Licenses

[mark]

makes you wonder what your vote is worth these days...

If you look at it another way - is 1.5 million votes enough to sway a government

nope

cos out of the 1.5 million voters, there will be a huge number of labour voters who'll still vote for them anyway

if voting changed anything it would be outlawed, to quote winston churchill "democracy by the ballot box is the least worst alternative"

1.5 million voters with guns might do it - for a short while though

[The Great Wallsendo]

"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter"
Winston Churchill

....best get my gun

[Topfly]

Hope you got a licence for the rod

[davem2005]

Mark ...Tony...the real figures...

Yeah they may need a new version of xp....or heaven forbid even could run to the vista upgrade...

But lets assume they have some money left after the projected extra expenses of enforcing a license...

From memory the forecast that the nesfc did on enforcement costs put their existig costs up by 1.1 million quid. That by the way did not include the cost of a new enforcement vessel and crew.

There are 13 sfc's in the uk...for now...

So lets assume that the nesfc underestimated the costs ...it has been known to happen that government projects run over budget so 1.2 million times 13 sfc's = 14.6 milllion. Lets assume that half those sfc's considered a new patrol boat was essential...and the other half just settled for trebling the number of enforcement officers...so perhaps another 6 million spent on boats. We are now over 20 million ...

Which funnily enough the nesfc could not find a suitable supplier for here in the uk and had to order one from abroad to meet their needs last year.

Hey and dont forget they need a vista upgrade as well

Cheers
Dave

[Red5]

Dave....Had a thought yesterday after speaking to you re: two pleasure cruisers (lol) and bait digging.
Most anglers seem to be either blissfully unaware or apathetic to how things are going to affect us all over the coming years me probably as much as anyone.
Could you give us the full facts that can be digested by the average Geordie as to what benefits a licence will bring or how it will be detrimental, who we should contact/lobby to report misdemeanours by both commercial vessels and anglers who stand and continually catch and keep undersize fish or take undersize shellfish from our coasts. Who represents us as anglers and what they plan to do to ensure we as anglers have a voice. What legislation there is on trawling and netting? Which forms of commercial fishing are most damaging, quotas and who's taking the most. (It will clear up wether it's Russian factory ships, French Trawlers or our mates that we share a pint with in the local pub!)
Obviously we discussed the fact that our SFC is pretty toothless and hard to contact for the average guy, but is that because over the years anglers have just sat back and let things happen without speaking up rather than mumbling and groaning away on forums about the lack of fish and anti-social behaviour. How many people know about what you mentioned about the bait collecting from our shores. It was certainly news to me.
I t may be a monumental task, but it would in my opinion clear up a lot of myths and give anglers the knowledge they need to lobby the correct people in an informed manner.

BTW met Loopy for a couple of chucks and although we caught nowt (well he had a rockling) we had a good chat and put plans in place to go out again.

[ScottyJim]

For those interested in the Portuguese first year figures after imposition of a license, here is a quick link to the stats.

Portuguese government releases data on sales of sea angling licenses « Louis Tchertoff: Tackle up!

For those sending in replies to the Strategy paper, this might make an interesting attachment to highlight the problems.

[davem2005]

Thanks scottyjim,

So according to that there has been a decrease in angling by 70% as a introduction of a license. So the revenue earned by the license is far outweighed by the loss in revenue ( Ie VAt) on tackle sales.....some serious kind of bsiness plan that is and goes a long way to prove what anglers have been saying ...we dont need a license.

Those reading that please bear in mind that the portugese license proposal was that 50% of the revenue would be given to a commercial fishermans fund !!!! Lets hope that fifty percent of the net loss also gets handed on

I did read somewhere that the introduction of a license decreased tackle sales by 40% in portugal.

Do licenses work?...do they hell..

Write to your MP and tell him.

Cheers
dave

[loopy]

This really has got me going.
Great article scottyjim and agree with all the sentiment from Dave and red.
So what to do?
Read the 175 pages of the Marine Bill white paper.
Research the history of the bill.
Research the response from all concerned.

I will sleep tonight no red wine required.

