World Sea Fishing Forums banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,105 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
This is not entirely tongue in cheek, as in if they decide to introduce licences for Sea Anglers, these are only fair and reasonable terms under which to do it:


Mr Ben Bradshaw MP
DEFRA
By e-mail:

26th April 2007.

Dear Mr Bradshaw,

I have been reading with increasing disquiet the proposal to make Recreational Sea Anglers (RSA) buy a licence.

What benefit may I ask will they obtain from such a requirement?

Answer: None.

Reasons:
  • You will not restrict commercial fisherman from netting or trawling in British Territorial Waters (BTW), to the extent necessary to preserve and allow the recovery of fish stocks.
  • You will not ban all foreign, or other EU state commercials from fishing in BTW.
  • You have backed down on the MLS limit for Bass, despite all scientific advice to the contrary.
  • You have resolutely and manifestly refused to accept independently qualified and quantified scientific research that overall fish-stocks in BTW are on the point of collapse due to commercial over-fishing and the idiotic discard and quota policies of the last 30 years.
  • Why should RSA pay a licence fee to, as Defra have put it, have their experience enhanced, when it will never be so due to the above reasons?
  • Why should RSA pay for the construction of facilities, car parks, toilets, disabled access etc that will be used by all people as well as RSA?
Therefore I have come up with a fairer proposal:
  • Every member of the UK and NI population should be required to purchase a Recreational Sea Users Licence. (RSUL)
  • The cost should be £10 per annum. This will generate £600 million in revenue and cover the costs of the facilities mentioned in point 6 above, without discrimination.
  • Any one found within 400 yards of the upper tidal flows of any river or the coast line, as defined by the mean high-water mark, who does not possess an RSUL, will be subject to a fine of £500 or 3 months imprisonment. After all, what is the point of having a system like this if it is not properly enforced.
  • All RSA wishing to fish will have to buy an RSA endorsement for £20 pa.
  • In return, the Government will close BTW to all commercial boats except those registered and based in UK Ports. No fish will be allowed to be landed here by any other boats.
  • The MLS for all species of fish caught commercially will be raised to a size where they are big enough to have spawned at least twice.
  • All UK registered boats, will have a Total Allowable Catch (TACs), of any species, each year, which will be agreed after consultation with the ICES and the TAC will be restricted to their recommendations. The TAC will include undersize fish which will be landed and where a boat lands more than 10% of its TAC in undersize fish, they will then be disbarred from going out again for 3 months.
  • No discards will be allowed.
  • All commercial fishing boats will pay a licence of £1000 per annum, there are I believe some 3000 such boats, to cover the cost of enforcement of TACs and discards. All offenders will be subject to fines of £50,000 and or imprisonment.
  • The number of Commercial Licences issued in any 12 month period will be the lesser of the current UK based only boats or the amount which ICEs recommend that will allow for stocks to be maintained or recover.
  • All known areas of the sea where fish collect to spawn will be closed to commercial boats for the spawning season concerned.
You will see from this excellent proposal that it benefits and penalises all on a strictly fair basis. It is self-financing, easy to police and maintain, it allows for the continued survival of the UK fish stocks and UK commercial fleet. It also ensures that the RSA community are not discriminated against and have their experience enhanced as set out in your white paper. These are the only fair terms under which RSA could be licenced. Any other proposals to make RSA pay a licence fee would be an infringement of their human rights.


Henry Wodehouse
 
Joined
·
15,082 Posts
This is not entirely tongue in cheek, as in if they decide to introduce licences for Sea Anglers, these are only fair and reasonable terms under which to do it:


Mr Ben Bradshaw MP
DEFRA
By e-mail:

26th April 2007.

Dear Mr Bradshaw,

I have been reading with increasing disquiet the proposal to make Recreational Sea Anglers (RSA) buy a licence.

What benefit may I ask will they obtain from such a requirement?

Answer: None.

