just read this on another site
- Thread starter sless
- Start date
Steve115
Well-known member
I'm with you on that one:
I'd happily pay a licence fee if like they say artificial reefs were built, a golden mile was introduced and a plan was drawn up to improve the sport.
Iceland have proved that no-fish zones, breeding and nursery grounds massively improve fish stocks. The management of the fish stocks will have a cost associated which I think the people benefitting from should pay for.
The other thing is an independant governing body should be formed to act as a voice for the anglers. Maybe they should also be the peolple who decide how the licence revenue is spent.
Just a thought - anybody agree?
Steve
The anglers of the UK create a revenue of over 1 billion pound per year matching if not out weighing the commercials.. why should we pay further to put right the damage done to our fish stocks by commercial fishing and a greedy government!!
The government needs us more than we need them!! if everyone wrapped in fishing because theres nowt there they'd loose a lot of money!!
Surely it should be them trying to make changes to attract more people to the sport to create yet more revenue!!!!!
I was at an nfsa meeting two year ago as was Marksworld and Yourstuly. They mentioned a golden mile then!! they also asked if they could take something away from the meeting and use it as a show of strength to show us that they meant business ..I think the pots off shields pier was mentioned and one of the piers closed to anglers was to be re-opened .... we are still waiting and as yet nothings happened... illegal netting still takes place, defra don't appear to have extra bodies patrolling the shoreline..
They are full of false promises..and I don't think a rod licence would change that ..just another way to tax us!!!
The government needs us more than we need them!! if everyone wrapped in fishing because theres nowt there they'd loose a lot of money!!
Surely it should be them trying to make changes to attract more people to the sport to create yet more revenue!!!!!
I was at an nfsa meeting two year ago as was Marksworld and Yourstuly. They mentioned a golden mile then!! they also asked if they could take something away from the meeting and use it as a show of strength to show us that they meant business ..I think the pots off shields pier was mentioned and one of the piers closed to anglers was to be re-opened .... we are still waiting and as yet nothings happened... illegal netting still takes place, defra don't appear to have extra bodies patrolling the shoreline..
They are full of false promises..and I don't think a rod licence would change that ..just another way to tax us!!!
Steve115
Well-known member
Where does that revenue come from Paul? Is it a total for coarse, sea and fly fishing or Sea angling alone?
Steve
Shore I presume as it was a meeting about recreational shore angling ..1million anglers apparantly ..nfsa's words not mine!!
http://www.nfsa.org.uk/
http://www.nfsa.org.uk/
Last edited:
mickthefish
Well-known member
thing is , where is this all going to end ?
its pretty scary the fact they can just start overruling ancient laws at a click of their grubby little fingers (i.e. magna carte etc ) .
whats going to happen in 20 yrs time when the government are sitting nicely on a 50 million a year (or whatever )license revenue , which will be budgeted for and more than likely spent craply , and the fish stocks continue to dwindle ? (which they will ).
what next ?a £25 3 cod ticket ? with a * guaranteed 1 fish to take home if you blank?
i can see it now , a queue of floaty clad , tackle laden anglers , blanking vouchers aloft , snaking down to the tuxedo royale from the fish counter at tescos on the high street after every open comp .
god bless our kids !
* subject to availability.
its pretty scary the fact they can just start overruling ancient laws at a click of their grubby little fingers (i.e. magna carte etc ) .
whats going to happen in 20 yrs time when the government are sitting nicely on a 50 million a year (or whatever )license revenue , which will be budgeted for and more than likely spent craply , and the fish stocks continue to dwindle ? (which they will ).
what next ?a £25 3 cod ticket ? with a * guaranteed 1 fish to take home if you blank?
i can see it now , a queue of floaty clad , tackle laden anglers , blanking vouchers aloft , snaking down to the tuxedo royale from the fish counter at tescos on the high street after every open comp .
god bless our kids !
* subject to availability.
Glenn Kilpatrick
Well-known member
All though I'm sure you had tongue in cheek whilst posting that Mick I feel anything is possible. You just have to take a look at which organisations the government are talking to about this. The SACN and the national federation of sea anglers who I feel know very little about fishing in our area and base the national angling experience on a bass catching bread floating model as used by our southern counterparts.
