I recieved this e-mail today…………

[TF_Swimfeeder]

For immediate release: 12/01/11

Angling Trust joins Fish Fight campaign to give Sea Anglers a voice in discard debate and reform of Common Fisheries Policy

Over £600 million is spent annually by recreational sea anglers in England and Wales supporting an industry of over 19,000 jobs. The limited number of fish species upon which this expenditure depends accounts for only £30.3 million to commercial fishing.

Sea anglers are direct stakeholders in fish resources and The Angling Trust has joined the Fish Fight campaign to give recreational sea anglers a voice in an issue that concerns them and the future of their sport. We hope to open up the debate surrounding our depleted public fishery resources.

There are at least four reasons why commercial fishermen discard fish:

1. Fish are too small to be legally landed.
2. Fish for which there is no market.
3. Fish of a size and type for which there is a market but a vessel has no quota.
4. Fish for which a vessel has quota but chooses to discard small or low value (albeit legal) fish in favour of utilising its quota allowance to land larger fish which are worth more money. A practice referred to as ‘high-grading’.

Each of these categories of discards have their own complexities but are only symptoms of decades of systemic failure of European Governments to take their responsibilities for looking after our public fishery resources seriously.

For decades, the Common Fisheries Policy and the UK Government have functioned to protect the short term well-being of those who catch fish commercially rather than the well-being of the fishery resources themselves.

The real irony is that this ‘industry centric’ approach has actually been devastating to the very sector it has sought to protect because it is fundamentally flawed.It fails to recognise that the single most important ingredient in the debate is quite simply – FISH!

For many species, the EU minimum landing sizes are set below levels that allow fish to reproduce. Minimum mesh sizes are far too small. Not only do we not have closed seasons for shoals of spawning fish stocks – when they are most vulnerable – but this is often when many stocks are targeted most by commercial fishing vessels. For decades, politicians seeking short term popularity have disregarded the science. Close to shore nursery areas and estuaries are still subjected to trawling, one of the most indiscriminate methods of fishing. Gill netting and tangle netting have no linear restrictions so some inshore vessels are now working up to 40 miles of net.

The 2012 Common Fisheries Policy reform desperately requires a 180 degree turnaround that places FISH FIRST. Such a change in cultural mindset would be the best news over the long term for all who rely on our marine fish resources

—Ends—

Contact: [email protected] or 0844 77 00 616

Anyone that watched Hugh Fearnley Witttingstall’s programe last night must have felt the same sense of anger as me, these sort of issues are precisely why anglers should consider joining the Angling Trust.

[TF_Fred Davis]

you received an e-mail ? well at least someone likes you Bob lol

on the commercials I fish they have a good stocking policy

[tweet]

Anyone that watched Hugh Fearnley Witttingstall’s programe last night must have felt the same sense of anger as me, these sort of issues are precisely why anglers should consider joining the Angling Trust.

It angers me as well that a perm haired chef seems to have more clout than Anglings governing body. I think I will buy this instead of joining the AT

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/images/0747588694/ref=dp_image_0?ie=UTF8&n=266239&s=books

[TF_Swimfeeder]

@tweet wrote:

Anyone that watched Hugh Fearnley Witttingstall’s programe last night must have felt the same sense of anger as me, these sort of issues are precisely why anglers should consider joining the Angling Trust.

It angers me as well that a perm haired chef seems to have more clout than Anglings governing body. I think I will buy this instead of joining the AT

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/images/0747588694/ref=dp_image_0?ie=UTF8&n=266239&s=books

That book is of no use to people that suffer from being short sighted AND ignorant, spend your £20 on a taxi to the doctors to get your head out of your arse pal.

[TF_Decaff]

@Swimfeeder wrote:

@tweet wrote:

Anyone that watched Hugh Fearnley Witttingstall’s programe last night must have felt the same sense of anger as me, these sort of issues are precisely why anglers should consider joining the Angling Trust.

It angers me as well that a perm haired chef seems to have more clout than Anglings governing body. I think I will buy this instead of joining the AT

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/images/0747588694/ref=dp_image_0?ie=UTF8&n=266239&s=books

That book is of no use to people that suffer from being short sighted AND ignorant, spend your £20 on a taxi to the doctors to get your head out of your arse pal.

I take it YOU don’t think he’s got a point then Bob ???

