World Sea Fishing Forums banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 63 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,674 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Sussex sea anglers have been asking "Where are the RSA reps in the Sussex IFCA and what are they doing for sea angling?"

Well the Angling Trust Sussex Marine Region have been in communication with the two reps over recent months and thought it appropriate, as questions have been asked, to request them to compile a mini report for Sussex sea anglers to read. The ATSMR will distribute this report through our normal channels of communication, that includes WSF.

Please try and look on this as a positive move forwards for communication and don't let the anti's destroy this thread.

Lets try and stop this one being dragged to C&P.



Here is what Graham Furness had to say:


Steve and I joined Sussex IFCA at its inaugural meeting on the 29th October 2010, we were both determined to be effective advocates for recreational sea angling and to do our best to improve the health of fish stocks across the district. Steve was impatient to get down to making changes straight away but, with a lifetime of working with local government committees and government departments, I realised things would not be so straightforward. Unfortunately I have been proved right!

As Statutory Authorities the work of all IFCAs is, to a large extent, governed by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA). Initially this meant that a lot of 2011 was given over to developing plans and processes to meet future needs. The IFCA is required to publish both an Annual Plan and Annual Report on its work which details our objectives and how these would be achieved. These can be accessed on the Sussex IFCA website and hardcopies are circulated to key partners such as the Angling Trust

Several subcommittees were established to work with the officers on the implementation of Authority policy and plans and both Steve and I have volunteered for the Compliance and Technical subcommittees.

Compliance Subcommittee:
All commercial inshore fishing activities are governed both by European Union rules as well as local byelaws. The IFCA is responsible for most enforcement activities within 6 miles of the shore and the subcommittee has designed and implements a risk based approach to enforcement. This translates into a month on month risk matrix to highlight where a lack of compliance with the rules could lead to the greatest damage to fish stocks and/or the marine environment. This helps the enforcement officers to target their activities so as to have the greatest impact. Before each quarterly meeting of the authority the sub-committee meets to review the previous quarter and to confirm the major risks for the next.

Technical Subcommittee:
Defra has charged all IFCAs with the task of reviewing their current byelaws and deciding whether any are now obsolete and which ones need revision. The statutory byelaw making process is lengthy and complex and all changes to legislation need to be properly evidenced. The subcommittee has developed a ‘Review of management measures’ process which went to public consultation in 2012 and involved several stakeholder meetings. The review identified key priorities for future investigation including fishing close to shore with fixed and mobile gears.

As all such rules have to be clear, unambiguous and evidence based our priorities had to be agreed to enable the Research Officer to undertake any research activities considered necessary. We agreed that a modernised shellfish byelaw was the first priority given the economic value to inshore commercial fishers and their risk status as currently full or over exploited stocks. . This has taken over 12 months but we now have a draft byelaw which should be going to the main committee shortly to obtain agreement to start the consultation process. Neither Steve nor I thought it could be this complex but the result should be a fair and enforceable byelaw that should help to maintain healthy stocks of shellfish throughout the district. We can now turn our thoughts to the next topics including fixed gear and trawling close to shore – This is where the fun starts!

In between the main processes the authority has had to consider an emergency byelaw to protect the oyster stocks in Chichester Harbour, the introduction of measures to ensure protection for ‘red risk’ European Management Sites, the first round of MCZs including Kingmere Reef and the Sea Angling 2012 survey. The Research team have also been carrying out their small fish surveys (see the IFCA website for more details) which are considered essential for future management of fish stocks and producing various reports to aid the Technical subcommittee. The report on whelks in particular was a fascinating document on one of the main stocks (in financial terms) for the district.

Have Steve and I been effective advocates of sea angling? For a lot of the time the work hasn’t required this as a significant component of IFCA duties relate to the management of species which have little RSA relevance such as whelk, lobster, oyster, crab and cuttlefish.

We are however able to influence for positive change on a wide range of issues which are linked to Angling needs. For instance encouraging the gathering of evidence on recreational species, encouraging officers to attend RSA events in the county and generally ensuring that RSA issues are heard during discussions.

We did represent the authority at meetings in Weymouth when Sea Angling 2012 was first being considered and we have both attended meetings in London where angling has been on the agenda. We are liaising more with the Angling Trust Sussex Marine Region and hope to use this as a conduit to keep anglers informed about important issues that might affect our sport. What we will need from anglers is a commitment to ‘get involved’ when we are undertaking consultations, including those regarding future byelaws and management of MCZ sites, as these are likely to affect all marine users throughout Sussex and your views will count.

Tight lines,

Graham Furness
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,674 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Nice to see the IFCA RSA Reps giving some feedback.