At one stage we asked to get a friend of mine Paul Kilpatrick into the meetings with DEFRA. As a local charter skipper and lifelong north east shore angler he would have represented those of us in the north east well. Despite offering to take time away from work and head to London at his own expense Paul was refused admission to the meetings. So what you continue to have when the government talks to anglers is a rather biased view from bass and mullet anglers.
Don't be surprised if you don't get the free fish for blanking though.
At one stage we asked to get a friend of mine Paul Kilpatrick into the meetings with DEFRA. As a local charter skipper and lifelong north east shore angler he would have represented those of us in the north east well. Despite offering to take time away from work and head to London at his own expense Paul was refused admission to the meetings. So what you continue to have when the government talks to anglers is a rather biased view from bass and mullet anglers.
Don't be surprised if you don't get the free fish for blanking though.
Last edited:
davem2005
Well-known member
Glenn
I have to put my hand up and say that I should have posted something about this but have not been well over the winter and have been very lax.
The first point to make is the SACN as well aware of the differences regionally and as such appointed me as the NE co-ordinator to deal with matters arising local. Due to ill health I have not had chance to dedicate time to this position that I should have. I am fully aware that the NE is different in terms of the methods we use and the fish we catch to almost every other region of the Uk.
Secondly the NEsfc has had a very effective angling rep for a while now and yet the position has been vacant for some time up here in the NSFC region .That place has now been taken by me and I intend to try to keep local anglers informed and chase up what is long ignored complaints The problem being is that people do not read the conservation section as a matter of habit. The "vision for the future " link was posted by Leon on 1/2/07 but recieved no comments despite mentioning the introduction of licenses and yet here we are with a very lively thread on the subject.
see:
http://www.sacn.org.uk/Conservation-...ries_2007.html
__________________
Sea Anglers' Conservation Network (SACN)
http://www.sacn.org.uk
Conservation & Political News
http://www.sacn.org.uk/Conservation-and-Political-News/
There are two consultations going on The Marine white paper ( I will add a link when sober) and the vision for the future consultation. Its only when the fact people may have to pay to sea fish that people are actually becoming intrested in conservation issues.
My reading of the white paper for now is that we will have to accept a license on the same basis we accept that fags, booze and petrol goes up every budget. I will fight against any license but one voice against the government just does not work. The good news is we are promised a better say in the way fisheries are run so we need to fight for that en masse...an email to Mr Miliband if you live in south shields saying where your vote may go if he doesn't get it right would help. I live in sedgefield and mine has already gone. (hi Tony if you are reading this)
There are many other suggestions in the white paper that are of benifit to anglers like giving them a gauranteed representation on the SFC's, improving the law making on a local basis, changing the regions covered by the SfC's to even out the regions. For example if you catch a tope and kill it south of the Tyne its illegal...but north of the Tyne its not. Guys in south shields run on rules set in Bridlington but in North shields its set in Cramlington...local is best IMHO. For now the white paper is a proposal for change not a law ...as anglers we need to get together and ensure we have our say.
The third point...I have recieved a copy of the bylaws introduced by the NSFC along with a lot of other papers. Considering that the SFC's have been operating for nearly 200 yrs I was amazed that the bylaws fit on 2 sheets of a4 paper! I expected a delivery by low loader. The local sfc's are inefective and underfunded in their current format...and yet these are the guys we have to rely on to protect our fishing. The proposal in the white paper is to increase funding for the SFC's ( which is currently funded by the local council) to ensure they can perform their duties to the full.
They (nsfc) have a (very expensive) patrol vessel to protect our fishing which currently averages 3 days at sea per week...wonder why this may be. That boat was bought to protect our fish yet is utilised less than 50% of the time...it will be the first question I will ask. I have fished in that region for the last seven years and have rarely seen the patrol vessel and have never been stopped and questioned. One of the first questions I will ask is how is that boat and the inshore one being utilised.
