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. neil bugdol

    neil bugdol Blenny

    All yours Clive, good luck
  2. stuartmac

    stuartmac New Member

    Hi Everyone
    Some news just in from SSACN:
    Expected amendments to art 47. At least shore anglers have got off the hook;




    1. 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.

    1. Non-Commercial Fisheries conducted from a vessel in Community marine waters on a stock subject to a multiannual plan shall be evaluated by the Member State in whose waters they are conducted.
    Fishing with rod and reel from shore shall not be included.

    2. Catches in recreational fisheries on stocks subject to a multiannual plan shall be registered by the flag Member State.

    2. Within two years of the date of entry into force of this Regulation, Member States shall estimate the impact of Non-Commercial Fisheries conducted in their waters and submit the information to the Commission. The relevant Member State and the Commission, on the basis of the advice of the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries, shall decide which Non-Commercial Fisheries
    are having a significant impact on stocks.
    Within three years of the date of entry into force of this Regulation, that Member State, in close cooperation with the Commission, shall develop a monitoring system for fisheries having a significant impact that includes licences and a means of accurately estimating the total catches for each fish stock. Non-Commercial Fisheries shall comply with the objectives of the Common Fisheries Policy.

    3. 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.

    3. Catches of species subject to a monitoring system under paragraph 2 shall be counted against the relevant quotas of the flag Member State. The Member States concerned may establish a share from such quotas to be used exclusively for the purpose of recreational fisheries.

    (7a) "Non-Commercial Fisheries" means any fisheries in marine waters including, inter alia, sports fishing, recreational fishing and tournaments, conducted from a vessel which is not required to have a Community fishing licence pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1281/2005 of 3 August 2005 on the management of fishing licences and the minimal information to be contained therein1

    The term "non-commercial fishing" is clearer than the term"recreational fishing" and should be defined to avoid confusion.

    I have just had a quick look at this but it may mean

    • hake, cod, plaice, eel, and sole are to be included for consideration

    • Assessments made by UK governments on RSA catches of these species within two years

    • Then Scientists/commission will decide which RSA captures are considered to be having a significant impact on stocks

    • After three years monitoring system in place including licenses and perhaps logbooks for those species we are considered to be having a significant impact on stocks

    • RSA catches on those species above shall be included in member states quota system

    • The Member States concerned shall establish a share from such quotas to be used exclusively for the purpose of recreational fisheries.

    It's too early to tell if RSA will be considered to have an affect on stock mortality of the above species. I guess it depends where they set the benchmark. It is still not clear where the quota will come from.

    Ian Burrett

    Whilst this is encouraging it raises two new issues.
    1) Licences and log books????
    2) It puts our target species right behind the eight ball and does not give us any hope of providing a sustained fishing season if the quota should expire "early".
    Please do not think that we have won the war this is only a minor skirmish so keep up the pressure.
  3. neil bugdol

    neil bugdol Blenny

    I don`t think these amendments have done anything other than move us back a year to the license thing again and then they`ve prolonged the agony by setting it up to run over 3 years. Seems to me they`ve just moved the goal posts and are intent on getting what they want regardless. It`s a nibble here and a nibble there tackling it a bit at a time, in other words divide and conquer. We have got to stick together as RSAs and not the shore anglers and the boat anglers and the in-betweenies {kayaks} :yes:. We are moving into the bureaucratic red tape spread it out stage that is designed to put people off big time, these people know how to work it.

    I found this SOS poster on the UKIP site, I think all members should download and print it, then display it somewhere especially tackle shops and charter boats and make sure every angler is aware of the situation.

  4. cleeclive

    cleeclive Whitby Fishing Forum _ Simply The Best

    I pedicted this. The Uk governmet is off the hook they can now enforce what they like and tell us they are obliged to follow EU rules while the French will do what they want and basically ignore it all. They are determined to get charter boats and private angling boats reeled into this scheme. Where we fit in Kayaks time will tell, maybe let off the hook because we don't have an engine, but they will get us all in the end

  5. Baramundi Bob

    Baramundi Bob Super Leeds United !!!

    Is this actually passed or just a new article 47 to be voted upon?
  6. stuartmac

    stuartmac New Member

    Hi Glenn
    As I read it this is an amendment due to the pressure that we have all managed to exert. The worry is that the MEPs will say "Oh great we have achieved something for the RSA sector" and then back off. We should all contact them again and inform them that this is not what we want all that will satisfy us is a total withdrawl of Art 47 and any reference to Recreational Fishing. As I understand it the amendment will be voted on by the EU Parliament in April. Then it will be up to the Fishery Ministers to take it to the Commission and anything can happen then. As I said above we have achieved a result in a minor skirmish but we still have to fight the major battle.
  7. wec

    wec Nunc est biben dum

    after you've signed, cheeky bugger writes to you and asks for money so he can keep up the good work , :surprise:
  8. neil bugdol

    neil bugdol Blenny

    thats why I only posted the link for the poster and not the full article that goes with it. But yes they are cheeky, not had a letter from No10 though and I signed that one as well.
  9. FireFly

    FireFly Blenny

    Received this email today.