Do the ATSMR plan on something similar here as well or will it be a case of guess ?
There has been plenty of AT meetings taking place for you to attend Drenia, especially the one on Brighton Marina that you personally requested.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,606 Posts
unfortunately 1 i forgot the date & meeting & had also just done 5x14 hr days , had i made it i probably would have slept through it.
I did ask on the meet section for any info from the meeting , I guess there were no minutes of the meeting made available ?
So re question , are there likely to be any ATSMR updates here or are there currently no plans or reps prepared to update us ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,877 Posts
Sussex sea anglers have been asking "Where are the RSA reps in the Sussex IFCA and what are they doing for sea angling?"

Well the Angling Trust Sussex Marine Region have been in communication with the two reps over recent months and thought it appropriate, as questions have been asked, to request them to compile a mini report for Sussex sea anglers to read. The ATSMR will distribute this report through our normal channels of communication, that includes WSF.

Please try and look on this as a positive move forwards for communication and don't let the anti's destroy this thread.

Lets try and stop this one being dragged to C&P.



Here is what Graham Furness had to s

Steve and I joined Sussex IFCA at its inaugural meeting on the 29th October 2010, we were both determined to be effective advocates for recreational sea angling and to do our best to improve the health of fish stocks across the district. Steve was impatient to get down to making changes straight away but, with a lifetime of working with local government committees and government departments, I realised things would not be so straightforward. Unfortunately I have been proved right!

As Statutory Authorities the work of all IFCAs is, to a large extent, governed by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA). Initially this meant that a lot of 2011 was given over to developing plans and processes to meet future needs. The IFCA is required to publish both an Annual Plan and Annual Report on its work which details our objectives and how these would be achieved. These can be accessed on the Sussex IFCA website and hardcopies are circulated to key partners such as the Angling Trust

Several subcommittees were established to work with the officers on the implementation of Authority policy and plans and both Steve and I have volunteered for the Compliance and Technical subcommittees.

Compliance Subcommittee:
All commercial inshore fishing activities are governed both by European Union rules as well as local byelaws. The IFCA is responsible for most enforcement activities within 6 miles of the shore and the subcommittee has designed and implements a risk based approach to enforcement. This translates into a month on month risk matrix to highlight where a lack of compliance with the rules could lead to the greatest damage to fish stocks and/or the marine environment. This helps the enforcement officers to target their activities so as to have the greatest impact. Before each quarterly meeting of the authority the sub-committee meets to review the previous quarter and to confirm the major risks for the next.

Technical Subcommittee:
Defra has charged all IFCAs with the task of reviewing their current byelaws and deciding whether any are now obsolete and which ones need revision. The statutory byelaw making process is lengthy and complex and all changes to legislation need to be properly evidenced. The subcommittee has developed a ‘Review of management measures’ process which went to public consultation in 2012 and involved several stakeholder meetings. The review identified key priorities for future investigation including fishing close to shore with fixed and mobile gears.

As all such rules have to be clear, unambiguous and evidence based our priorities had to be agreed to enable the Research Officer to undertake any research activities considered necessary. We agreed that a modernised shellfish byelaw was the first priority given the economic value to inshore commercial fishers and their risk status as currently full or over exploited stocks. . This has taken over 12 months but we now have a draft byelaw which should be going to the main committee shortly to obtain agreement to start the consultation process. Neither Steve nor I thought it could be this complex but the result should be a fair and enforceable byelaw that should help to maintain healthy stocks of shellfish throughout the district. We can now turn our thoughts to the next topics including fixed gear and trawling close to shore – This is where the fun starts!

In between the main processes the authority has had to consider an emergency byelaw to protect the oyster stocks in Chichester Harbour, the introduction of measures to ensure protection for ‘red risk’ European Management Sites, the first round of MCZs including Kingmere Reef and the Sea Angling 2012 survey. The Research team have also been carrying out their small fish surveys (see the IFCA website for more details) which are considered essential for future management of fish stocks and producing various reports to aid the Technical subcommittee. The report on whelks in particular was a fascinating document on one of the main stocks (in financial terms) for the district.

Have Steve and I been effective advocates of sea angling? For a lot of the time the work hasn’t required this as a significant component of IFCA duties relate to the management of species which have little RSA relevance such as whelk, lobster, oyster, crab and cuttlefish.

We are however able to influence for positive change on a wide range of issues which are linked to Angling needs. For instance encouraging the gathering of evidence on recreational species, encouraging officers to attend RSA events in the county and generally ensuring that RSA issues are heard during discussions.