Its taken a lot of hard work by a dedicated few to get RSA's recognised on an official basis...lets not waste the opportunity through apathy thinking someone else will do it . Dont think that a license is uninforcable as they will word it like the coarse license whereby if you are equiped to go fishing for sea fish you need a license...ie they could pull you on the Metro or in the car park and ask to see your license. RSA's make a major contribution to the economy of the country...far more than commercial fishermen do...but a week on tuesday I will be attending my first NSFC meeting representing you and will be sat with 19 other people who are not intrested in the catches of RSA's. What do you want brought up ?
I have the support of both the nfsa and the sacn should I need it to back me up with information and technical support but when it comes down to it I have taken this position to help me catch more fish here off our North East coast..if you catch a few extra as well I would call that a result
Cheers Dave
I have to put my hand up and say that I should have posted something about this but have not been well over the winter and have been very lax.
The first point to make is the SACN as well aware of the differences regionally and as such appointed me as the NE co-ordinator to deal with matters arising local. Due to ill health I have not had chance to dedicate time to this position that I should have. I am fully aware that the NE is different in terms of the methods we use and the fish we catch to almost every other region of the Uk.
Secondly the NEsfc has had a very effective angling rep for a while now and yet the position has been vacant for some time up here in the NSFC region .That place has now been taken by me and I intend to try to keep local anglers informed and chase up what is long ignored complaints The problem being is that people do not read the conservation section as a matter of habit. The "vision for the future " link was posted by Leon on 1/2/07 but recieved no comments despite mentioning the introduction of licenses and yet here we are with a very lively thread on the subject.
see:
http://www.sacn.org.uk/Conservation-...ries_2007.html
__________________
Sea Anglers' Conservation Network (SACN)
http://www.sacn.org.uk
Conservation & Political News
http://www.sacn.org.uk/Conservation-and-Political-News/
There are two consultations going on The Marine white paper ( I will add a link when sober) and the vision for the future consultation. Its only when the fact people may have to pay to sea fish that people are actually becoming intrested in conservation issues.
My reading of the white paper for now is that we will have to accept a license on the same basis we accept that fags, booze and petrol goes up every budget. I will fight against any license but one voice against the government just does not work. The good news is we are promised a better say in the way fisheries are run so we need to fight for that en masse...an email to Mr Miliband if you live in south shields saying where your vote may go if he doesn't get it right would help. I live in sedgefield and mine has already gone. (hi Tony if you are reading this)
There are many other suggestions in the white paper that are of benifit to anglers like giving them a gauranteed representation on the SFC's, improving the law making on a local basis, changing the regions covered by the SfC's to even out the regions. For example if you catch a tope and kill it south of the Tyne its illegal...but north of the Tyne its not. Guys in south shields run on rules set in Bridlington but in North shields its set in Cramlington...local is best IMHO. For now the white paper is a proposal for change not a law ...as anglers we need to get together and ensure we have our say.
The third point...I have recieved a copy of the bylaws introduced by the NSFC along with a lot of other papers. Considering that the SFC's have been operating for nearly 200 yrs I was amazed that the bylaws fit on 2 sheets of a4 paper! I expected a delivery by low loader. The local sfc's are inefective and underfunded in their current format...and yet these are the guys we have to rely on to protect our fishing. The proposal in the white paper is to increase funding for the SFC's ( which is currently funded by the local council) to ensure they can perform their duties to the full.
They (nsfc) have a (very expensive) patrol vessel to protect our fishing which currently averages 3 days at sea per week...wonder why this may be. That boat was bought to protect our fish yet is utilised less than 50% of the time...it will be the first question I will ask. I have fished in that region for the last seven years and have rarely seen the patrol vessel and have never been stopped and questioned. One of the first questions I will ask is how is that boat and the inshore one being utilised.
Its taken a lot of hard work by a dedicated few to get RSA's recognised on an official basis...lets not waste the opportunity through apathy thinking someone else will do it . Dont think that a license is uninforcable as they will word it like the coarse license whereby if you are equiped to go fishing for sea fish you need a license...ie they could pull you on the Metro or in the car park and ask to see your license. RSA's make a major contribution to the economy of the country...far more than commercial fishermen do...but a week on tuesday I will be attending my first NSFC meeting representing you and will be sat with 19 other people who are not intrested in the catches of RSA's. What do you want brought up ?
