12m and Charter Boats

[Paul D]

As you may have read, the Southern Sea Fisheries have informs some of the local charter boats that the 12m limit on fishing boat size is deemed to apply to them.

 

If implemented and agreed then this would mean those safe big cats will be a thing of the past.

 

If, like myself, you think this ruling is ludicrous then please make your opinions known by writing to Ian Carrier,Southern SFC - Clerk and Chief Fishery Officer at southernsfc@btconnect.com and also cc. jonathan.shaw@defra.gsi.gov.uk

 

Your voice does make a difference.

 

PS: You will even get a reply

[TomBettle]

Paul

 

I do think that the ruling is ludicrous, but you will find that very few of the charter fleet are 12m or over.

 

..not that is any concilation for those with 12m+ boats.

 

The vast majority of the cats are 11m and below.

 

Tom

 

PS: Sent my email

Edited November 27, 2007 by TomBettle

[shytalk]

ttttttt tom this rule also applys to all those poor people who buy 12m jeanneaus be they stink pots or rag and stick

[TomBettle]

ttttttt tom this rule also applys to all those poor people who buy 12m jeanneaus be they stink pots or rag and stick

Well Peter

 

Seeing as you believe I am as silly as you look, here is a copy of the email i sent yesterday at 15:48.

It may not be perfectly worded or grammatically correct, but I was rather angry about the whole thing when i sent it.

 

Email reads****

 

Dear Sir

 

I am writing with some concern about the very ill thought out plans to ban all vessels over 12m that engage in "Fishing" from within 6 miles of land.

I am sincerely hoping that I have simply misunderstood and that this will, of course, purely relate to vessels engaged in commercial fishing and not angling charter vessels or even private pleasure boats that happen to be wetting a line.

 

Please can you put my mind at rest, or at least give me the detail of the plans.

I can't believe that a charter boat with 12 anglers and is 12m long and another with 12 anglers and is 10m long can be viewed any differently as they will only catch the same amount of fish which will be a tiny number compared with a beam trawler and the like. In addition, I find it rather laughable and can't imagine anyone would be so daft as to stop a chap in his pleasure boat from angling from the back of it.

 

Please help set the record straight as clearly either I am very confused or there is an extremely ill thought out plan afoot.

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

Tom Bettle

 

[duncan]

Tom

 

I think you should have replied as a boat salesman in the area.

 

The comercial aspect is important and, as things stand, you wuld have to advise a potential buyer of a 12m + boat that their children couldn't fish for mackerel from it within 6 miles. You could go further and ask if the children were to sit in the tender, but the tender was attached by a line to the boat, would this be alright?

 

These are not things for the courts to decide - the law makers should clarify.....

 

D

[duncan]

duplicate - damm system

Edited November 28, 2007 by duncan

[TomBettle]

Tom

 

I think you should have replied as a boat salesman in the area.

 

The comercial aspect is important and, as things stand, you wuld have to advise a potential buyer of a 12m + boat that their children couldn't fish for mackerel from it within 6 miles. You could go further and ask if the children were to sit in the tender, but the tender was attached by a line to the boat, would this be alright?

 

These are not things for the courts to decide - the law makers should clarify.....

 

D

You are probably right Duncan, but I've done it now.

It was sent from my work email, complete with signature.

 

Have you sent one yet yourself?

 

I think if we all simply bombard them, they'll have to take some notice.

 

Tom

[great white]

My reply

I am not sure that it will do any good but I do know that doing nothing will not help

 

Charlie

 

Dear Mr Carrier and Mr Shaw

 

It has come to my attention that the Southern Sea Fisheries have decided to use some of its meagre resources to implement an old Bye Law preventing boats of over 12mtrs in length taking fish within the 6 mile line.

 

I am a keen recreational Sea Angler, I own a 30ft angling boat that is used in my leisure time by my family and I in and around Poole harbour Dorset. We all have a very keen interest in the conservation of the badly depleted fish stocks around the South coast.

 

While we would applaud any means of increasing conservation of the fish stocks I am struggling to see the benefit of implementing this Bye Law and particularly by targeting some of the new safer large charter angling boats.

Even though some of these boats are up to 47ft in length they are only licensed to carry 12 passengers so the fishing effort and effect on stocks is the same as a smaller boat also licensed for 12 anglers.

The owners of these boats have invested large sums of money in their vessels to increase comfort and safety for their paying anglers and you are trying to ensure that they can only use these boats outside the 6 mile line.

Even though these boats are bigger than the average charter boats I am sure that at times they will need to be closer to land than that to find some shelter for their anglers safety and comfort..

