Ex Sea Angler Editor Arrested for Poaching

[TC]

\".....i\'m in no way trying to say it is legal just trying to point out that it may not harm the stocks as much as you may think.....\"

Micky, your arguement isn\'t getting any stronger, m8.

Doesn\'t matter how much \"little harm\" you reckopn the taking of undersized fish causes, the top & bottom of it is ...IT IS ILLEGAL !

As I\'ve said earlier, the minimum size limits apply to ALL anglers and there is NO justification in ANY angler retaining undersized fish.

Your general question....
\"which would do the MOST long term damage to the coalie population the angler keeping only small coalies or the angler keeping only large coalies ?\"

......and your question to Ray....
\"ray, do you really in your heart of hearts think the coalie population is been harmed more by a piker keeping 5\" coalies or the angler keeping the bigger ones, answer not on a legal stand point but from a reality point of view please, hypothetically so to speak....\"


Micky, you can\'t ignore the \"legal standpoint\" - doesn\'t matter what your, (or anybody elses) opinion is, it\'s the Law.


[Edited on 10/3/2004 by TC]

[Chippy]

I firmly believe that taking undersized fish is wrong, legally and morally.
However, what is the legal and moral position of taking an undersized fish that is deeped hooked and dead or will not survive if put back?
Last week on Shields pier I saw dozens of dead undersized fish floating past. Would it have been wrong to keep any of these?

[ray]

i wasnt apologising i stand by everything i said what i said was i wasnt having a pop just at you but all anglers that take undersize fish so i really dont think i need to appologise to anyone

[micky-quayle]

to all those coneming the pike anglers just let me ask a hypothetical question.
imagine its october, the first decent sea of the winter, good 5 and 6lb cod are coming in all over, the best fishing in years, but only on fresh crab, problem you don\'t have any. anyway a good friend says i\'ve got a dozen but can\'t get fishing, you\'re welcome to them. you jump up and down with glee but when he gives you them there are 12 juicy EATER peelers in the bucket all popping their backs.
now would you use them for all it is illegal or say no thanks mate ?

[Davyred]

Sorry Mickey, thats not an argument. Thats what if...what we\'re talking about is happening now. Keeping undersize fish is the one thing thats guaranteed to get experienced anglers backs up.

Personally, if I catch undersize fish and they\'re gut hooked, I kill them straight away, then throw them back once I\'ve got the hook out - why make the fish suffer more than it should.

One thing about your point though.... would it be illegal to use the crab, as you didn\'t collect it?

[micky-quayle]

all i\'m trying to say davy is everyone transgresses the rules sometimes, i know a few members on here who i wont name who regularly use undersize coalies as ling and conger bait, i know two who often use eater peelers so its not just pikers, anyway the analogy question still stands, would you use those eater peelers in those circumstances, lets see who will answer truthfully !

[mark]

Where did the eater peelers come from???

they are available to the restaurant trade, imported from europe (well france mainly) or the far east. Certainly not illegal.

maff or defra as it is now, are their own worst enemy. They make the rules but do little to enforce them. I would wholeheartedly welcome seeing defra officials randomly checking the piers in summer, and prosecuting offenders. Yet you very rarely hear of any prosecutions for undersize fish.

On Amble pier last year, I nearly ended up in a fight over undersize coalies. Bunch of kids, bag of rag, pulling 4 5 and 6 \" fish in. One fat little charver had a hold of one of these fish, sqeezing it so its eyes bulged whilst trying to coax it inot eating a worm, the fish went then went into a plastic box with about a dozen others. Soon as I tried to point out to him that he should throw it back Charver senior turns up out of nowhere and has a go at me for telling his son what is and is not legal. If I had my filleting knife handy I would of cut his liver out and thrown that back in place of the coalie.

Catching undersize fish is a fact of life, and little fish ggiven the chance will grow into big fish. A mortally wounded coalie is better back in the sea to die, where the everything is a predator and hence keep the food chain going.

Only a few out of hundreds might make to big fish status, but those big fish rely wholely on the little fish on the way up the evolutionary ladder. Taking a handful of little uns might not effect the number of little uns as a percentage, but if only 1 out of a hundred makes it, taking 10 little uns might be removing 10% of the food chain for that big un.

I realise this has gone completely OT from the original post re: poaching, but where do you want to draw the line?? If you take undersize fish - for whatever reason are you not also poaching?? Ok we fish the sea, nobody owns it and nobody can charge you to fish it, but in my view its poaching just the same.

If I fished a well known lake and took half a dozen jack pike to use as bait for bass/ling/conger etc would that be ok??

Is it fair to target a species (pike) with a bait (coalfish/herring/mackeral) that is completley alien to its environment in order to catch more - why not gill net the fens to get that fish of a lifetime??

[jason]

I think that one issue ,issing off here is the food chain one. Little fish get eaten by big fish (but in their own environment). Removing little fish of any sort does affect the food chain (not just fish but shell fish etc).
One way around the live bait issue for ling or cod is to rig up with a reverse pennel - bait the lead smaller hook with lug etc and catch yer little fish and then leave the rig in the water for a larger fis h to come along for lunch this way you are only using fish that would have been eaten anyway and if you dont catch on the live bait just reel in and release it(even if it is dead it will be returned to the food chain and not wasted).