I have the support of both the nfsa and the sacn should I need it to back me up with information and technical support but when it comes down to it I have taken this position to help me catch more fish here off our North East coast..if you catch a few extra as well I would call that a result
Cheers Dave
treeboa
Well-known member
IF we had enforced fish protection areas, IF they had protected breeding areas, IF realistic fines were levied against trawlers breaking the rules ( not just uk ones), IF gill netting was outlawed, IF the money was used for the sea fishing of the uk including repair of piers and breakwaters, IF baitbeds were protected against greed, we all know this is not going to happen, also as we all know the e.a or whoever takes enforcement on will only check easy to reach areas like comps and fish from your car venues, possibly some easy piers and breakwaters, the likes of the greek ( was it ? ) trawler that was impounded in heartlepool, should have been fined a realistic amount or the boat/nets taken, they will have covered the fine on the way back home, on the dee trawlers over a certain size have just been banned, so some greedy sh*t now has a trawler just below and is raping the area of flounders for pot bait !!!, while the abuse of the seas continues i am not supprised that few if any are in agreement with paying for it, the sea fishing in the uk is sad compared to even 20 years ago, too little too late comes to mind and now the greedy t**ts in govenment want to make us pay for a near empty pot
davem2005
Well-known member
Treboa,
An excellent post. A lot of what you put is covered in the white paper. Please keep in mind that these are only suggestions for the future inviting comments not proposed laws.
Fines for offenders to be increased ten fold.
Bait digging to be brought under SFC's control not local council.
Better funding from central government to enable sfc's to enforce laws locally.
The goldenmile is also discussed.
The right of a place for an RSA representative.
The ability to bring in fast track laws for a 6 months period to enable the sfc's to respond faster to local conditions.
And many other proposals. An intresting one is the suggestion to get rid of the SFC's all together and then they go on to say how they propose to increase their powers to get more effective control.
The whole white paper is full of proposals to improve our fishing (or not if the commercials are allowed to have their way) by modernising the regulation of our fisheries and update a 200 yr old system set up purely for the benifit of commercial anglers. It is only in recent years that RSA's have been recognised as a valuable contributor to the economy and I see many of the points raised in the paper as being of major benifit to sea anglers. Unfortunately this recognition will probably come at a price in the form of a license. The one hope is that this financial hit on all anglers will encourage anglers to get involved more with government decisions and actually start taking some action to help protect there sport instead of letting someone else do it .
Its a fact that many of the bait digging bans in our region have been brought about by the intervention of the RSPB. This is a large organisation but more importantly their membership are prepared to actively write in support to the powers that be. This means that the government sit up and take note as all these people are voters. When the RSpb get into a most unlikely colalition with the wild fowlers association to object to bait digging in a paticular area and 50 anglers object we will loose out every time as we have done in the past. Perhaps if a large proportion of anglers complain about the introduction of a license then the government will realise the numbers of voters involved and it can only help strengthen the case for improvement in a sport we all enjoy.
Cheers
Dave
An excellent post. A lot of what you put is covered in the white paper. Please keep in mind that these are only suggestions for the future inviting comments not proposed laws.
Fines for offenders to be increased ten fold.
Bait digging to be brought under SFC's control not local council.
Better funding from central government to enable sfc's to enforce laws locally.
The goldenmile is also discussed.
The right of a place for an RSA representative.
The ability to bring in fast track laws for a 6 months period to enable the sfc's to respond faster to local conditions.
And many other proposals. An intresting one is the suggestion to get rid of the SFC's all together and then they go on to say how they propose to increase their powers to get more effective control.
The whole white paper is full of proposals to improve our fishing (or not if the commercials are allowed to have their way) by modernising the regulation of our fisheries and update a 200 yr old system set up purely for the benifit of commercial anglers. It is only in recent years that RSA's have been recognised as a valuable contributor to the economy and I see many of the points raised in the paper as being of major benifit to sea anglers. Unfortunately this recognition will probably come at a price in the form of a license. The one hope is that this financial hit on all anglers will encourage anglers to get involved more with government decisions and actually start taking some action to help protect there sport instead of letting someone else do it .
