1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

EU ARTICLE 47 - Sea Angling Under Attack again

Discussion in 'Sea Fishing Forum - Shore, Boat & Kayak Fishing' started by stuartmac, Dec 16, 2008.

  1. biscuitlad

    biscuitlad Guest

    Re: ARTICLE 47 - Sea Angling Under Attack again

    No worries mate. :happy:
  2. Baramundi Bob

    Baramundi Bob Super Leeds United !!!

    Re: ARTICLE 47 - Sea Angling Under Attack again

    Another response

    Thank you for your correspondence about Article 47 of the Control Regulation. I share your concerns over this.

    Unfortunately, the Article is not clearly drafted, but as far as I can understand it the European Commission intends it to apply only where there is a multi-annual (recovery) plan, for stocks outside safe biological limits, such as with cod and blue fin tuna and where the fishing is done from onboard a vessel. This means that it would not affect most recreational sea fisheries, including any done from onshore, or angling on inland waters.

    As I understand it, the Commission's concern is with the substantial amounts that are caught by some recreational fisheries in relation to the species covered by the multi annual recovery plans. For example, it is estimated that in Italy (2007), 800 tonnes of blue fin tuna were caught by recreational fishers whilst the national quota is around 4,300 tonnes. On my reading, too, the Article is intended to prevent commercial fishing under the guise of recreational fishing.

    That said, Article 47 sets a precedent of which we should be very wary. Please be assured that this point has already been raised with some force in the course of deliberations in the Fisheries Committee. It seems clear that there will be amendments from committee members including my colleague Elspeth Attwooll MEP (Scotland) asking for the Article to be deleted from the proposal or, failing that, amended very substantially indeed.

    I should add, though, that under the current procedures, the Parliament can only give an opinion and the final decision is taken by the Council of Fisheries Ministers. So, it would be useful, too, for you to make the government and your MP directly aware of your views on the issue.


    Diana Wallis MEP - Vice President of the European Parliament
    Liberal Democrat Yorkshire & the Humber
    PO Box 176
    East Yorkshire HU15 1UX

    Tel/Fax: (+44) 01482 666898
  3. deecee

    deecee Blenny

    Re: ARTICLE 47 - Sea Angling Under Attack again


    The reply from Diana Wallis is identical to the one I received from
    Fiona Hall MEP ( see my earlier post)

  4. deecee

    deecee Blenny

    Re: ARTICLE 47 - Sea Angling Under Attack again

    And another .................

    Thank you for your email regarding your concerns with the quota
    regulations imposed by the Commission on recreational anglers and

    The control systems for compliance with the CFP which you've expressed
    concern about will be discussed shortly in the Fisheries Committee. I am
    deeply concerned with the proposal contained in Article 47 of the
    Regulation, which will effectively bring recreational fisheries under
    the direct control of the CFP as you've mentioned.

    As you know, the Proposal would require millions of recreational anglers
    throughout the EU to apply for special licences and log and register
    their catches, where they are fishing for species covered by a
    multi-annual recovery plan. Member States would have to allocate a quota
    for recreational anglers and this would be deducted from their national
    quota. Recreational anglers would be prohibited from selling any fish
    they catch.

    These proposals are unjust and inflexible, imposing a level of
    bureaucratic interference into sport fishing that would have a
    disastrous impact on the tourist sector, without providing any
    meaningful benefits to conservation. I, along with my Conservative
    colleagues, will seek to remove recreational fisheries from the proposed

    Again, I thank you for your email,

    Yours Sincerely,

    Martin Callanan MEP
    North East England
  5. FireFly

    FireFly Blenny

    Re: ARTICLE 47 - Sea Angling Under Attack again

    Funnily enough , the same answer I got off Sharon Bowles MEP
  6. 3be2

    3be2 Blenny

    Re: ARTICLE 47 - Sea Angling Under Attack again

    Not sure it much matters what the "Commission intends" only what whoever is interpreting the actual text believes it intends. I can't believe that anyone experienced in framing law would accidentally leave holes like this in the text. If it is only to apply to boats then it should say exactly that.

    More likely 47 (2/3) will be interpreted as applying to anyone fishing outside the commercial fleet. It's great for HMG as they could now bring in a huge licensing and reporting scheme (with lots of new bureaucratic jobs of course) and blame it all on Europe
  7. cleeclive

    cleeclive Whitby Fishing Forum _ Simply The Best

    Re: ARTICLE 47 - Sea Angling Under Attack again

    I am sure that is exactly what they intend to do. None of this is going to go away, too many jobs depend upon it. We may get a temporary reprieve aging and then it will be back. They will start with the charter boats re cod and bass, and then the pleasure boats, kayaks may be in maybe out, then it will be the lot of us.