We did represent the authority at meetings in Weymouth when Sea Angling 2012 was first being considered and we have both attended meetings in London where angling has been on the agenda. We are liaising more with the Angling Trust Sussex Marine Region and hope to use this as a conduit to keep anglers informed about important issues that might affect our sport. What we will need from anglers is a commitment to ‘get involved’ when we are undertaking consultations, including those regarding future byelaws and management of MCZ sites, as these are likely to affect all marine users throughout Sussex and your views will count.

Tight lines,

Graham Furness

This all looks like good stuff but can someone enlighten me to who the people are that administer ATSMR
and how they achieved this position ? In the past in the time of NFSA,the Sussex div.was run by elected officers
,is this the still the case,or is this just a group of people who have put themselves in this position ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,674 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
This all looks like good stuff but can someone enlighten me to who the people are that administer ATSMR
and how they achieved this position ? In the past in the time of NFSA,the Sussex div.was run by elected officers
,is this the still the case,or is this just a group of people who have put themselves in this position ?

Mike, This was answered a long time ago.

All the people behind the ATSMR are volunteers, giving their time freely.

Can we now get back on topic,

These two IFCA reps could help you secure a brighter future for the Sussex recreational fishery.

The question is - How much do you want it?

I hope you are not satisfied just catching rocklin and tings every day Mike, there is far more to sea angling than that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,674 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
unfortunately 1 i forgot the date & meeting & had also just done 5x14 hr days , had i made it i probably would have slept through it.
I did ask on the meet section for any info from the meeting , I guess there were no minutes of the meeting made available ?
So re question , are there likely to be any ATSMR updates here or are there currently no plans or reps prepared to update us ?


I believe there are updates/mini minutes if you like on every meeting. Should be minutes of the Brighton meeting on the ATSMR website if not now then in the near future?

Luckily, to date I have had nothing to do with the minutes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,877 Posts
Mike, This was answered a long time ago.

All the people behind the ATSMR are volunteers, giving their time freely.

Can we now get back on topic,

These two IFCA reps could help you secure a brighter future for the Sussex recreational fishery.

The question is - How much do you want it?

I hope you are not satisfied just catching rocklin and tings every day Mike, there is far more to sea angling than that.
I'm happy catching anything that gets results in a match,a fish is a fish and it still has to be caught.It is no harder now to catch big fish than it was years ago,in fact catching double figure hounds when they turn up is as easy as catching mackerel.but at least mackerel have a use,There are most probably more big bass caught now than there ever was when I was young,they are there if you have the inclination to sus it out.
The only problem I have with the local commercial fishing is the pair trawling,not for what they catch but the damage they have caused to the inshore environment,what was vast areas of kelp on the low water springs is decimated every year
The proper commercials are not stupid and would not be setting nets if there were no fish to be caught inshore,The anglers that know what the're doing are still catching plenty the others will blame everything ,except themselves for the lack of success
That'll do for now.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,845 Posts
this all sounds nice and cosy .

what bothers me , is that at least on the face of it these two guys have spent more time hugging whelks than looking at
what can be done on behalf of RSAs.

call me a cynic , but they are now in their fourth year and we still have no definitive info on bass or bream stocks .

RSAs have to take some of the blame ,because they just don't go to these meetings . if they did it may go some way to prevent regulation being imposed without the science being done.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,148 Posts
Good to here from them at last although I have to sort of agree with sealine I don't understand why spend four years on something that does not effect Angling perhaps they have made influential friends for angling that way.Maybe a monthly report? and for all the meeting I have attended including those chaired by I.F.C.A. not sure I have ever seen one of these guys do they understand the strength of feeling about the pair trawling
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,148 Posts
I'm happy catching anything that gets results in a match,a fish is a fish and it still has to be caught.It is no harder now to catch big fish than it was years ago,in fact catching double figure hounds when they turn up is as easy as catching mackerel.but at least mackerel have a use,There are most probably more big bass caught now than there ever was when I was young,they are there if you have the inclination to sus it out.
The only problem I have with the local commercial fishing is the pair trawling,not for what they catch but the damage they have caused to the inshore environment,what was vast areas of kelp on the low water springs is decimated every year
The proper commercials are not stupid and would not be setting nets if there were no fish to be caught inshore,The anglers that know what the're doing are still catching plenty the others will blame everything ,except themselves for the lack of success
That'll do for now.
I agree with a lot of what you have said Mike but how many Bass turn up in Worthing comps over 36cm let alone N.F.S.A. size 45cm in fact if we went back to fish in the bucket on N.F.S.A. limits most matches no one would way in hence the measure and return
I agree we want our Kelp back
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,674 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
Good to here from them at last although I have to sort of agree with sealine I don't understand why spend four years on something that does not effect Angling perhaps they have made influential friends for angling that way.Maybe a monthly report? and for all the meeting I have attended including those chaired by I.F.C.A. not sure I have ever seen one of these guys do they understand the strength of feeling about the pair trawling
I agree with you, Dave and Mike.