Its a fact that many of the bait digging bans in our region have been brought about by the intervention of the RSPB. This is a large organisation but more importantly their membership are prepared to actively write in support to the powers that be. This means that the government sit up and take note as all these people are voters. When the RSpb get into a most unlikely colalition with the wild fowlers association to object to bait digging in a paticular area and 50 anglers object we will loose out every time as we have done in the past. Perhaps if a large proportion of anglers complain about the introduction of a license then the government will realise the numbers of voters involved and it can only help strengthen the case for improvement in a sport we all enjoy.
Cheers
Dave
willywetegg
Administrator
I have read your posts from beginning to end and I have to say I see a lot of good things in them Dave. If you continue in the same manner that you have started then I would have to say that you have a great future.
I would have to say that I hope that is the case as over the last couple of years there has been one or two people that have said that they are there to represent "US" and when they have been asked a lot of hard questions there have been no answers at all. A certain few members are waiting for answers from a couple of seasons ago.
If this sounds negative it is not meant to as I will try to help and back you as much as I can. What you have taken on is massive and is only the beginning of what is going to be a very long and hard fight.
If you need any help on here please let me know and I will be only to glad to help you.
Jim.
I would have to say that I hope that is the case as over the last couple of years there has been one or two people that have said that they are there to represent "US" and when they have been asked a lot of hard questions there have been no answers at all. A certain few members are waiting for answers from a couple of seasons ago.
If this sounds negative it is not meant to as I will try to help and back you as much as I can. What you have taken on is massive and is only the beginning of what is going to be a very long and hard fight.
If you need any help on here please let me know and I will be only to glad to help you.
Jim.
treeboa
Well-known member
untill the commercial boys are sated or bankrupt there will be no agreements from them, the none uk boats dont give a damn as they are here because they have raped thier countries coastline, to do as they have in the dee invites further abuse from `potbait` trawling, the nets need to have markers on them to stop the more devious from dropping them, or `reefs` need to be set along shores to stop the close in netting being viable, they have to catch offenders to issue fines, of all the transgressions last year for instance how many fines were levied, untill we have a viable fisheries protection system in place the abuse will continue unabated, or sorry the easy target-the hobby sea angler with his rod will be targeted while the real rogues get away as there is no `policing` of the waters, in this the navy, the air force ( nimrods actively track vessels) and the coastguard needs to be more proactive, a big order and a bigger job but untill something is done and seen to be done you will not get people willing to hand over money to fish, i can see the course lads up in arms soon, the recent relaxation of imigrant workers has a side effect that no one forsaw, large freshwater fish now being caught and removed for food !!, and from what i have read and heard its not just the occasional time but happening more and more, now if these `easy` waters are not being policed what chance do we have with the sea, no doubt statistics will be played with to prove we have never had it so good, you only have to look at the crime rates and nhs waiting list times to see this, however sitting on a beach waiting to catch that ellusive 3 inch dab will show otherwise
Glenn Kilpatrick
Well-known member
Hi Dave I am curious as to what you have found in the white paper that you feel to be beneficial to anglers. Admittedly I haven't read it all (too long a document and not enough time to read).
What I have seen are proposals to bring in legislation to allow the government to charge us to fish in the sea. Proposals to allow the government to control anglers catches and their right to retain fish. Proposals to introduce legislation for restrictions on anglers collecting bait including worms and crabs, Proposals to introduce legislation to allow the government to restrict where we fish and I believe its highly unlikely that a golden mile will ever come into fruition around the UK.
In return we may get (as yet the are no commitments from the government) - another voice on the sfc (still leaving us hugely outnumbered). Extra toilets and parking facilities, more slipways (all of which should already be supplied by the local authority). There is talk of more places to fish from and creating artificial reefs however with fish stocks as they are and DEFRA choosing to ignore ICES advice year on year you can have a pier every 100 yards along the coast but of what use would it be ? No real incentives there for me Dave and even amongst this list the Government hasn't even begun to show willing on any of the issues. I know its a much used phrase these days but More and bigger fish might be worth trading against loosing some of our ancient rights - slipways, toilets and old cars on the sea bed aren't.
At present I feel we have everything to loose and nothing to gain. I think our old friend Steve Coppollo sums up the current situation quite well on the NUBA website :
http://www.nuba.org.uk/stevecop.htm
That aside Dave good luck with the NSFC it will be a tough task but I know you will give it your best shot.