    By the way I have had the standard Euro -reply from Diana Wallis.

    Sorry to paint a picture of gloom but I am sure that is the way it will slowly go and the sea fisheries committees can't wait.

    Cheers Cleeclive

    I am off to see what the Grimsby boat club lads have to say about it in a minute
  8. stuartmac

    stuartmac New Member

    Re: ARTICLE 47 - Sea Angling Under Attack again

    Hi Guys & Gals
    As I said before there is a lot going on behind the scenes. We had an article on BBC York Breakfast Radio on Monday. On Tuesday Big Cod and I did an interview with BBC Countryfile. BG did the boat aspect and took them out on Sea Otter II. I did over an hours filming at the end of the West peir. I covered all the salient points and was well satisfied that the message had been delivered. I got a phone call from the Director yesterday telling me that because of a response from the EU the shore anglers were not being included so regrettably he was cutting back on the shore expose. I pointed out that the guys who go on boats/kayaks fished with rod and line and the only apparent change in EU policy was the word shore. To no avail. So cleeclive is right it is only a matter of time and we have to keep up the pressure.

    The following response from an MEP indicates that we are having an effect and they don't like it.

    Giles Chichester, my fellow MEP, has sent me a copy of a briefing note about this controversy.As I understand it, the Commission did not intend to include in its net (if I may use that expression) ordinary line anglers in the UK, but had in its sights line-fishermen in boats off Italy who catch tuna which is an increasingly sought after fish in those parts.I'd be grateful therefore if you can manage to avoid whipping up a huge anti-EU campaign about this misunderstanding. The parliament exists to scrutinise such errors by civil-servants and will undoubtedly remove the silly words, and it is not an anti-UK campaign.All the bestBill Newton Dunn, MEP for East Midlands Group of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe.
    It might be worth letting the Conservative and UKIP MEPS have sight of this. I am sure they will make political mileage out of it with some benefits to our cause. I have asked for a copy of the response so that those who wish can respond I am on hold while my blood pressure drops.
    Don't forget the response from DEFRA which said that the operative word for reporting catches was "CATCHING"
    Firefly I don't know if this MEP is on your doorstep but you are probably nearer than a lot of us up here.
  9. FireFly

    FireFly Blenny

    Re: ARTICLE 47 - Sea Angling Under Attack again

    Just got this reply this morning.
    "Dear John

    Thank you for your e-mail regarding the EU Consultative document on the Monitoring of Recreational Fisheries Article 4.

    I have forwarded your correspondence to Commissioner Joe Borg, responsible for Fisheries and Maritime Affairs within the European Commission, asking him to respond to the issues you raise.

    I will be back in touch as soon as I receive a reply from the Commissioner.

    With best wishes

    James Elles MEP
    Conservative Member - South-East Region"

    A lot of what comes back, I have several other responses I haven't posted here yet, seem to be stock answers sent to everyone.
    I don't think that is necessarily a bad thing because it shows at least someone, somewhere has had to sit down and compose a standard reply because of the response to article 47.
    I do want to say, you guys on here are certainly showing other forums etc the way. One I go on on the west coast, everyone is skating round the issue and stopped even looking at the info I posted. Even the webmaster posted that it was probably because folk were worried about their jobs and livelihood etc. Bad time and all that. I can understand that but there is only this 'time' now to do anything about article 47!.
    If Carlsberg built fishing forums they would probably call it 'Whitby Fishing Forums' ! :yes:

    I will send you a PM Stuart.
  10. cleeclive

    cleeclive Whitby Fishing Forum _ Simply The Best

    Re: ARTICLE 47 - Sea Angling Under Attack again

    If there is one thing we should do it is whip up anti-EU feeling At least Iceland and Norway had sense to keep out of the club. Nothing good has come out of it as far as fisheries are concerned and all we seem to be doing is paying to much money into it to subsidise all our poor european neighbours and to be told what to do by them. Anyway I must not show my political colours too much or I may be in trouble with Barrumundi Bob!!!

    Interesting the way this is panning out but watch your backs.
  11. Baramundi Bob

    Baramundi Bob Super Leeds United !!!

    Re: ARTICLE 47 - Sea Angling Under Attack again

    Totally agree Clive. I am pleased they dont like the fact we are fighting back. What do they expect ? Surely they dont think we will just lay down for them to walk all over us.