    Dear John,

    As someone who has corresponded with Caroline previously about Article 47 of the European Commission’s plans to monitor recreational fisheries, I thought you would be interested in this update.

    After extensive lobbying by many recreational anglers and representative groups, Caroline has agreed that there is an urgent need to amend the Commission’s proposals to better protect the interests of the UK’s non commercial anglers. So, she has helped draft a series of amendments to the proposed legislative text. These seek to limit the scope of the regulation to non-commercial fishing conducted from boats (i.e. not from shore) in marine waters (i.e. not inland waters). Member States would have time to evaluate the impact of such fishing on stocks and, in cases where it is having a significant impact, to propose a means of monitoring it. Greens want to see the phrase ‘recreational angling’ replaced with the properly defined term ‘non-commercial angling’; to clarify that only fishing (by any gear) from boats would be covered, excluding shore-based activities; and to ensure that fishing with rod and reel from shore is not included.

    It is also worth pointing out at this stage that the original text has been misrepresented by some articles in the national media and that:

    The proposal is not seeking to ban recreational fishing, it is seeking to quantify it (para. 2), include it in the quota of the MS (para. 3) and to prevent the commercial sale of fish caught (para 4.).
    All fisheries would not be involved. The words stocks "subject to a multiannual plan" mean only stocks of fish for which there exists, at EU level, an agreement to impose special restrictions and controls on commercial fisheries because the stocks are under threat from over-fishing. Recreational fishing for other species, or other stocks, would not be included. At present, there are such plans for a half-dozen or so species (cod, hake, Norway lobster, sole, a few others).
    Only fishing in the sea would be covered, the proposal does not apply to inland (fresh) water.

    The Fisheries Committee will consider Green and other amendments shortly, although Caroline is not a member of that committee. When the legislation comes before a full plenary, Caroline and the Greens will be supporting the principle of some governance of non-commercial angling, as well as seeking to ensure that any measures are fair, proportionate and aimed only at fishing from boats in marine waters.

    I hope that is helpful. You can read more about Caroline’s work at www.carolinelucasmep.org.uk

    Kind regards,

    Cath Miller

    Constituency Coordinator and Researcher

    Office of Dr Caroline Lucas

    Green Party MEP for SE England
  10. neil bugdol

    neil bugdol Blenny

    Cheers for that FireFly.

    Nothings changed then, they must think we`re all thick, it`s an insult article 47 concerns recreational SEA angling, why would we be concerned with fresh inland waters, smoke screen tactic. Amendment "not to include shore anglers" we know about that one. change RSA to NCA dodgy, don`t like that one.

    Member States would have time to evaluate the impact of such fishing on stocks and, in cases where it is having a significant impact, to propose a means of monitoring it. this leaves us wide open to our own dictatorship of a government who would more than likely impose tax`s sorry I mean licensing and restrictions on us and just blame the EU for it,

    Now this bit "to clarify that only fishing (by any gear) from boats would be covered, excluding shore-based activities; and to ensure that fishing with rod and reel from shore is not included". I`m quite intelligent but my powers of interpretation are running overtime and giving me headache with it. Are kayak anglers a shore based activity fishing with rod and reel, if this is the case would charter boats launching from shore with rod and reel anglers be the same.

    It`s still going to effect every sea angler if not in the short but in the long term.
  11. stuartmac

    stuartmac New Member

    With referenece to the earlier post regarding getting DEFRA to come and state their policy on Art47 which was provisionally arranged for the 24th at Whitby and the 25th at Grimsby. I have at last managed to speak to DEFRA today, as I learned at the weekend that they had only reached Art32 in their weekly consultation in Brussels. I suggested that the reception they would receive would be less than cordial if they arrived on the above dates and were unable to provide any answers. They therefore conceeded that it was best that the meetings be postponed. They are still in agreement to attend on dates to be arranged when I will contact them again in early April. I will then get back to you all.
  12. Baramundi Bob

    Baramundi Bob Super Leeds United !!!

    Good of you to keep us updated Stuart Im sure the skippers will appreciate that. All this rubbing shoulders with politicians, bureaucrats and the like must be taking up a lot of your time. You should take some time off and get out fishing.
  13. Baramundi Bob

    Baramundi Bob Super Leeds United !!!