All the best Glenn
davem2005
Well-known member
Having just read the rest of the thread I will reply in as much detail as I can tomorrow to Willy's, treboa and glenns comments ...its late and I have to be up before the sparrows tomorrow. What I would say its important that we look carefully at what is being proposed..and just about every proposal is to do with increasing the number of fish in our seas on a national basis to the benifit of BOTH RSA's and commercial fishermen.
The white paper is a proposal to update a legislation system that is over 200 years old and totally biased towards commercial fisherman as that is the sole purpose that it was set up in the first place. The white paper offers recognition to the fact that RSA'a actually exist and that is a step in the right direction. Its no wonder that your average beach fisherman is catching fewer fish after two hundred years of commercial orientate legislation . We as RSA's are now been offered the chance to make a difference for our kids ( because in my opinion that is how long it will take for us to see any major changes)
Its easy to quote an odd paragraph from the white paper and not take it into context. I have taken the time to read the whole document as I feel its of major importance to the future of both commercial and recreational anglers/fishermen. I have to say its heavy reading but it does outline the proposals for our sport and commercials livelyhood for generations to come.
Please bear with me while I get time to reply in detail to individual comments.
Cheers dave
The white paper is a proposal to update a legislation system that is over 200 years old and totally biased towards commercial fisherman as that is the sole purpose that it was set up in the first place. The white paper offers recognition to the fact that RSA'a actually exist and that is a step in the right direction. Its no wonder that your average beach fisherman is catching fewer fish after two hundred years of commercial orientate legislation . We as RSA's are now been offered the chance to make a difference for our kids ( because in my opinion that is how long it will take for us to see any major changes)
Its easy to quote an odd paragraph from the white paper and not take it into context. I have taken the time to read the whole document as I feel its of major importance to the future of both commercial and recreational anglers/fishermen. I have to say its heavy reading but it does outline the proposals for our sport and commercials livelyhood for generations to come.
Please bear with me while I get time to reply in detail to individual comments.
Cheers dave
treeboa
Well-known member
as a bit of a side line to the debate, in have just come back in from a long walk on the beach, not northeast but wirral in the northwest, not only have the bait beds been decimated but there was loads of chinese pulling 5 gallon containers and digging out razors and clams, in total there must have been 30 of them, the fisheries guy was there on his quad and cant do a thing about how much is taken as long as they are saying that the razors and clams are for thier consumption and they are not selling them, speaking to a guy local he said that every decent tide they decend on the beach and take what they can, no way could what they are taking be for personal consumption yet nothing can be done about it, no doubt this is something thats country wide and again greed will be the downfall of the bait beds
davem2005
Well-known member
To go back on what I said
(quote)The whole white paper is full of proposals to improve our fishing (or not if the commercials are allowed to have their way) by modernising the regulation of our fisheries and update a 200 yr old system set up purely for the benifit of commercial anglers. It is only in recent years that RSA's have been recognised as a valuable contributor to the economy and I see many of the points raised in the paper as being of major benifit to sea anglers. Unfortunately this recognition will probably come at a price in the form of a license. The one hope is that this financial hit on all anglers will encourage anglers to get involved more with government decisions and actually start taking some action to help protect there sport instead of letting someone else do it .(quote).
I dont believe the white paper is all doom and gloom for hidden within are more things that should benefit RSA's than are of detriment.
Treboa states that the seas are being raped by unmonitored and uncontroled commercials. The boats above 10m all have sattelite tracking installed so their whereabouts is always known ( in theory) Its the sub 10m boats often used inshore which are a bigger worry for RSA's. A lot is said within the white paper about changing the whole way that the SFC's operate. The SFC's work to an almost draconian system where it takes ages for any changes to be made which means its almost impossible for the |SFC's to take any action quickly to prevent localised problems leading to declining stocks. The suggestion is to put in place a system where SFC's can close an area or bring in temporary legislation ( max 6 months) whilst a full assesment of any overfishing is caried out. This brings control of a region back into the region concerned and should mean fish getting better protection and should lead to more and bigger fish for sea anglers both shore and boat.