    Taking shore anglers out the frame has been a cunning plan but they need to realise there are a lot of boat and kayak anglers out there too and we will all stick together to fight these new regulations.

    Best thing we can do is forward this message to Godfrey Bloom the UKIP MEP.
  12. ducky

    ducky maybe one day...

    Re: ARTICLE 47 - Sea Angling Under Attack again

    well i am just a shore angler and i am still backing this all the way i got godfrey blooms phone number so i will just give him a call i think
  13. Baramundi Bob

    Baramundi Bob Super Leeds United !!!

    Re: ARTICLE 47 - Sea Angling Under Attack again

    Related article on country file

  14. FireFly

    FireFly Blenny

    Re: ARTICLE 47 - Sea Angling Under Attack again

    If anyone is still in doubt about what goes on in the 'commercial' sector and has been for years, then they need to look at this.
    A boat out of Hartlepool.
    It is back in 2007 mind but still is an informative read.

    Do you know a skipper who can't tell between prawns and cod on his fish finder?...I once caught a 12lb prawn off Redcar rocks you know?


    This is one of the real problems not rod and line IMHO.
  15. carpyken

    carpyken New Member

    Re: ARTICLE 47 - Sea Angling Under Attack again

    Recently signed up for the Sharkatag meet and so think I'm on the SSACN (The Scottish Sea Angling Conservation Network) mailing list, just received this email if any of you are interested.


    Article 47 has been a top topic of conversation and concern for many days now.

    This week Ian and Denis met up with fishery organisation lawyers and the Scottish Marine Directorate (SMD) for a long meeting to discuss the Articles in the proposed EU Control Regulations.

    It was agreed by all concerned that the proposals, as they are currently written, would apply and impact ALL forms of sea angling - boat and shore - and if they do go through, the ability of anglers to enjoy our sport will be severely compromised.

    Ian has also contacted Sir Simon Day who is a Devon County Councillor, Full Member and Deputy Leader of the UK Delegation to the Committee of the Regions of the European Union and UK Spokesman for Fisheries. He is also a keen angler and is aware of Art47. As a result of the discussion, he now intends to put Art47 on the agenda at the Fisheries meeting on the 17th and 18th of this month.

    We are also exploring an opportunity to do a joint presentation in Brussels with the EAA.

    The following is our best understanding of the issues along with what we would like to see the EU do regarding recreational sea angling. We can only stress that we feel this set of Control Regs and Articles has the potential for the greatest impact and ask that you do take a few minutes to review the points raised and we would be grateful for any feedback, additional viewpoints, etc.etc.

    Article 47 Summary
    The following is how we understand the proposed EU Control Regs and Article 47 in particular may affect recreational sea angling. It is drawn from meetings with the Scottish Marine Directorate (SMD), other bodies and email discussions with a broad range of politicians, anglers and other interested bodies.

    Our understanding so far :

    # The EC intends to have this tied up by June but it is thought that it could be November and December.
    # The SMD have made a written response which basically says Art 47 is unworkable at the moment due to lack of data but data gathering exercises should be considered for the forthcoming Common Fisheries review.
    # As the proposals stand they clearly affect shore and boat anglers until such times the proposals are rewritten.
    # The SMD made it plain they have no idea which way Art 47 will go.
    # Neither DEFRA nor the UK Government have articulated their position.
    # EU politics may affect their decision.
    # The UK and a few others will not be enough.
    # The EU Parliament can only advise, the EC can ignore.
    # It will need pan-European action by anglers to stop this nonsense.

    What we feel the EU should do :

    # Delete Article 47 for now or exempt recreational angling from this proposed Regulation
    # Show detailed evidence behind the claim that recreational sea angling "... has an increasing influence on fish stocks and marine environment.
    # Analyse and define the legal status of recreational sea angling within the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) at present
    # Discuss and decide the future status of recreational sea angling with regard to the CFP
    # As part of the ongoing CFP review, in depth discussions and proposals for the recreational sea angling sector to achieve more recognition and better treatment with regard to the sectors needs and (sustainable) growth potential
    # Determine more and better data on the recreational fisheries sector

    # Allocate budget to set up and run a genuine recreational sea angling unit aimed at regeneration and development.

    # Investigate if and how ICES and the Member States today include recreational sea angling catches in their fishing mortality estimates with regards to setting and distribution of TACs and quotas
    Launch another consultation round on this proposed Regulation.