    Something I heard yesterday Stuart, and it hadnt dawned on me until I read it. If DEFRA come to Whitby after this date, it will be too late. The EU are to vote on article 47 in Early April - arent they ?
  14. Baramundi Bob

    Baramundi Bob Super Leeds United !!!

    Related topic here

  15. FireFly

    FireFly Blenny

    Got this reply off my south east MEP.
    Don't know whether anybody has seen this.
    I've had to post as a pic as it was in PDF format and I haven't the software to re-format it.

    Some positive stuff about RSA's, Kayak's etc - but not so good for lads fishing off boats

    If you find it hard to read and you are using Firefox I think if you press
    ctrl + shift + Z it will zoom in
    to zoom out press ctrl +shift + X ...as I say....I think it works!!!

  16. Baramundi Bob

    Baramundi Bob Super Leeds United !!!

    Looks like they have it in for boat anglers. I understand that Members of the NFFO have been putting the boot in for boat anglers too. Not quite sure why the commissioner is listening to an organisation run by convicted fisheries criminals - but there you go. I suppose if boat anglers do come under regulation they will have a lot more say in the running of the fishery. First thing I would demand in return for compliance with new rules is a stop to commercial discards.
  17. cleeclive

    cleeclive Whitby Fishing Forum _ Simply The Best

    The boat and charter skippers now only have one defence for their case.

    They must keep their own personal logbooks clearly showing dates fished numbers of anglers on board and catches per angler, so that they can demonstrate their average catces per man hour or man day etc by species. This kind of data will be their only defence at the end of the day. it appears that there is going to be a research period for a couple of years before the final ultimatum is decided.

    Failure to do this will leave them entirely in the hands of officials with little or no defence.

  18. neil bugdol

    neil bugdol Blenny

    Thanks for posting that FireFly. It seems that every time one of these EU people gives away a bit of info, we are winning because they answer our concerns. So now shore anglers, pier anglers and kayak/canoe anglers are not affected by article 47, it`s just anglers who fish from a vessel on the open sea. But it`s still not clear, what do they class as open sea, is a kayak/canoe not a vessel. A kayak fishermen is capable of fishing 3 miles out, if not more, a charter boat could fish half a mile out. Still smells of devide and conquer to me.
    eg, a small charter boat takes husband and wife 2 mile out to fish, when they get to their ground they anchor 100yds away from 2 anglers in a tandem kayak, is that not the same thing. Article 47 doesn`t need amending, it just wants throwing away full stop.
    First it`ll be boat anglers then kayak/canoe then shore, each time they include one section of angling they make the rest of their campaign easier. We have got to be one group RSA, stick together and fight for one another. Shore and kayak anglers should back the charter industry and private boat anglers, once article 47 gets a foot in the door we`ll all be covered by it, it`s just a matter of time.
  19. bigcod

    bigcod Rockling

    Just why the hell are anglers being targeted at all who is feeding these mob in europe with rubbush about anglers doing damage to fish stocks the seas off our coast have had a hammering 1000ss up 1000ss of tons of cod have being thrown back over the side in years gone by if it had been line fishing only the seas around our shores the stocks would still be what they were 30 years ago in one breath they say long line fishing is suitstainable then on the other hand angling isnt i thought angling as a hobby was supposed to encouredged if every charterboat on uk mainland stopped tommorow it wouldnt have any impact on cod stocks in real terms the lies being peddled about charterboats and anglers in general is mad and it obviously those who are listening must be clueless the angling trust need to get organized the NFFO have meeting with those in power on regular basis we need to represented and our corner fought anglers are being punished for something they aint done charterboats genarate much needed money for local economy whitby has the biggest boat angling festival in the uk this could be lost for what nothing.
  20. stuartmac

    stuartmac New Member

    Hi Glen
    I am sorry I have not responded sooner I took your advise and had a weekend off. Sadly not fishing so that kick up the a... is coming nearer. I had an e-mail from Doc asking the same question about the Commission and it is not clear but the information from DEFRA suggests that it is quite a protracted operation. I made the point that DEFRA are fully aware of our views what we need is what DEFRA are going to reccommend to the Minister so we can really turn the heat up on the lobbying. What everyone appear to have missed in Firefly's letter is the mention of BAG LIMITS. Not said specifically but that is what they are meaning by reference to what the Scientific Group reccommend. Cleeclive is also correct about keeping your own catch records. We do need evidence to refute any suggestion that we are endangering the sustainability of any species. Paul's reference to AT doing something to counter the discussions that NFFO are having with Government is valid. In actual fact we have done quite a lot of lobbying and meetings are ongoing, there is one again next week. But to compare AT to the NFFO in financial terms is a no brainer that is why they have permanent lobbyists. Getting organized takes money and money means members.

Share This Page