[Doc]

Byelaw XX (20) states it is illegal to use edible crab (Cancer pagurus) as bait, soft-shelled or berried. The distinction between collecting or using is a tenuous one as there are still minimum landing sizes for the species (130mm). So if you have a bucket of edible crabs below the MLS you are in breach of the byelaw, if the intent is to use them as bait, then that is a separate byelaw, which can also carry a stringent penalty.

There can be no justification for retaining juvenile fish, coalies or any species, for pike bait or otherwise. I do not like the inference that pike anglers go sea angling (pier fishing) to collect bait for piking, I wonder why they don\'t use roach or rudd or other small cyprinid alternatives, is this because its illegal. This illustrates the problems that angling still has, especially those who are not regular sea anglers or those that should know better, god forbid we can\'t break freshwater regulations, but it doesn\'t matter about sea fish. Similarly, there is no legal reddress for the retention of juvenile (undersized fish), if the fish is below MLS then its illegal, whatever the arguement. What if you don\'t catch enough or any coalies for a piking session, will whiting, codling etc. have to do.

Before anyone asks, yes I\'ve used small pouting as deadbait for ling on wrecks, only when the fish is dead or the depth is too great for the fish to return, these fish are then despatched as humanely as is possible. I could count on the fingers of one hand the number of times that this has been done, as I prefer mackerel as a ling bait anyway. However, more importantly there is no MLS for pouting.

Sorry Mickey, but in this instance there is no justification, legally and or theoretically.

[Ell]

Following with interest.
One point maybe not entirely on topic but

Micky, you can\'t ignore the \"legal standpoint\" - doesn\'t matter what your, (or anybody elses) opinion is, it\'s the Law

You can ignore the Law, in fact unjust laws should be ignored. You will however be punished if caught.

Are there any other sources for this type of Pike bait that do not involve deliberatley targetting under size fish or keeping them if caught accidently. What are the alternatives for Pike anglers, I know dead baits are not the only method. I have often seen tackle dealers with a wide range of dead baits for pike, joey mackerel etc. what other species are used in a similar manner. I guess they\'d cost you more than keeping undersize coalies for starters.

[TC]

So are you saying, Ell, that it is \"unjust\" in NOT being able to keep legally defined \"undersized\" fish, and that if you have your own reasons for flouting the law, then it\'s acceptable to do so?

Micky, in answer to your peeler question, my answer would be as you stated....\"no thanks mate\". And I CAN say that \"TRUTHFULLY\"

As for deeply hooked immature fish (we\'ve discussed this several times on NESA), I would agree that returning them to their natural environment IS the thing to do. Whether they are so deeply hooked that they need to be humanely despatched 1st, or unhooked and still seem to have fighting chance of surviving, they still play an active role in the ecology of the sea and its own resident predators.

As has been said, this is geting way OTT and increasingly further away from the original topic.
The consensus opinion seems plainly to be that the taking of undersized fish is wrong - whatever the so called \"reason\" may be, (and so it should be really, as it is also illegal).

I\'ll let this topic stay open for a wee bit longer, but as there is NO \"defence\" for keeping legally defined \"undersized\" fish - it seems pointless in dragging this on and on.

[Edited on 10/3/2004 by TC]

[Ell]

I hit Post twice hence this edit Nowt dodgy removed honest
[Edited on 10/3/2004 by Ell]

[Edited on 10/3/2004 by Ell]

[Ell]

sorry for any confusion Tony I personally agree that deliberatley taking undersize fish is not on and the law regarding it is probably too lenient.

As for having a personal reason for flouting the law then that\'s a bit different. Maybe I shouldn\'t have posted that comment here but I was alluding to things like interacial marriage in SA being unlawful at one time, Homosexuality laws here in the past, that type of thing.

At the moment Tony I think the debate is interesting and being conducted with a certain amount of restraint and respect.

The questions asked in my last post re: alternatives, sound like they are supporting this activity, they were not intended that way. I\'m sure there are many alternatives. Maybe not as affective in certain circumstances but if we were after the most effective methods of fishing then our tackle shops would be selling dynamite and gill nets. Just wanted a bit of info from Micky or other Pike specialists.

[Edited on 10/3/2004 by Ell]

[TC]

Glad you cleared that up, Ell.

I agree with your sentiments - if laws infringe on human rights, then they DO need to be questioned - but that\'s a different kettle of fish (undersized, or not), to what was being discussed - hence my confusion.....lol

I think you\'re also right in that the issue has been (so far) discussed well. I do think, however that it possibly deserves its\' own thread:

See the topic UNDERSIZED FISH:RIGHT OR WRONG?

[TC]

If you have any views on what has been discussed regarding the laws governing undersized fish, please post them in the \"UNDERSIZED FISH: RIGHT OR WRONG\" topic.