It it such a large subject and our licence is such a small part, but there are so many other things within this document that will impact on our sport and the gathering of bait, the £11 becomes insignificant or even if it were free the other implications are potentially great. far to many to post.

Much of the history of the bill comes as you expect from lobbying and other pressures from MCS (marine conservation society) in conjunction with RSPB, Natural England need I go on this came to a head in about 2005.These organization are funded by donation most are registered charities, they employ full time staff and communicate with other like minded organizations.

The MSC recently published its response to the white paper and a
1/4 of a million signatures to no. 10 October 2007
Supporters of MCS, WWF, RSPB and The Wildlife Trusts are calling for a Marine Act Now and signed over 1/4 million postcards and petitions, amounting to over 300,000. These were delivered to no. 10 Downing Street Wed 17/10/07 by 4 children representing future generations who want our seas protected. Isabel Carr, eight year old volunteer for the Marine Conservation Society said "I love dolphins, lobsters and starfish and think there should be a law to protect them. Also basking sharks or I may not have seen the one I did in Cornwall this summer and so it goes on.

They support No fish zones
Banning of bait digging in these various zones
A licence for RSA (recreational sea anglers)
and many more.

Many have said its coming whats the point, I'm not paying, pay up and shut up, it will not work and so on.

Looks like the other interested parties have and continue to have there say to influence the outcome of this Bill should it come before Parliament this session. ?

http://www.mcsuk.org/mcsaction/marinebill/marine+

[ScottyJim]

Spot on Loopy. Not everyone has internet access though, so how many anglers are still in the dark about this. If you've printed off a copy of the report, and are finished with it, take it with you next time your fishing and pass it on. There's an address to send postal replies. We need as much feedback sent in as possible.

[ScottyJim]

Another link on a similar vein.

Eftta pledges action after sea fishing license scheme damages sales in Europe « Louis Tchertoff: Tackle up!

And just out of devilment, I sent an e-mail to the Portuguese Tourist Board informing them, due to the need for a license, I will no longer consider Portugal as a holiday destination. Won't do us any good, but if enough did it, then it might help the Portuguese anglers some. No one will ever listen until they think it might hit them in their pocket.

tourism@portugaloffice.org.uk

[davem2005]

Once angain thanks scottjim for posting that.

Portugal is the latest country to introduce a license scheme and as such is a good indicator of what may happen.

The figures in that link have been pointed out to Defra, the last time to my knowledge was at the meeting on Nov 15th where members of the tackle trade were present.

If anyone happens to be calling into a tackle shop over the next week or so ...mention to them what happened in Portugal and the possible affects on their business.

I know Defra are sending details of the RSA consultation out via tackle and guns magazine which goes to every shop. I very much doubt that there are many tackle shops that could stand even a 25% cut in trade,So perhaps the tackle shop owners and staff may help to get the message through to anglers to write to defra in complaint of the proposed license.

Cheers
Dave.

[ScottyJim]

Something else to raise the blood pressure. And these “clowns” at DEFRA have the hard neck to say we are seriously impacting the fish stocks. The article below is for ONE boat on ONE trip. (Note the article was written Dec. 2001.) Now translate that figure into the entire industrial commercial fleet. Then add on the discards from the whitefish fleet, followed by the bycatch from the Nethrops fisheries. What have you got? A scandal and a blown up calculator. And the crazy thing about it, is, that I still get guilty if I catch a deep hooked fish that I can’t put back.


“ A recent article in the Fishing News illustrated some of the problems associated with industrial fishing:
On 4th September the Benny Dorthe of Thyboron landed at her home port with 543 tonnes of what were reported as sandeels. But the Danish Inspectorate, after taking several samples of the catch, found that only 59% was sandeels. The other 41% consisted of several other species, including 21% haddock equivalent to 114 tonnes. The vessel’s industrial fishing license was suspended for one month, although she was still permitted to fish for human consumption species. The Danish Fishermen’s Ecological Network found that the average size of the haddock was probably around 100 grams per individual (the legal MLS is equivalent to about 170g)
“On that assumption, it means that 1,140,000 individual haddock have been caught and reduced to meal and oil for a price of 1 Danish kroner per kg” said the organisations Knud Anderson. “When longliners catch their haddock it is a high quality white fish product and the price is 18 DKr per kg. The fish has a chance to reproduce itself several times and weighs on average 800 grammes.”