 

I also believe that most of these boats are not registered and therefore are prevented from selling any fish caught. This encourages catch and release rod angling which has been increasingly popular in my sport over recent years. Local charter boats also enjoy a reputation of being very keen to promote this on their vessels.

 

I firmly believe that your resources would be better used to try and prevent the illegal sale of undersize fish or fish being sold from un registered boats and the massive waste of fish from the dumping of dead fish back in the sea as a by product of commercial fishing methods/overfishing.

 

I am writing regarding my views, but as a Member of a large local angling club I can assure you that these feelings are shared by a lot of Recreational Sea Anglers. Who feel as I do that the value to the countries economy of live fish in the sea should be recognised? We spend a lot of money on our sport in a wide selection of businesses and it is about time that someone took that into consideration.

 

The fish stocks in this country are in a serious decline and it is up to people in your positions to look to the future and what can be done about it, employing your staff to implement ancient bye laws can not be considered a justified use of your resources.

 

 

Yours,

 

 

Charlie Chapman

 

[Paul D]

Sent mine off a few days ago and quite a bit shorter than the ones above. ( Haven't got it to hand at the moment. ).

 

I received a reply saying I could continue fishing in my Orkney if it is less than 12m long ( no problem there then ) and that my e-mail will be put with the others received for consideration.

 

The more e-mails they receive then the more they will realise what they are doing, so keep the pressure on ( IMHO ).

 

[Wedger]

 

 

done

 

[TomBettle]

Just received a rather uninforming reply frm Ian Carrier saying he has posted me a copy of the Byelaw and the same explanatory letter that was sent to the Charter Angling Vessel Associations.

 

I am sure it will be stimulating reading, but not sure if it will make any sense.

 

We shall see.

 

Tom

[great white]

It would be interesting to know if all the replies are the same

 

Charlie

[duncan]

"I think if we all simply bombard them, they'll have to take some notice."

 

nope

 

I think they will retrench - I would. they have a job to do and have done it. the absolutely last thing to a quick resolution is 'pressure' - and as I have said elsewhere the newspaper article was probably the last straw to any quiet resolution.

 

this now won't help either

 

[great white]

I still feel that there meagre resources [5 officers to cover about half of the south coast] would be better used elseware

 

and as for raising Cod quota's

 

Charlie

[Maverick Martin]

Duncan if thats the case they must like looking stupid in front of joe public

 

At this rate they may need more staff just to read the emails

 

Martin

[Maverick Martin]

This bylaw has been around for years but not fully enforced so why now?

 

Well look at what sea anglers have been trying to achieve against the wishes of commercial fishermen, we were unsuccessful. In return I think commercials have had words in ears, in turn those ears have had words with ssfc who can do nothing other than enforce the bylaw they introduced even though it was ill thought out. Who's winning now!

 

In the end no one will win as money talks and when all the fish are caught and theres nomore money to be earned by commercials or those that supply RSA's no one will care pessimistic view? nope - realist? maybe

 

Has anybody had a proper answer as to why angling craft over 12 metres with a licence for 12 anglers were originally included in that bylaw? or indeed why a private craft over 12 metres with 2 or 3 anglers aboard is included?

 

Certainly takes some working out and what makes my blood boil even more is its' another blatant waste of my hard earned taxes

 

Martin

 

[shytalk]

if you would like a hand to pick up the toys tom !! nice letter well said this law has been around for 4o years now back then it was to stop big powerful trawlers etc destroying the inshore areas 12m angling boats were unheard of the wording of the rule was a bit out for its intended purpose but did its job untill now im sure most realise that there is an agenda that us mere mortals are not privvy to but mr carrier and his chums are the constant supply of objecting emails etc can do no harm keep em coming

[Wedger]

If the government had spent the

[duncan]

Duncan if thats the case they must like looking stupid in front of joe public

 

not sure they do (look stupid) Martin - the byelaw was enacted for a purpose and the terms considered approprite at the time ie no fishing from vessels over 12m within 6miles - if anything they were visionary in getting ahead of the commercial/organised leisure arguments!

 

Interestingly in the considered (stated) opinions of many, including yourself if my memory serves, it would be appropriate to include reference to coded vessels partaking in charter angling with 12 or less anglers onboard...? Well that still leaves the kids fishing for mackerel on the back of a 13m boat breaking the byelaw which I think the general public would see as patentely stupid in a way they might not apply to a 'commercial charter boat'.

 

At this rate they may need more staff just to read the emails

 

yes - which will inevitably slow down any byelaw revision!

 

Martin

 

There's a long term solution in there somewhere but it will need a will on behalf of the regulators (which appears lacking) and some time to emerge.