Reasons:
  • You will not restrict commercial fisherman from netting or trawling in British Territorial Waters (BTW), to the extent necessary to preserve and allow the recovery of fish stocks.
  • You will not ban all foreign, or other EU state commercials from fishing in BTW.
  • You have backed down on the MLS limit for Bass, despite all scientific advice to the contrary.
  • You have resolutely and manifestly refused to accept independently qualified and quantified scientific research that overall fish-stocks in BTW are on the point of collapse due to commercial over-fishing and the idiotic discard and quota policies of the last 30 years.
  • Why should RSA pay a licence fee to, as Defra have put it, have their experience enhanced, when it will never be so due to the above reasons?
  • Why should RSA pay for the construction of facilities, car parks, toilets, disabled access etc that will be used by all people as well as RSA?
Therefore I have come up with a fairer proposal:
  • Every member of the UK and NI population should be required to purchase a Recreational Sea Users Licence. (RSUL)
  • The cost should be £10 per annum. This will generate £600 million in revenue and cover the costs of the facilities mentioned in point 6 above, without discrimination.
  • Any one found within 400 yards of the upper tidal flows of any river or the coast line, as defined by the mean high-water mark, who does not possess an RSUL, will be subject to a fine of £500 or 3 months imprisonment. After all, what is the point of having a system like this if it is not properly enforced.
  • All RSA wishing to fish will have to buy an RSA endorsement for £20 pa.
  • In return, the Government will close BTW to all commercial boats except those registered and based in UK Ports. No fish will be allowed to be landed here by any other boats.
  • The MLS for all species of fish caught commercially will be raised to a size where they are big enough to have spawned at least twice.
  • All UK registered boats, will have a Total Allowable Catch (TACs), of any species, each year, which will be agreed after consultation with the ICES and the TAC will be restricted to their recommendations. The TAC will include undersize fish which will be landed and where a boat lands more than 10% of its TAC in undersize fish, they will then be disbarred from going out again for 3 months.
  • No discards will be allowed.
  • All commercial fishing boats will pay a licence of £1000 per annum, there are I believe some 3000 such boats, to cover the cost of enforcement of TACs and discards. All offenders will be subject to fines of £50,000 and or imprisonment.
  • The number of Commercial Licences issued in any 12 month period will be the lesser of the current UK based only boats or the amount which ICEs recommend that will allow for stocks to be maintained or recover.
  • All known areas of the sea where fish collect to spawn will be closed to commercial boats for the spawning season concerned.
You will see from this excellent proposal that it benefits and penalises all on a strictly fair basis. It is self-financing, easy to police and maintain, it allows for the continued survival of the UK fish stocks and UK commercial fleet. It also ensures that the RSA community are not discriminated against and have their experience enhanced as set out in your white paper. These are the only fair terms under which RSA could be licenced. Any other proposals to make RSA pay a licence fee would be an infringement of their human rights.


Henry Wodehouse
Only one problem with your proposals I see there Henry,old bean........BB dont run the fishing,Brussels and the CFP do.....What do want the man to do? You know he dont have the power to do any of it.......Good idea though...some of it at least! :)

Ron

Ron
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,105 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
I do understand that, hopefully the idiot, sorry I meant the Honourable Minister, will realise that it makes the point therefore that as Defra cannot possibly enhance the UK RSA experience, without kicking out the foreign boats, due to Brussels, they should in turn not make us buy licences. To my mind one should not go without the other.
 
G

·
A very well written letter Henry! I doubt it will ever see the Ministers red box but you never know! Is there anyway that the Freedom of Information Act could be used to flush out some data on the subject?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,105 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
A very well written letter Henry! I doubt it will ever see the Ministers red box but you never know! Is there anyway that the Freedom of Information Act could be used to flush out some data on the subject?
Would be nice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
749 Posts
this proposal is the most sensible thing i have heard of in years! i will gladly pay a tenner for all this to be put in place. the only thing is we are asking politicians to to listen to common sense!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,883 Posts
Well guys you can actually ask any of the slack handful of wierdo's and budding politicians what are their proposals to ........" Any part of Henry's letter you chose ", when they come happy grovelling and tappingon your door in the next few days.

Then shut your trap and let the nerk standing on your doorstep open theirs .

With a little skill you can always ask the questions and get them to blurt out a response .... let them work for you ...... not the other way around .

Don't tell them you will vote for them either , Say something like , " I'll have to see what the other campaigners are saying before I can commit my vote to anyone " . Keep them worrying and thinking about what you have said, treating everyone of them the same may just get some of the letter's contents noticed and discussed at higher levels than at the doorstep campaign level.