[TF_Swimfeeder]

Decaff wrote;
I take it YOU don’t think he’s got a point then Bob ???

Tweet is an obvious opponent of the Angling Trust,and clearly believes that supporting them through membership fee’s is a waste of his hard earned, that is fair enough, but to then publically ridicule them for not being in a position to be as high profile as a TV personality is a bit rich don’t you think?
Talk about wanting it both ways, but alas, he is in the majority of anglers, they all want someone or something for nothing, money can get all sorts of things done.

[TF_Decaff]

Maybe so Bob,but I wish the AT had a few “Hughs” in their ranks all the same.

[TF_NW Cut Angler]

Why oppose the AT? Fine to argue X, Y and Z but surely every angler wants a strong unified governing body ?

[TF_sumo]

@NW Cut Angler wrote:

Why oppose the AT? Fine to argue X, Y and Z but surely every angler wants a strong unified governing body ?

NWCA I agree that anglers may need a voice but do we need to be governed ? to me that is the real question represented maybe governed no.And realistically would we be better employing some media guru to fight our causes or the current backbiting heirarchy that is currently within the AT.

[TF_caster robParticipant]

Good post sumo.

I stated when the AT was first mooted that I’d had quite enough governance already, thanks.

A trend I’ve noticed over the years is that the cost of government tends to rise rather than fall.

[TF_caster robParticipant]

@ swimfeeder:

“Talk about wanting it both ways, but alas, he is in the majority of anglers, they all want someone or something for nothing, money can get all sorts of things done.”

Not me Bob.

I don’t want anyone, or anything, (besides an absence of interfering busybodies) irrespective of cost.

[tweet]

Swimfeeder wrote:

Decaff wrote]

Money is not the issue for me , it is about supporting something that clicks for me and Im afraid most of the issues they oppose or support don’t . Lets ask ourselves 1 question why do the majority of match anglers that are in the AT join ? is it because they want to be governed or is it to make them eligible to fish the various AT matches? give it a couple of weeks and I am sure the fisho ticket debacle will start again.

[TF_paulD]

Afraid the AT paid officials always sounds to me like the typical fishing club comittee – well meaning but usually just made up of control freaks who want to rule and “govern” everything and forget why most of the members join the club.

[TF_ScottT]

“Angling Trust joins Fish Fight campaign to give Sea Anglers a voice in discard debate and reform of Common Fisheries Policy”

Are these the same sea anglers that a certain person was wanting thrown out the AT a few weeks ago?

[TF_NW Cut Angler]

The term ‘governing’ body is an historical one and it is what the Government / Media would use. I am glad we all seem to agree that we benefit from being represented.

Rob, slightly off at a tangent but I do like to try to educate you 😉 Still on IPlayer watch Ian Hislop’s The Age of the Do-Gooders Very enlightening and in most ways contradictory to your own values albeit one. IMO it highlights why we as a nation lost the plot thereafter and how the Rob’s of today are but mere victims.

Get it watched Rob. HOMEWORK!! 🙂

[TF_sumo]

ScottT wrote:

“Angling Trust joins Fish Fight campaign to give Sea Anglers a voice in discard debate and reform of Common Fisheries Policy”

How this should read is “Angling Trust leads the Fight to campaign for Sea Anglers to have a voice in discard debate and reform of Common Fisheries Policy” Hugh Fearnley Whittenstall popular TV chef has backed the AT campaign . If the AT had good PR I am sure that is how it would read.

[TF_wightangler]

Good and well made Post Bob,
Sadly most non-AT members seem to have no real idea or desire to bother to find out the lengthy and detailed campaigns for angling and fish that the AT & Fish legal are heavily involved in.
That stems from the fact that the regular AT newsletters go out to only AT members which is logical.
However, if people actually bothered to read the campaign and update section on the AT site they might actually learn what the AT is doing on anglers behalf;

http://www.anglingtrust.net/landing.asp?section=26&sectionTitle=Campaigning

http://www.anglingtrust.net/page.asp?section=517&sectionTitle=Campaign Strategy 2010%3A What the Angling Trust is doing for you

That Hugh F/W and the AT find common ground on a serious national issue that involves both anglers AND the wider non angling public is surely good news- and cheap and snide ignorant remarks by ‘anglers’ who state they are only interested in themselves shows why angling and effective representation at govt. level is hard to gather collective support.

