PRESENT: Stuart McPherson (SMcP) Chair, David Henry (DH), Alan Brothers (AB), John Brooks (JB), Dave Morton (DM), Leon Roskilley (LR), Peter McConnell (PMcC) and David Rigden (DR)
APOLOGIES: Nigel Proctor, David Rowe, Tony Williams, Mike Patten and Tim MacPherson
MINUTES OF LAST MEETING:
The minutes of the meeting held on the 25th February 2009 had been circulated and were accepted as a true record.
1 )MATTERS ARISING:
1. Defra Consultation on IFCA Boundaries: The agreed comments had been prepared by Richard Ferre’ and submitted to DEFRA. JB agreed to circulate a copy of the document for the information of the members. ACTION JB/SMcP
DM asked if the members were in receipt of the ASFC minutes as they appeared to be having considerable input. He passed a copy to the Chair in order that they could be copied to the members.
It was apparent from the discussion which followed that the perception was that the original concept of a new organisation was being diluted. SMcP pointed out that this had been included in the AT response to the Lords and had been reiterated verbally to DEFRA. A protracted debate continued and it was the consensus that AT should strive to obtain the recognition our contribution to the economy warranted.
JB agreed that he would maintain a scrutiny of the progress of the Marine and Coastal Access Bill(M&CA Bill)with particular reference to the IFCA question.
Item 9) on the Agenda was brought forward as this also related to SFCs JB outlined the contacts that had been made with various RSA representatives on the SFCs and it was agreed that we should set up a communications link. DM made the point that this would be particularly useful for new members or sole members of SFCs as in many cases they were the lone voice for RSA and support and guidance in addition to a focal point for problems arising would be welcome. LR suggested that the presence of RSAs in the public gallery would help impress on the Committees that there are serious numbers involved in their localities. JB commented on the short notice given on SFC minutes in the main the previous meeting minutes only appeared two weeks prior to the subsequent meeting. It was agreed that JB would coordinate the contact with the RSAs on the SFCs in England and draw up broad terms of reference of the purpose and intent of the link. Action JB. In order to establish the position regarding vacancies on the SFCs SMcP would contact Rebecca Dominey
SMcP referred to communication by the Kent and Essex SFC to Defra and ATs response. LR related the reactions and response to the letter at the K&ESFC meeting on 11th inst. This was totally negative.
1. SMcP sought the approval of the Committee to pursue the issue once the formal response from K&ESFC was received. AGREED.
2. A further proposal to raise issues with other SFCs where they suggested restrictions on the RSA sector that had no scientific substantiation or lacked parity with other stakeholders was also AGREED.
2. Bait Digging Fareham Creek: SMcP summarised the progress that Tony Williams had made with NE in relation to Fareham. A discussion then addressed the problems associated with Commercial Bait digging but conceded that a large proportion of RSAs were obliged to source their bait from tackle shops and consequently there was a demand for the service of organised bait digging. LR then pointed out that a Local Authority in Essex actually licensed the organised bait diggers and also that bait digging was now surfacing on the statute books as it was mentioned in the M&CA Bill. PMcC suggested that as a formal agreement was being progressed by TW and NE in respect of Fareham perhaps it was appropriate that we draw up a policy that encouraged voluntary agreements. It was agreed that this would be appropriate but would benefit from an input from TW in the formulation. Agreed to be considered further at the next meeting.
2) Art 47 Matters outstanding and update:
1) SMcP summarised the current position and that the latest that had been communicated from DEFRA was that a revised document was being produced for submission to the Council of Ministers for their meeting in July.
2) SMcP had met with the Shadow Fisheries Minister Richard Benyon MP. and a productive dialogue had ensued which led to the invitation to meet with the EU Commission.