The second major change is the way the sfc's are funded. This is currently done by the local councils in each region. They have no real intrest in what happens beyond the tideline. This system may have worked when almost every coastal town or village was reliant on the sea harvest for the prosperity of the locals. Things have changed and councils will only allocate the minimum funding for this purposeand would far rather spend the money on huge art galleries and rusty statues. The paper addreses this by proposing that funding for SFC's comes from central government instead of cash strapped councils. This should lead to more and bigger fish in the sea.
Thirdly. There is a proposal in there to increase the fines for breaches of regulations tenfold. Perhaps now the skippers flaunting the rules will think twice before doing so and wont be walking out of court with a smile on their faces. The current max fines limit was set in 1975 when 5k was a lot of money.Particularly since extra funding should be available for the patrolboats to be out more . First question I will ask is why the NSFC patrol boat only averages 3 days a week at sea...I bet the answer I get is that its what the money allows. This should lead to more and bigger fish in the sea.
4. Currently bait digging is under the control of local councils or private landowners. So we have no representative on there putting our case and each borough council can slap in a bait digging ban as and when they think fit. Its far better that this comes into the control of the SFC's where at least we have a representative voicing our case.Glen.. An example of how this is in our benefit is when NESFC proposed to ban crab collecting and a certain mutual fiend (ooops sorry friend) got it thrown out in minutes by stating facts. This should lead to anglers getting more input into bait digging bans if and when they are proposed. You see this as a downside that SFC's will control bait collecting ...we differ in opinion on this.
5. There are also proposals to limit the number of dredging operations and increase the cost of the licenses. I have no personal knowledge of dredging at sea and how it may affect our fishing but can see no harm for us as RSA's if the dreging is curbed or at least the licensing scheme is reviewed to bring it into line with modern costs. The verdict is out on wether we benefit from this but it personally I think its nice that a review of an ages old right is being discussed.
There are a lot of other items in the white paper which was created " to protect and improve our local fish stocks". This must mean that its aims are to increase the size and number of fish caught which must be of benifit to both rsa's and commercials alike.
We can go through and pick out the bits we dont like ...as have the commercial anglers and the dredgers...and we have all found bits we find we dont agree with. At the end of the day its only a proposal not a law and the fact RSA's are even recognised as a stakeholder in the document should be something we should be gratefull of..at least we have a chance to have our say and ask yourself would the government be proposing to spend for on the sfc's if rsa's had not made a point about their value to local economies? If anglers are insenced by a licence fee they hopefully will (At last) band together and fight that one particular issue.
I cant comment on bag limits other than to say that in my opinion its a sound conservational issue and until we find out what and how much its another thing we should band together to oppose. I cant see it affecting your average shore angler but a lot of the charter boat anglers in whitby may have a grievance on their good catch days. ( as would the skippers of course).
As to the cost of an annual license this is likely to be less than the cost of one day out on a charter boat so is unlikely to deter the boat anglers. One major arguement for it is that if you pay for something you expect results...will people expect to catch more the day after they buy a license...or are they prepared to wait for what is currently a bad situation to improve...I personally think for most it will be the former suggestion... but realistically it will take several years for any major noteable changes..ie sea angler reporting 20+ cod catches from the beaches and the whitby gazette reporting skippers been fined/jailed for breaches of the regulations.
Personally I know deep down we will be hit with a license but since I love fishing I will pay it and continue doing what I enjoy.
Cheers
Dave.
PS sorry for the typos but a new laptop keyboard is taking some getting used to .
(quote)The whole white paper is full of proposals to improve our fishing (or not if the commercials are allowed to have their way) by modernising the regulation of our fisheries and update a 200 yr old system set up purely for the benifit of commercial anglers. It is only in recent years that RSA's have been recognised as a valuable contributor to the economy and I see many of the points raised in the paper as being of major benifit to sea anglers. Unfortunately this recognition will probably come at a price in the form of a license. The one hope is that this financial hit on all anglers will encourage anglers to get involved more with government decisions and actually start taking some action to help protect there sport instead of letting someone else do it .(quote).
I dont believe the white paper is all doom and gloom for hidden within are more things that should benefit RSA's than are of detriment.
