFRAs collection of information, unless you believe it's to further hinder shore fishing. If the EU say we have to collect the data then that's surely what we will, as a country, have to do. Shouldn't we be truthful about it rather than have the politicians make it up to suit their agenda. I for one, would happily tell how much I spend per fish I keep. If they're going to use the information to push for a sea license then they'll do that regardless of our standpoint or involvement.

At least here, at NESA, we're relatively civilised about the arguments for and against possible changes. Others are, and have been for months, at one anothers throats. I hope the Hull meeting helps to clarify things - just looking to going fishing at the end of the month - first time for 12 months!!

[loopy]

David, Your observations and comments as always welcomed and will form part of my feedback.
The problem with most of the data collection is a data directive that this country agreed to without asking us and it is annual data they require from now on.
So you appreciate RSA includes private boat anglers who probably spend the lion share of the revenue generated, who knows? they will have to be regulated and step 1 will be boat registration and all that comes with it, safety certificates, perhaps a licence of competence ? then you can introduce article 55 as it has been law for 3 months but government does not know who owns a boat or if indeed they fish from it.
In an ideal world you are right and giving the information should do us nothing but good, but I along with many others believe it could be used by other NGO such as RSPB or MCS to influence bye-law making in MCZ or otherwise by local IFCA's in the future. Trust is a wonderful thing and works two ways, successive governments have not done anything for our sport even after the Drew report stated we are worth 1.4 billion to the economy. I hope you remember my invitation on the 30th.

[Stores]

Hi Les - you make your point well and I have no axe to grind with any RSA groups nor would I wish to make fishing more expensive for any group, especially recreational boat owners. It is fair, however, to say that this site has frequently criticised the ineptitude of some boat owners who have either got into difficulty without necessary safety or communication kit and regulation would certainly reduce this. I also accept it tars everyone with the same brush, both shore and afloat.

What about points 1-3 Les?

Who's side are the policy makers really on - or should that be policy implementors? We know that politicians are no longer held to what they say in the House anymore, will Benyon cow tow to the European masters when the time is right, thereby increasing our taxes further (through licences, course costs or fines) or will he stand by the man on the rock ends or in his clinker built boat?

ps - if it's too politically sensitive with you in the role you have, I understand.

30th's still on - will be crabbing early and late but a pub lunch (liquid or otherwise looks on the cards) Could be an open invitation for others to express their point of view rather than just this bialogue (think I got that from QI lol)

[loopy]

Dave we are the slave of our European masters and we must think and vote in future for the MEPS in this country who will (we hope) take our views to Europe otherwise we have no voice and will have to do as we are told or vote for UKIP ?
1.
Not sure if the Benyon reply is correct as it will impact on RSA. Reference areas will have no human depositional or extractional activity.
2.
Shore anglers are not included in the CFP.
3.
This is the wedge that some may wish to use to divide RSA . Boat/shore
and we come back to the Sea Angling 2012 project data collection. Your point that you can go out today buy a boat of any description and go to sea totally with no experience, no equipment be drunk as a skunk and catch 500 cod and give them away is mad, but the question is do we want government regulation and in my view it will be licensing as it is the best way to regulate, it is how we do it in this country and raise revenue or do we self regulate and retain our freedom and some cash.
I will explain my rational over a liquid lunch on Saturday, please an open invitation sounds like a great idea and could prove helpful in future lobbying campaigns. I will be in Whitley Bay at about 1.30pm 2pm name the Pub and I will meet you there and anyone else who likes to drink and talk about fishing.

[Stores]

Hi Les,

How about the bar of the Kings Arms, Seaton Sluice, 2.00? All welcome.

[loopy]

Liquid lunch

See you there 2pm.

I love this,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUAPV67RsVo&feature=related

Les

[wheres the fish?]

See you there 2pm.

I love this,
UKIP Nigel Farage MEP - Fishing Stop "Article 47" !!! - YouTube
Les

That man is a hero, so my advice to you commisioner is sling your hook... Lol...

[wheres the fish?]

And his policies are spot on....


UKIP deplores the decision to sign over control of British fishing grounds - which contain nearly 70% of Europe’s fish - to the EU’s Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). The CFP has driven the British fishing industry and many fish species to the edge of extinction while non-EU nations such as Norway benefit from a healthy fishing industry. UKIP will:

· Immediately withdraw from the Common Fisheries Policy

· Reassert our territorial rights, reclaim our fishing grounds, restore our fishing fleet and support our fishing industry for future generations

· Return £2.5bn a year in fish sales to the UK economy

· Establish an ‘Exclusive Economic Zone’ extending 200 nautical miles from the UK’s coastline over which the UK exerts total control

· Abandon all EU quotas and strictly forbid the shameful discarding of dead fish - sometimes up to 70% of catches or 800,000 tons p.a.

· Require all commercial species of fish caught, regardless of size or species, to be landed and recorded. This will allow the Government to determine how best to manage the recovery of UK fishing grounds. To preserve fish stocks, UKIP will establish a system of moveable ‘No Take Zones’ allowing fish to spawn and assisting recovery in overfished areas

· Ban all forms of industrial fishing and pair trawling for bass. Industrial trawlers have helped cause a catastrophic decline in key fish species

· Strengthen the UK’s Fishery Protection resources to guard British fishing grounds