3) SMcP along with Mark Lloyd (CEO AT) and Jan Kappel Secretary General of EAA met with Commissioner Borg and his staff. Summarised the meeting and the Commissioner repeating his assertion that he was not wishing to impose restrictions on any anglers unless there was a significant impact on stock subject to a recovery plan. The Member States would be given two years to capture the data from the date of commencement of the Regulation and submit it to the EU Scientific panel for determination of significant impact. The delegation pointed out that this would require the imposition of restrictions in order to establish the data. It was apparent that this had not been addressed by the Commission. LR pointed out that the Fisheries Commission which had previously been under the aegis of EG Fisheries would be subservient to DG Environment and this had a strong influence of commercial and environmental interests. PMcC suggested that the pressure must be sustained and that we should emphasise that it was totally inappropriate to impose restrictions on the UK RSA sector to cure an apparent problem with Mediterranean blue fin tuna. AB/JB reiterated the need to continue actively engaging with all sectors and AB should contact all MEPs again after the European elections on June 4th. Action AB
3) Cefas/RSA Data collection co-operation.
SMcP summarised the events following the decision at the meeting of the CG on 25th February. He asked whether the AT should go forward with the research into gathering its own data and there was general agreement that it should, especially since the decision had been publicised and approved by the Board. LR expressed concern that AT said it would do its own survey. The magnitude of such a project was severe. A general debate followed on the pros and cons and the problems of identifying the required extent of the data and sourcing available data.
AB questioned whether having commissioned its own research through CEFAS, Defra or the EU fisheries commissioner, would be likely to pay serious attention to figures produced by the AT, however reliable they might be. JB intimated that we had to have data and it had to be above scrutiny and that we should canvas the opinions of a number of organizations who can carry out this type of research. Agreed.
PMcC related his experiences with previous surveys and experience world wide and indicated the need to major on the socio economic impact. He agreed to provide a draft list of topics that required addressing and would circulate it to members. Action PMcC
4) JNCC/MCZs REPORT:
SMcP updated the meeting on the current position of the four project areas and PMcC related his experience and the progression of Finding Sanctuary the South West Project. An in-depth discussion concluded that it was essential that we organise local participation by RSAs and advise the Project teams when formed of AT’s commitment to being involved. SMcP to write to Sue Wells Project Leader for the Eastern Channel. SMcP Action
It was agreed that there was a need for a central co-ordination and as a consequence of his involvement to date that SMcP should fulfil this role. SMcP agreed and informed the meeting he would review the recently published DEFRA Guidelines and summarise his findings. Action SMcP
5) Bait Digging North East:
DM informed the meeting that there was a recent addition to the Fisheries Officers reports in the North east relating to bait digging sightings. From the previous discussions this could be attributed to the references in the M&CA Bill and the MCZs and Cefas involvement with the NE Survey. The Committee agreed that this trend should be watched closely Action ALL.
6) RSA Representation on SFCs and Coordinating RSA reps.
Included in the discussion on IFCAs at 1(1) above.
7) Shark Trust.
JB outlined the current activity by the Shark Trust in endeavouring to gather more comprehensive data on sharks and rays and suggested that a presentation by representatives of the Shark Trust could be useful in gaining a greater awareness and fostering relations. Agreed JB to arrange invitation.
Note we had agreed that we would invite the >10m representative body to a meeting to be considered at next meeting with a view to invite to subsequent meeting.
SFCs REPS UPDATES
Included under IFCA discussion at 1(1) above.
9) AOB
1) MCZ Defra re issued guidelines:
SMcP to review the document and summarise the contents.
2) DEFRA consultation on the Control Regulation Impact Assessment:
The EAA response had been circulated and it was agreed that SMcP would prepare a draft and circulate it to the members with responses to be returned by 4th June. DM pointed out that Ian Burrett had highlighted other areas of the Control Regs. that could relate to RSA and we should consider these in our response. Action ALL.
3)CFP Green Paper:
A request was made for a member of the Committee to review the Green paper. AB agreed to report Action AB.
4) EAA Representation
PMcC asked for clarification on the sea angling representation on EAA. John Leballeur had stood in for Tony Williams and was under the impression that he was representing AT for the forthcoming year. SMcP said there had been considerable confusion both with fresh water and sea representation and the matter was being reviewed and there would be a Board decision. PMcC asked that we achieve a response sooner rather than later. Action SMcP
10) Date of Next Meeting: 1000 on Saturday 5th September at Warwick.
Tags: angling trust, ANGLING TRUST - National federation Of Sea Anglers, stuart mcpherson