Full article at address.

http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/research/pdf_res_papers/rp01-20.pdf

[davem2005]

Been having a think about what red posted about a simple guide to how we have ended up in the current situation regarding our sport.

I'll try keep it simple, no letters, no latin just basic facts.

For simplicity you can split our shoreline into two regions, Low water out to 12 miles, and 12 miles out to 200 miles.

The 12 - 200 mile region is run by the EU and as such we have little say in what happens out there. Its policed by the fisheries protection, an off shoot of the navy. Not really of intrest to anglers apart from the fact that if it is overfished it will eventualy reflect in catches inshore.

The Low Water to 12 Mile Section.

This is the area most of intrest to anglers. It is run and policed by sea fisheries committees of which there are 12 in the UK and Wales.

Sea fisheries committees were set up in 1890 to look after the intrests of commercial fishermen and apart from the addition of 2 angling representatives to each committee around 5 years ago they have remained very much unchanged. The last major update of the regulations they work to was in the late sixties. This means many of the procedures and regulations are well out of date. There is a minefield of different laws for different boats and unfortunately the laws differ from region to region...there is no consistency through neighouring regions. Not suprising since these were set up over a century ago.

The biggest downside to this management system is it is very old fashioned and very slow to react. The commitees are funded by the local councils not central government, which worked fine when everyone in the coastal towns and villages earned their living from the sea. Nowadays councils will cut costs where they can. ( I started put put in personal comments but will leave them out)

Now we come to the busy bit with lots happening.

A report was commissioned by defra about 4 years ago called "the net benifits report" which looked at all aspects of the uses of our seas in an effort to ensure they are used sustainably. This recommended many changes of which one was that anglers (and others)should be considered as stakeholders. The prime ministers written response to this report backed the majority of the proposals in the report.

Around the same time anglers started to campaign for the increase in the minimum landing size of bass which became known as the bass management plan and part of their plan was to point out exactly how many anglers there are and how much more they are worth to the economy than commercial fishing. A study was commisioned into the value of anglers to the uk which arrived at a figure of 587 million ( I think) now refered to as the Drew Report. Also during the meetings with defra the introduction of licenses and bag limits came up and people in general agreed that if the size limit went up they would be happy to pay for licenses and most already fished to a self impossed bag limit.

The logic behind the introduction of both these was to reduce the illegal fishing for bass which invariable end up been sold at the back door of restaurants. It must be pointed out that at the time they were only speaking up for bass but this was eventually to be taken up by defra and proposed for introduction to us all.

Defra.

Department of the Enviroment, Fisheries and Rural Affairs,

Where do they come into it? The sea fisheries committees in theory make the bylaws, propose them to defra who put them infront of government ministers with a recommendation. He signs on the bottom line ( at the moment that guy is John Shaw ) It becomes a law.

Easy to write down but a very longwinded process which very often makes changes after the problem is long over.

As part of the efforts of those promoting the bass management plan Defra began to speak to anglers seriously and (appear) to take note. When new legisation was proposed it went to more and more consultees each time. Anglers were finally having there say but to date there has still been no national law changed to benifit anglers however there have been local successes such as the tope bylaw in the North East Sea Fisheries Region.

As an example of how ludricrous the current legislation is in terms of protecting our fish...if a trawler leaves hartlepool and catches a Tope. He lands it at shouth shileds or sunderland...he is breaking the law...If he lands it at north shields...that fine and it can be sold! This regional difference needs clearing up. Another example I saw recently was a trawler landing cod at Sunderland when I was lead to believe the quota was full. Turns out its a boat owned by a Scottish Producer Organisation who still had quota left so it was legal. Yet the local boats could not land cod.

Marine Bill White Paper.