David
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,986 Posts
Last time they came groveling to my door saying "please vote for me" i asked this question "why should i pay a tax to park my car outside my street door" answer
"we are sorry to disturb you" "please carry on with what you were doing" "well what are you going to do about it"? they did not even have the courtsy to reply,
Well i wish you luck with Mr Bradshaw,but my experence is they will compleatly ignore you or you will get a non commital reply from the lower rank,but still take your money.after all who will help pay for Mr Blairs Mortage`s
 

·
King of Kings
Joined
·
16,043 Posts
This is not entirely tongue in cheek, as in if they decide to introduce licences for Sea Anglers, these are only fair and reasonable terms under which to do it:


Mr Ben Bradshaw MP
DEFRA
By e-mail:

26th April 2007.

Dear Mr Bradshaw,

I have been reading with increasing disquiet the proposal to make Recreational Sea Anglers (RSA) buy a licence.

What benefit may I ask will they obtain from such a requirement?

Answer: None.

Reasons:
  • You will not restrict commercial fisherman from netting or trawling in British Territorial Waters (BTW), to the extent necessary to preserve and allow the recovery of fish stocks.
  • You will not ban all foreign, or other EU state commercials from fishing in BTW.
  • You have backed down on the MLS limit for Bass, despite all scientific advice to the contrary.
  • You have resolutely and manifestly refused to accept independently qualified and quantified scientific research that overall fish-stocks in BTW are on the point of collapse due to commercial over-fishing and the idiotic discard and quota policies of the last 30 years.
  • Why should RSA pay a licence fee to, as Defra have put it, have their experience enhanced, when it will never be so due to the above reasons?
  • Why should RSA pay for the construction of facilities, car parks, toilets, disabled access etc that will be used by all people as well as RSA?
Therefore I have come up with a fairer proposal:
  • Every member of the UK and NI population should be required to purchase a Recreational Sea Users Licence. (RSUL)
  • The cost should be £10 per annum. This will generate £600 million in revenue and cover the costs of the facilities mentioned in point 6 above, without discrimination.
  • Any one found within 400 yards of the upper tidal flows of any river or the coast line, as defined by the mean high-water mark, who does not possess an RSUL, will be subject to a fine of £500 or 3 months imprisonment. After all, what is the point of having a system like this if it is not properly enforced.
  • All RSA wishing to fish will have to buy an RSA endorsement for £20 pa.
  • In return, the Government will close BTW to all commercial boats except those registered and based in UK Ports. No fish will be allowed to be landed here by any other boats.
  • The MLS for all species of fish caught commercially will be raised to a size where they are big enough to have spawned at least twice.
  • All UK registered boats, will have a Total Allowable Catch (TACs), of any species, each year, which will be agreed after consultation with the ICES and the TAC will be restricted to their recommendations. The TAC will include undersize fish which will be landed and where a boat lands more than 10% of its TAC in undersize fish, they will then be disbarred from going out again for 3 months.
  • No discards will be allowed.
  • All commercial fishing boats will pay a licence of £1000 per annum, there are I believe some 3000 such boats, to cover the cost of enforcement of TACs and discards. All offenders will be subject to fines of £50,000 and or imprisonment.
  • The number of Commercial Licences issued in any 12 month period will be the lesser of the current UK based only boats or the amount which ICEs recommend that will allow for stocks to be maintained or recover.
  • All known areas of the sea where fish collect to spawn will be closed to commercial boats for the spawning season concerned.
You will see from this excellent proposal that it benefits and penalises all on a strictly fair basis. It is self-financing, easy to police and maintain, it allows for the continued survival of the UK fish stocks and UK commercial fleet. It also ensures that the RSA community are not discriminated against and have their experience enhanced as set out in your white paper. These are the only fair terms under which RSA could be licenced. Any other proposals to make RSA pay a licence fee would be an infringement of their human rights.


Henry Wodehouse
well done edgey for trying maybe if everone else wrote to him or there local mp something mite get done after all thats what but them in for,sadly ron right(god that hurt)eu make all chosse about sea but we can do what some of other countries in eu do and do what we like and get away with it like they do.shaggy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
706 Posts
MLS that allows fish to spawn at least twice....

....and no discards?!!!:g:

My god these fisherman better have a taste for fish... they are gonna have to eat some serious tonnage out at sea before the come back to port!!!:blink: :blink: :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,877 Posts
if they are going to bring in a sea licence,why dont they just make it all in one!you buy the licence and it entitles you to fish sea,river and ponds.havent thought his through so there is probably a flaw in it somewhere and im sure you will pick me up on it!cheers
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top