World Sea Fishing Forums banner

61 - 72 of 72 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,102 Posts
Discussion Starter #61
Most of us are quite capable of taking responsibility for our actions without the need for your machinations. Been doing it for years now long before the advent of the AT.

The one thing I have learnt is that you and your colleagues are not to be trusted with the future of sea angling.
Or try it your way which is to Run and Hide, Say Nothing and be Thankful for Nothing. Yes that one sure served us well over the last four decades.

No thanks, I'll take my chances with the Angling Trust.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,831 Posts
Or try it your way which is to Run and Hide, Say Nothing and be Thankful for Nothing. Yes that one sure served us well over the last four decades.

No thanks, I'll take my chances with the Angling Trust.
yep because when in the last four decades did we end up with bag limits and restrictions (despite BASS claiming bass were endangered since the 70s) oh yes since the AT got involved, yeah its been a real success story since they got involved.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,617 Posts
For sure not everyone agreed with the initial strategy - but some would say that it was the responsible first step to show willingness to the cause, AND the original Bag Limits for RSA have been relaxed due to lobbying by the AT?

Mart
Some would say it was naïve and irresponsible.......and also ask what percentage of the membership decided on that course of action......;)
As for bag limits being relaxed.....you do realise you've now got a bag limit forever.....it's not going away...
That is also now the standard model for every species that anglers interact with....
Naïve probably doesn't do it enough justice.
But then you look at the AT input and response to the fisheries bill.....
Actively calling for that type of management.......
And calling for UK wide regulations....???
Maybe it's not naïve after all......looks more calculated to me...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,442 Posts
Personally, I'm not in the slightest bit interested in how many fish I'm allowed to take home...that isn't what fishing, sorry, Angling is about imho...
But I'm VERY interested in how many fish, of any species, are actually in the sea to target?
Reduced stocks through unsustainable fishing, environmental and pollution issues are the real restrictions we should be worried about imho but it depends on agenda I guess at the end of the day...
Mart.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,102 Posts
Discussion Starter #65 (Edited)
yep because when in the last four decades did we end up with bag limits and restrictions (despite BASS claiming bass were endangered since the 70s) oh yes since the AT got involved, yeah its been a real success story since they got involved.
You mean the fact that anglers were able to force a MLS increase on bass to 42cm's allowing them to be able to breed at least once before being taken for commercial profit. This against fierce opposition by CF for 3 decades.

Or the fact that CF are severely restricted in the number of bass they can target

Or the fact that adrift netting for bass is being banned

Or the fact that anglers were able to stop the commercial pair trawling for bass in the Western approaches targeting our pre spawning brood bass stocks

Yes I agree it has been a very successful story.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,831 Posts
Personally, I'm not in the slightest bit interested in how many fish I'm allowed to take home...that isn't what fishing, sorry, Angling is about imho...
But I'm VERY interested in how many fish, of any species, are actually in the sea to target?
Reduced stocks through unsustainable fishing, environmental and pollution issues are the real restrictions we should be worried about imho but it depends on agenda I guess at the end of the day...
Mart.
it might not be what angling is about for you but it is for quite a few
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,831 Posts
You mean the fact that anglers were able to force a MLS increase on bass to 42cm's allowing them to be able to breed at least once before being taken for commercial profit. This against fierce opposition by CF for 3 decades.

Or the fact that CF are severely restricted in the number of bass they can target

Or the fact that adrift netting for bass is being banned

Or the fact that anglers were able to stop the pair commercial trawling for bass in the Western approaches targeting our pre spawning brood bass stocks

Yes I agree it has been a very successful story.
Or that we now have bag limits and restricted seasons which we never had before the ATs involvement

Or we can no longer take eels despite commercials still being allowed to

As above with tope (commercials once again are allowed a by catch albeit a very limited one) and yes I realise few anglers would ever consider taking tope but it's still a right we lost thanks to the ATs love of intersectoral disputes

Now if you had got them to increase the number of bass surveys and recruitment surveys they carry out instead of relying on the same ones taken from the same area year in and year out (they even dropped the thames survey I believe because it didnt fit in with what their "models" were spitting out) and limited data from commercial catch so that we actually have a clue as to what the stock levels and recruitment are really like (what are bass stock levels like for scotland for instance) I might have actually said well done.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,102 Posts
Discussion Starter #68
Or that we now have bag limits and restricted seasons which we never had before the ATs involvement

Or we can no longer take eels despite commercials still being allowed to

As above with tope (commercials once again are allowed a by catch albeit a very limited one) and yes I realise few anglers would ever consider taking tope but it's still a right we lost thanks to the ATs love of intersectoral disputes
Excellent post this, it shows that you have to go backwards to a previous decade to find a problem in something the AT may have done.

As regards bag limits, it is a tool used to prevent long term draconian restrictions on anglers and a method practiced all over the world where much better recreational fisheries have been built over decades.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,282 Posts
I may be at fault here, but I cannot find a reference [via google] on who exactly the "F" are the Scot govs chief medical officer and who is the chief scientific advisor to the First meenister;

You know the ones who stand there on TV and don't have questions or say anything.

Gieus a clue someone will ye.

PS GREAT THREAD REG.


As they say there's a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,831 Posts
Excellent post this, it shows that you have to go backwards to a previous decade to find a problem in something the AT may have done.

As regards bag limits, it is a tool used to prevent long term draconian restrictions on anglers and a method practiced all over the world where much better recreational fisheries have been built over decades.
yeah its excellent, so I had to go back to a previous decade, well since this decade is only 5 months old thats hardly like going back to the prehistoric times even if it was going back many years the fact that the AT still hasnt corrected those balls up says a lot to me
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,102 Posts
Discussion Starter #71
yeah its excellent, so I had to go back to a previous decade, well since this decade is only 5 months old thats hardly like going back to the prehistoric times even if it was going back many years the fact that the AT still hasnt corrected those balls up says a lot to me
Short memory when it suits you, these were decisions made 10+ years ago.

The AT has asked anglers, via at least two national surveys I am aware off, if anglers wanted the AT to try and reverse those decisions. The eel topic received the most responses, eleven if my memory serves me well and out of the eleven responses not a single one wanted the AT to reverse them. I do believe that means anglers, or shall I say anglers that a) are aware of the rules and b) wish to comment on them do not consider those decisions to be errors. Personally I would rather them be reversed but I also know I am in a tiny minority.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,442 Posts
it might not be what angling is about for you but it is for quite a few
I dare say that is the case for quite a few on here, but that is absolutely miles away from claiming that the majority feel that way.....

The AT certainly support their membership well, but the vast majority of sea anglers arent members....of that there is no denying.

Hopefully the recent upturn in publicity and interest in sea angling they have shown, plus Jamie Cook input, will address this to some extent ?

But the lack of numbers the AT have still dwarfs the minority of die hard AT critics too IMHO.
Mart.
 
61 - 72 of 72 Posts
Top