I can assure every Sussex sea angler that these two IFCA reps, in fact every Sussex IFCA rep is totally aware of anglers concerns with the pair trawling the inshore waters of the Sussex coast. Dave is right again when he says not enough anglers attend the meetings being organised for them to have their say. As you are fully aware Tony, every single SSFC, Sussex IFCA meeting with SSAN and now the ATSMR there has been mention of the depth of resentment towards pair trawling so close to our shoreline, furthermore it is not just sea anglers complaining, commercial fishermen are saying it as well.

The IFCA reps have explained why action takes so long, I know exactly how they feel as I have witnessed it myself. Hats off to them for sticking with it, four long years of frustration and getting nowhere fast. These reps are part of the stakeholder group appointed to work together for the long term better good of the fishery, that is why they have been involved in the management of other commercially viable marine species.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,828 Posts
Good to here from them at last although I have to sort of agree with sealine I don't understand why spend four years on something that does not effect Angling perhaps they have made influential friends for angling that way.Maybe a monthly report? and for all the meeting I have attended including those chaired by I.F.C.A. not sure I have ever seen one of these guys do they understand the strength of feeling about the pair trawling
here we go, pair trawling, bass as an example, the pairs are targeted as the wrong doers in the anglers fishery world. To put it into perspective,
their take of the bass in the uk is between 2-3 % of the total (LANDINGS) sealine, note, in the uk. I therefore relate that to 26 tonne per year at most, again throughout the uk based on 800 tonne landed. According to some that 800 could well be considered high.

As one set of pairs have in the past caught 28 tonne in one tow, how can anyone today intimate that the pairs are the problem. Facts please to counter.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,708 Posts
The IFCA reps have explained why action takes so long, I know exactly how they feel as I have witnessed it myself. Hats off to them for sticking with it, four long years of frustration and getting nowhere fast. These reps are part of the stakeholder group appointed to work together for the long term better good of the fishery, that is why they have been involved in the management of other commercially viable marine species.
In all honesty, the IFCAs have done a remarkably large amount of work in a remarkably short time. Consider that EU legislation passed in 1996 took thirteen years to get on the UK statute book as the Marine & Coastal Access Act, and the 2008 Data Collection Framework Regulation of 2008 took four years to be applied in Sea Angling 2012 of which the statistics appeared this year, six years from the Regulation being voted........

The IFCAs have priorities, and sea angling must take its turn. It must be stressed, in case members get the wrong idea, that sea anglers on the IFCAs are not there to promote sea angling. They are there as representative of a type of stakeholder, to offer opinion based on their knowledge of sea angling and sea anglers in the same way that bird watchers are there to offer opinion on birds & bird watchers. They are not there to campaign for sea anglers' rights and privileges. Any campaigning is done via the consultative process, not within the Committee itself.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,845 Posts
here we go, pair trawling, bass as an example, the pairs are targeted as the wrong doers in the anglers fishery world. To put it into perspective,
their take of the bass in the uk is between 2-3 % of the total (LANDINGS) sealine, note, in the uk. I therefore relate that to 26 tonne per year at most, again throughout the uk based on 800 tonne landed. According to some that 800 could well be considered high.

As one set of pairs have in the past caught 28 tonne in one tow, how can anyone today intimate that the pairs are the problem. Facts please to counter.
sorry Barry ,i'm not anti any legal c/f activity , but do you seriously expect us to believe that one pair caught the entire pair trawling catch for a year , and then went home and that was that .?

the pairs take has to be very seriously understated .any commercial fisherman will take his quota of any species that will make money .
he has no choice in the matter . he has a family , crew , and bank manager to support
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,828 Posts
sorry Barry ,i'm not anti any legal c/f activity , but do you seriously expect us to believe that one pair caught the entire pair trawling catch for a year , and then went home and that was that .?
not quite, 20 tonne was split between 2 boats, went to france and the remainder went to brixham, the legality was challenged on the transhipment at the time and the sfc ruled it was legal. That was with one tow.



That's not a swerve away from sparks's quote: not sure I have ever seen one of these guys do they understand the strength of feeling about the pair trawling

Evidence of decimation, or hype?
 

·
Member
Joined
·
13,170 Posts
Would there be as much antipathy if there were twice as many single trawlers?
 
1 - 20 of 63 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top