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 hasnt 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
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 hasnt 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
