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

  2. stuartmac

    stuartmac New Member

    Hi Guys
    I have been away a couple of days but the answer to the vote was 564 in favour 42 against and 49 abstained. But even although the vote was carried in the Paliament as I have said before the Commission can ignore it. If I read it correctly the next dcision will be from the Council of Ministers so Huw Irranca-Davies need a lot of mail.
  3. neil bugdol

    neil bugdol Blenny

  4. stuartmac

    stuartmac New Member

    That should get to him good on yi.
    Here is the link to the Press release that just goes to show how things are spun.
    There is also a good video clip showing Nigel Farrage's speech in the Parliament on the UKIP web site.
  5. neil bugdol

    neil bugdol Blenny

    Hi Stuartmac, I found that press release yesterday, posted it above and your right about the spin, hense my final statement "is it on hold" it looks like they`re still consulting with everybody from the way it reads.

    Also found this one today.

    The sanctions I found amusing, penalty points on fishing licenses for 3 years :laugh: it`ll be greed cameras next :laugh: :laugh:

    PNGWIN New Member


    Can anyone tell me if Discards are recorded by the commercial fleet. I bet that has more impact on fish stocks than recreational fishing. WE DONT DMUP DEAD FISH. :angry:
  7. stuartmac

    stuartmac New Member

    Here is the response the Commissioner made to the ammendments at the plenary session relevent to Art 47:
    Concerning recreational fisheries: on this controversial subject, I would like to indicate that, in contrast to what has been widely reported, the draft regulation does not aim to place a disproportionate burden upon individual anglers or on the leisure fishing industry. What is proposed is to subject certain recreational fisheries on certain specific stocks, namely those subject to a recovery plan, to certain basic conditions on permits and catch reporting. These requirements will also help to obtain information allowing the public authorities to evaluate the biological impact of such activities and, where necessary, to prepare the measures needed.
    Concerning the EP report, the Commission welcomes the fact that a definition of ‘recreational fisheries’ is provided for in Amendment 11, and that Parliament foresees that, where a recreational fishery is found to have a significant impact, catches should count against the quotas. It also welcomes the fact that the EP agrees that the marketing of catches from recreational fishing shall be prohibited except for philanthropic purposes. However, I would like to stress that it is important to maintain an obligation for Member States to evaluate the impact of recreational fisheries as set out in Amendment 93, and not just the possibility to do so as contemplated in Amendments 48, 49 and 50.
    On the one hand he says he doesn't want to bother us and the next he is talking about permits and quota and MAY has changed back to SHALL.
  8. Baramundi Bob

    Baramundi Bob Super Leeds United !!!

    Hi Stuart, I think this has been discussed before. By the time this comes into being, do you think this will have been devolved right down to sfc level ?
  9. stuartmac

    stuartmac New Member

    There are so many possibilities on the table at the minute. If it came to licensing the charter boats it would probably be the new Marine Management Organisation which replaces the MFA and that would also cover the quota ellement. But if it was a permit situation it would probably be the new IFCA similar to the current permit system for 10 pots. You guess is as good as mine as it twists and turns but the latest from the EAA suggests that the Ministers will meet in June??? and once that has happened any petitioning and opposition from the RSA will be over and we will have to take what is dished out. It will probably be DEFRA dishing it out we've got to convince the Government there is an election on the horizon.
  10. neil bugdol

    neil bugdol Blenny

    Well I sent an e-mail Huw Irranca Davies and got a reply. The reply was from a Miss J. T. Patel, from the DEFRA customer contact unit, I am confused as I haven`t bought anything from DEFRA so why am I a customer or do they intend selling me something in the future.
    The response I received states quite plainly that DEFRA are totally against and will oppose Article 47 until it is made completely clear what it actually means for the UK RSA`s. They are concerned at the different understandings of the term recreational angling across the European communities.

    Anyone else had a response from their e-mails to Mr Davies
  11. 3be2

    3be2 Blenny

    Interesting about point 4 earlier that in order to measure RSA impact in any realistic way you would need the information first. Before policy decisions are made. It looks like licences and log sheets would be required from day one regardless of the outcome. You can't analyse data you don't have.

    looking at the UK proposal posted earlier it looks as though (III.D Biological - Recreational fisheries - III.D.2 Data quality) log books are seen as the way to go. Add a numbering scheme to the log book and you have a basis for individual returns and, of course, licences.

    (Of course as a conservation starting point in the case of Cod they could always prevent the commercial fleet trawling their spawning grounds and taking tonnes of egg laden fish away - just a thought.)
  12. cleeclive

    cleeclive Whitby Fishing Forum _ Simply The Best

    Re thae question Are Discards recorded by the commercial fleet? The answer is only when a reasearch project on discards is being undertaken, which would look at a sample of representative boats in a specific fishery. These numbers would then be raised to represent the whole fleet fishing a particular stock in a specific area. Results are rarely made public as they are embarrassing to the authorities.

Share This Page