    Article 47 : Recreational fisheries
    Recreational fisheries on a vessel in Community waters on a stock subject to a multiannual plan shall be subject to an authorisation for that vessel issued by the flag Member State.
    Catches in recreational fisheries on stocks subject to a multiannual plan shall be registered by the flag Member State.
    Catches of species subject to a multiannual plan by recreational fisheries shall be counted against the relevant quotas of the flag Member State. The Member States concerned shall establish a share from such quotas to be used exclusively for the purpose of recreational fisheries.
    The marketing of catches from a recreational fishery shall be prohibited except for philanthropic purposes.
    Which other articles might apply to recreational fisheries apart from Article 47?

    We are concerned that the apparent “ad hoc” inclusion of Article 47 may inadvertently cause recreational fisheries to be included in many of the other 116 articles, for example, Articles 39 and 40 could also impact anglers.

    These say that every fishing vessel must carry electronic equipment which notifies the relevant MPA authorities and the skipper via an alarm bell that they are entering a Marine Protected Area (MPA); and that Masters of Community fishing vessels intending to transit a Marine Protected Area shall communicate the following data in the form of a transit report, to the authorities of the flag Member State and to the coastal Member State:

    the name of the vessel, external identification mark, radio call sign and name of the master of the vessel;
    the coordinates of the geographical location of the vessel to which the communication refers;
    the date and time of each entry into a Marine Protected Area, and
    the date and time of each exit from a Marine Protected Area.

    This will apply equally to recreational sea anglers unless there is a derogation.

    Perhaps most concerning, a member of the SMD told us of an occasion when every EU fisheries minister without exception voted no on a topic and yet it still appeared in the proposals. The tenacity of EU civil servants should never be underestimated.

    The Scottish Sea Angling Conservation Network
  16. Baramundi Bob

    Baramundi Bob Super Leeds United !!!

    Re: ARTICLE 47 - Sea Angling Under Attack again

    Interesting read Ken, thanks for posting it.
  17. Baramundi Bob

    Baramundi Bob Super Leeds United !!!

  18. harrythecod

    harrythecod Rockling

    Very good read ,i did understand most of what the statment siad,but not all,it seem,s another body has joined the crew against article 47 :happy: if i understand correctly :suspious:
  19. cleeclive

    cleeclive Whitby Fishing Forum _ Simply The Best

    Thanks for that ken, just back from visiting Germany so been out of touch for a few days.
    With 23,600 tonnes of cod, 31048 tonnes of haddock and 6000 tonnes of whiting discarded in the North sea alone for 2007 before we start on plaice sole and othe non commercial species one truly wonders what planet these people are on. As we see proposed the best we can most probably expect is a few years research to build up data on what anglers are actually doing. The one thing that anglers do need to be careful of is giving false data at this stage because if we ever do end up with a quota allocation based on track records we could shoot ourselves in the foot before we start in relation to NORTH SEA COD WHICH IS UNDER THE MULTI ANNUAL GUIDANCE PROGRAMME.

    Anglers need to be very careful in relation to how this all pans out!

  20. Hairybeast

    Hairybeast Blenny

    10 Feb 09 - From a speech today by Jo Borg Member of the European Commission - Responsible for Fisheries and Maritime Affairs

    some of it needs clarification, what is a hobby angler, and does paragraph two mean boat, pleasure and charter.


    Before I come to the end of my intervention let me say a few words about our proposal to reform the way we control fisheries activities in the future.

    The most famous words contained in our proposal must be the words "recreational fishing". In some Member States our proposals in this regard have been misinterpreted alarming citizens that the Commission wants to start controlling millions of hobby anglers and impose quota restrictions on them. This would obviously be a crazy thing to do, and it is therefore not at all our intention to implement such a ludicrous system. Let me make clear once and for all that the hobby angler who catches a few kilos of fish every time he goes out fishing and uses it for his private consumption, will not be covered by the control regulation, even if he catches fish like cod which is under a recovery plan.

    There are however facts and figures in abundance that show that certain forms of so called recreational fishing have a dangerously considerable impact on certain vulnerable fish stock. We cannot just keep restricting severely professional fishing on those stocks but give the recreational fishermen a free ride. They have to contribute as well to the conservation effort. It is with this balance in mind that the Commission will approach the issue in the context of negotiations.

    We look forward to working with you on this question, on the whole control regulation and of course also on the reform of our policy. In any event, I know that we at the Commission can always rely on the Parliament to stimulate and support us in improving the lot of Europe's citizens.

Share This Page