 

Duncan

[Paul D]

Disagree that petitioning them will not help. After all it is exactly what the commercials have done. Sitting quietly has done our cause no good whatsoever ( look at he Bass MLS fiasco ).

 

If no-one complained then they ( SFSC ) wouldn't know they were failing to act in all stakeholders interests.

[duncan]

agree the principle Paul - at the risk of repeating myself if you are petitioning then exactly what are you petitioning for?

 

no limit at all on the size of rod and line angling boats?

[Paul D]

agree the principle Paul - at the risk of repeating myself if you are petitioning then exactly what are you petitioning for?

 

no limit at all on the size of rod and line angling boats?

Correct - with the proviso they are still limited to 2 anglers

[Maverick Martin]

agree the principle Paul - at the risk of repeating myself if you are petitioning then exactly what are you petitioning for?

 

no limit at all on the size of rod and line angling boats?

Correct - with the proviso they are still limited to 2 anglers

You of course mean 12 anglers Paul

 

Martin

[Paul D]

My e-mail was as follows :-

 

To whom it may concern,

 

I am an avid fisherman who fishes from both Charter Boats and from my own boat, generally from Poole, Lymington,Weymouth and Langstone.

I understand that Southern Sea Fisheries have decided to interpret their byelaw 16 with regard to the size of vessels which are allowed to fish within the 6 mile limit to now include Charter Vessels.

This was not the intention of this byelaw originally ( It was intended to reduce the pressure on inshore fish stocks from commerical trawling ). A 12m plus charter boat is going to have no more pressure on the inshore stocks than a 10m one. EIther way they both fish 12 anglers.

 

There is also a safety aspect here as well. If the weather turns bad whilst on a charter trip - I guess I can now expect the charter boat to stay at least 6 miles out as opposed to fishing some sheltered inshore spot ?

 

In the meantime, I shall continue to fish inshore on my small Orkney and watch the beam trawler fishing inshore land more fish in one sweep than all the charter boats put together land in the whole week.

 

regards Paul Dore

Webmaster - Poole Bay Small Boat Fishing Club

 

PS: I would like to protest against this ruling, how can I do this ?

[TomBettle]

My letter arrived this morning from Ian Carrier.

 

I received a copy of the original byelaw and a copy of the letter to the Charter Vessel Association.

 

Unfortunately the wording is what sucks. Whilst it is obviously aimed at commercial vessels they slip up with a couple of words which I have highlighted in bold.

Please don't let this one go away guys. Keep badgering Ian Carrier. Make him work, but also make him realise that we want to work with them for a brilliantly managed and sustainable local fishery.... if ludicrous byelaws are rewritten sensibly.

 

The first sentence is the wording of the relevant byelaw. Folling that is my email reply this morning to Ian Carrier.

 

"No person shall use, or permit the use of any vessel which exceeds 12 metres in overall length for fishing or taking sea fish within any part of the District which lies within a line drawn six nautical miles to seaward from the baselines".

 

My reply to receiving the copy letters:

 

Dear Mr Carrier

cc Jonathan Shaw

cc Boats & Outboards magazine email address

 

Thank you for the copy of the byelaw and copy letter.

It does seem that my fears are correct and that this really is an archaic and antiquated, ill thought out byelaw that penalises those going afloat for fun or low level, sustainable angling.

I have used the word angling carefully as the byelaw is very clearly written (albeit very badly) with Commercial vessels such as trawlers in mind. Unfortunately, the words, "or taking fish", then mean the inclusion of anglers. Even a 7 year old angling from his father's boat could, in theory, be penalised?

 

I can only guess that this, daft and damaging byelaw (damaging to myself and other local business) has been resurrected by the complaints of some greedy and disgruntled commercial fishermen?

Please at least put my mind at rest that Southern SFC can see the ludicrousness of the wording in the byelaw and that moves are being made so that the leisure angler, fishing sustainably from his own or charter vessel will not be penalised.

 

Anglers are usually a quiet bunch who put up with the rubbish and daft rulings that are landed on us (The recent Bass MSL u-turn debacle as an example). However, this time, honest livelihoods are at stake.

Most of us leisure anglers run own small private boats, but we do also regularly use local charter boats. Some of which fall over the 12m mark. The owners of these boats have made a huge investment in our comfort and safety. Not so they can cram more of us onboard. No, these boats carry the same number of anglers as the boats which are smaller and not as safe.

Nearly everyone of my own customers keep a fishing rod aboard their boats. Many are not seriously dedicated anglers, but like to catch a Mackerel for the barbecue. Am I supposed to tell my customer who is planning on spending