Treboa states that the seas are being raped by unmonitored and uncontroled commercials. The boats above 10m all have sattelite tracking installed so their whereabouts is always known ( in theory) Its the sub 10m boats often used inshore which are a bigger worry for RSA's. A lot is said within the white paper about changing the whole way that the SFC's operate. The SFC's work to an almost draconian system where it takes ages for any changes to be made which means its almost impossible for the |SFC's to take any action quickly to prevent localised problems leading to declining stocks. The suggestion is to put in place a system where SFC's can close an area or bring in temporary legislation ( max 6 months) whilst a full assesment of any overfishing is caried out. This brings control of a region back into the region concerned and should mean fish getting better protection and should lead to more and bigger fish for sea anglers both shore and boat.
The second major change is the way the sfc's are funded. This is currently done by the local councils in each region. They have no real intrest in what happens beyond the tideline. This system may have worked when almost every coastal town or village was reliant on the sea harvest for the prosperity of the locals. Things have changed and councils will only allocate the minimum funding for this purposeand would far rather spend the money on huge art galleries and rusty statues. The paper addreses this by proposing that funding for SFC's comes from central government instead of cash strapped councils. This should lead to more and bigger fish in the sea.
Thirdly. There is a proposal in there to increase the fines for breaches of regulations tenfold. Perhaps now the skippers flaunting the rules will think twice before doing so and wont be walking out of court with a smile on their faces. The current max fines limit was set in 1975 when 5k was a lot of money.Particularly since extra funding should be available for the patrolboats to be out more . First question I will ask is why the NSFC patrol boat only averages 3 days a week at sea...I bet the answer I get is that its what the money allows. This should lead to more and bigger fish in the sea.
4. Currently bait digging is under the control of local councils or private landowners. So we have no representative on there putting our case and each borough council can slap in a bait digging ban as and when they think fit. Its far better that this comes into the control of the SFC's where at least we have a representative voicing our case.Glen.. An example of how this is in our benefit is when NESFC proposed to ban crab collecting and a certain mutual fiend (ooops sorry friend) got it thrown out in minutes by stating facts. This should lead to anglers getting more input into bait digging bans if and when they are proposed. You see this as a downside that SFC's will control bait collecting ...we differ in opinion on this.
5. There are also proposals to limit the number of dredging operations and increase the cost of the licenses. I have no personal knowledge of dredging at sea and how it may affect our fishing but can see no harm for us as RSA's if the dreging is curbed or at least the licensing scheme is reviewed to bring it into line with modern costs. The verdict is out on wether we benefit from this but it personally I think its nice that a review of an ages old right is being discussed.
There are a lot of other items in the white paper which was created " to protect and improve our local fish stocks". This must mean that its aims are to increase the size and number of fish caught which must be of benifit to both rsa's and commercials alike.
We can go through and pick out the bits we dont like ...as have the commercial anglers and the dredgers...and we have all found bits we find we dont agree with. At the end of the day its only a proposal not a law and the fact RSA's are even recognised as a stakeholder in the document should be something we should be gratefull of..at least we have a chance to have our say and ask yourself would the government be proposing to spend for on the sfc's if rsa's had not made a point about their value to local economies? If anglers are insenced by a licence fee they hopefully will (At last) band together and fight that one particular issue.
I cant comment on bag limits other than to say that in my opinion its a sound conservational issue and until we find out what and how much its another thing we should band together to oppose. I cant see it affecting your average shore angler but a lot of the charter boat anglers in whitby may have a grievance on their good catch days. ( as would the skippers of course).
As to the cost of an annual license this is likely to be less than the cost of one day out on a charter boat so is unlikely to deter the boat anglers. One major arguement for it is that if you pay for something you expect results...will people expect to catch more the day after they buy a license...or are they prepared to wait for what is currently a bad situation to improve...I personally think for most it will be the former suggestion... but realistically it will take several years for any major noteable changes..ie sea angler reporting 20+ cod catches from the beaches and the whitby gazette reporting skippers been fined/jailed for breaches of the regulations.
Personally I know deep down we will be hit with a license but since I love fishing I will pay it and continue doing what I enjoy.
Cheers
Dave.
PS sorry for the typos but a new laptop keyboard is taking some getting used to .