[TF_caster robParticipant]

NW Cut Angler wrote:

The term ‘governing’ body is an historical one and it is what the Government / Media would use. I am glad we all seem to agree that we benefit from being represented.

Rob, slightly off at a tangent but I do like to try to educate you ]

“I am glad we all seem to agree that we benefit from being represented.”

In which case a reperesentative body rather than a governing one is the requirement.

Maybe you should concentrate on your own education rather than concern yourself with mine.

[TF_Fred Davis]

I have seen on previous AT posts a lot of anglers saying that the angling trust can not call itself the voice of angling when such a small number of anglers join it, maybe they have a point? Do the majority of anglers only join the AT to fish there AT events, I wonder in percentage terms what the membership is compared to the number of rod licenses sold? anyone know?

[TF_sumo]

Less than 2% I would say, but getting a actual figure from the AT may be difficult but sure it was around 13,000 last year.

[tweet]

@Fred Davis wrote:

I have seen on previous AT posts a lot of anglers saying that the angling trust can not call itself the voice of angling when such a small number of anglers join it, maybe they have a point? Do the majority of anglers only join the AT to fish there AT events, I wonder in percentage terms what the membership is compared to the number of rod licenses sold? anyone know?

Don’t know but there is a lot of support from this lot

http://www.whitbyseaanglers.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=19180.0

[TF_Fred Davis]

yes I see the 3 posts on the page are all moaning about the AT either having to join in the case of wanting to fish AT matches or being a member through hobsons choice because their club is affiliated. don’t sound promissing for the AT does it!

[TF_caster robParticipant]

Whitby seaanglers seem to have it sussed.

I thought closed-shops went out in the 80’s.

[TF_NW Cut Angler]

Rob ones Education is a constant process and I enjoy spreading education to as many people as possible. Watch the programme, contradicts a lot of your own views whilst supporting one. One that many liberals / left wing advocates have forgotten.

Closed shop always existed, less so than in history but still exist and the biggest closed shop blights is amongst the upper classes, high earners, renowned education establishments.

Never be afraid of education Rob ~think

[TF_caster robParticipant]

I’ve never feared education, that’s why I went to a proper school.

It’s the “educators” that give me cause for concern.

[TF_NW Cut Angler]

@caster rob wrote:

I’ve never feared education, that’s why I went to a proper school.

It’s the “educators” that give me cause for concern.

‘Proper’ one would suggest that such a clumsy ill fitting phrase does not reflect well upon the education afforded to you.

Better schools and better teachers struggling against the tide of a society lacking vital qualities. A very harsh message that no politician will ever confront the electorate with. Therein is the greatest tragedy of the modern era and the one thing that could transform our society.

You owe your educators so much Rob. never forget that. We all do.

[TF_caster robParticipant]

I certainly owe my educators plenty, the Grammar School teachers were good enough to manange without “teaching assistants” for a start.

Education can transform any society, it just depends what you teach it.

[TF_NW Cut Angler]

Education is an holistic process Rob therein lies the greatest issue and one which society / politicians are afraid to deal with.

TA’s sign of the times / students I daresay. TA’s can support the disabled so they could / will be in all schools Rob incl grammar schools.

Some of the worst teachers I have known Rob have been in Grammar Schools. Given that is correct does that suggest that the quality of the teacher is not the greatest determinant of academic success.

Collectively, the quality of teachers has improved across the board. Alas, Society has deteriorated.

[TF_caster robParticipant]

“TA’s sign of the times / students I daresay. TA’s can support the disabled so they could / will be in all schools Rob incl grammar schools.”

As the class-warfare demolition launched against Grammar Schools by Shirley Williams and her ilk had been almost completed before TA’s were even instigated I think that is irrelevant.

“Some of the worst teachers I have known Rob have been in Grammar Schools. Given that is correct does that suggest that the quality of the teacher is not the greatest determinant of academic success.”

That is immeasurable subjectivity and so the validity is indeterminable. I’d suggest that higher pass thresholds in recognised exams (not coursework) is a truer yardstick. Sadly the bar seems to have been lowered so the results appear better.

“Collectively, the quality of teachers has improved across the board. Alas, Society has deteriorated.”

So these higher teaching standards haven’t contributed to the deterioration of society?

“http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Nl1/Newsroom/DG_175719”

Hardly looks like raising of standards to me, if you stand still long enough……………………………………………………………………………………………………

[Author]

Posts