We have all heard it mentioned. We know it mentions a license, bag limits and bait digging. But what is it.

This is Defra's suggestions for tackling the issues and problems highlighted by the Net Benifits report. Its a huge document 160+ a4 pages. It covers everything from dredging, building new marina's, gravel extraction down to charging anglers for licenses.

One of the biggest sections is related to reforming the sea fisheries committee's. Last done in 1967 and long overdue. Change of name, number of them but most importantly to update the way they are funded and speed up the system so they can react faster to local needs. They also have to accept that others have a right to use the seas and react accordingly, no longer will they be looking after the commercials intrests.

Also included is the proposal to charge anglers for a license and bag limits...its all been discussed elsewhere.

Not included as far as I can see is a proposal to ban bait digging...what is included is to change the jurisdiction of SFC's to include up to the high water mark. This takes responsibility off the local councils. It will affect management of the foreshore but will not mean a ban on bait digging.

Marine Protected Area's (MPA's) and No Take Zones (NTZ's)

Both of these do not necessarily mean that we wont be allowed to fish there. Angling is recognised as an enviromentaly friendly use of the sea. The marine bill covers the company wanting to drill for oil, drag 20 tonnes of chains across a coral reef, build a wind farm or excavate an amount of gravel the size of the Isle of man to build another runway somewhere. It doesn't just apply to anglers and if large areas are left undisturbed we could see a few benifits.

No Take zones are exactly what it says on the tin...catch it but put it back without harming the enviroment. A practice common in other areas for some species. It does not necessarily mean no fishing.

The marine bill is not a law it just puts in place the means to create laws as and when they become necessary. The best way to regard it is as a list of things we would like to change.

The marine bill will be debated in the current session of parliament and has widespread support from many organisations simply because it addresses many of the problems we are suffering due to outdated legislation. Each item there will be debated and consulted on before it actually becomes law.

Finally this RSA Consultation,

For defra this is quite a short one...only 25 pages. This is a request by defra for more input from anglers. They are asking for feedback from the guys on the beaches and the piers and not just those who turn up to committee meetings in London.

Its easy to say that the NFSA,sacn, bass ,sos etc dont represent us the masses. This is the masses chance to make their comments known. Defra are going out of their way to contact as many anglers as possible so they can have their say.

DONT MISS THE CHANCE...HAVE YOUR SAY.

For the record the suggestions/questions in the rsa consultations were made by a combination of Defra, a working committee of commercials and a working committee of anglers. At this stage I cant remember the letters naming the committee.

This is a list of changes that are proposed to modernise a 120 year old system, yes its far reaching, but by bringing legislation in line with modern technology it should mean the laws can ensure the seas can sustain ALL users demands on them

Please dont shout at me for inaccuracies here...I kept it vague/easy to follow...If there are any major errors in what I have put please let me know and I will edit it.

Another item not mentioned in the RSA consultation is the calls for a "Golden Mile"...basically 1 mile of no trawling from low water out to sea. There is no reason why you could not demand it be considered in any future proposals.

There were many occassions where I wanted to put my own personal comments in , especially as a SFC member who is rapidly learning the failings of this particular system of management of what you and I catch ( there I go again)

Cheers
Dave

[willywetegg]

Once again Dave, thanks a lot for your time. It must have taken quite a while to get that all down. There is a lot to take in as you say but the main message is for us to make our feelings known.

If we do not then we have no right to complain when or if changes are made that we do not agree with. I will have another read through this all again tomorrow and start to draft a letter myself. I think it is something we all need to do now.

Jim.

[Red5]

Wouldn't move to Poland mate, they've nicked all the Pike and Carp for the table!

Dave thanks for taking the time out to post about how things will and won't affect us over the next few years. I will certainly be taking all this information to our club and getting them to make representation to DEFRA.

Just as a thought (again) how about another section on the NESA website which could be a direct link to one of the angling bodies (SACN, NFSA etc) which could contain a news section on any new legislation and misdemeanours performed by commercial fishing so that we have more information to put pressure on our MP's to get the SFC's to get the commercial sector to clean up their act!