UNDERSIZED FISH:RIGHTOR WRONG?

[TC]

Is the current legislation on fish size limits right or wrong?
and is there ever a justifiable reason for NOT returning fish which are classified as legally undersized ?

I have copied over the \"POSTED BY\" posts (below) from another Topic in which this debate came up......


[Edited on 11/3/2004 by TC]

[TC]

POSTED BY Ray:

i\'ll tell you what makes my **** boil pike anglers taking undersize coalies for dead baits off shields pier every summer. the coalie population will never recover either

[TC]

POSTED BY Micky Quayle:

look at it logically ray, yes pike anglers take undersized coalies true but at the same time return all big ones that are over the size limit which they would be quite within their rights to keep. now it doesn\'t take an einstein to work out that the bigger the returned coalies are the more chance they have to go on to breed. as long as they are returning the larger ones they are doing less overall damage to the coalie population than if they kept the big ones and returned the small ones.
the bigger coalies could its true be cut in half and used as pike baits but these are less effective and as stated above if they took these bigger ones it would undoubtedly do more damage to the coalie population than taking the smaller ones.


[Edited on 10/3/2004 by TC]

[TC]

Sorry Micky, that sounds like a VERY poor argument to me, m8.

Is it not the fact that the phrase, “undersized�, means just that, and that they SHOULD be returned if caught.
The minimum size limits on ANY fish govern ALL anglers and that limit should be adhered to.
There’s NO justification I can see for ANY angler “adapting� the “rules� to suit their own ends. If there was, what’s the point in having them in the 1st place?

Just because you return “in size� fish, doesn’t therefore make it permissible to take “undersized fish�

[TC]

POSTED BY Willywetegg:

I was just about to post the same thing as TC. If you are taking undersize fish you are breaking the law. Sorry Micky no iffs no butts that is how it is. I used to fish Roker pier amnd the amount of undersized fish that came off there was disgusting. No argument can explain taking an undersize fish. Sorry mate.

[TC]

Jim,
\"I used to fish Roker pier amnd the amount of undersized fish that came off there was disgusting. \"

Yep, I think we\'ve all witnessed similar, m8.

Over the years on NESA, there\'s been constant critiscism of \"anglers\" who, when they land an undersized fish, don\'t bother to return it, but just leave it lying where it\'s been unhooked.
To my mind, an angler flounting the rules on fish sizes in order to suit their own ends is just as bad and deserves the same level of critiscism.

NOTE:
There is NO WAY I will allow the advocating of retaining under sized fish on NESA

[TC]

POSTED BY Ray:

so what your saying is its all right to prosecute an old man but its all right for you and others to fish illegally by taking undersize coalies and mackeral bit of a double standard you say taking the small ones does no harm of course it does as people are taking the bigger ones legally there will be less fish to take there places to eventually spawn, im sure maff would have a field day on the pier in the summer i for one would love it if they did regular patrols as ritchie said in another post were have all the flounder gone we will be saying that about the shoals of coalie around shields pier shortly

[TC]

POSTED BY Ray:

the einstien bits wrong aswell the reason the cod stocks are so low is the wholesale slaughter of immature fish getting caught and killed with the ones that are above the size limit this means if the big fish are being taken aswell as the small ones the fish stocks will never recoverif immature fish arent allowed to grow and breed

[TC]

POSTED BY Micky Quayle:

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, i don\'t know the exact maths of it but i would think out of several hundered coalies at lets say 5\" maybe only 1 or 2 would reach 13.8\". therefor returning all coalies over this size (in reality most of the pike lads return them over about 8\") it is doing the stocks less harm than if they kept the larger ones only.
legally, yes it is a no no, and yes it would not stand up in court, i know that. all i\'m trying to do is make a differential between the two situations. pikers have thought about the morality of it and tried to think it through morally and logically, but i\'m afraid dead lines for apex predators are indescriminate and have neither any legal or moral ground only greed. dead lines in freshwater also kill many swans and geese each year they are the devils work.
both practises are illegal yes, but which is the greater transgression of the rules.
by the way ray, i\'ve always tried to keep answers on this forum \"on topic\" and not take cheap pops at people, which if you care to look back at any posts i\'ve made you\'ll to be the case. i knew my reply would cause some conrtoversy but i would rather explain my views than keep quiet. 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.
ps. i\'ve tried to word my message and reply so that it can be legally posted and not deleted tony, i know its dodgy ground discussing such matters

[Edited on 10/3/2004 by TC]

[TC]

POSTED BY Ray:

i wasnt having a cheap pop at you micky alli did was speak my mind,
if you think it was specifically aimed at yourself then your wrong its aimed at anyone who takes undersize fish in my opinion its wrong and it gives groups like petra more ammunition to throw at us. and yes i do beleive that taking undersize coalies will have an effect on the local population around the pier

[TC]

POSTED BY Micky Quayle:

apology accepted ray, i thought someone was having a pop specifically in my direction.the question i asked though ray, was although as soon as ANY fish is taken it has affected the fish population, i asked the 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 ?
last year there were some cracking coalies coming in around 2lb mark and loads of them, they were all returned safely surely fish of this size stand a much better chance to go on and procreate. personally i take a lot of time helping promote environmental issues, more so on the freshwater lochs of scotland now its true, off our own backs many lochs have been cleaned up both from pollution and general litter (in much the same way nesa members did last year on shields pier)etc. fish stocks issues both sea and freshwater are very close to my heart and if i believed for one minute that the taking of the size coalies mentioned was having a greater affect than the angler keeping the sizable ones i would condem it.


[Edited on 10/3/2004 by TC]

[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.

[TC]

POSTED BY 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?

[TC]

POSTED BY 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

[TC]

POSTED BY 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 ?



[Edited on 10/3/2004 by TC]