EU Monitoring of Recreational Fisheries (Article 47)

[Mohawk]

what is the alternative to article 47?,to just keep going as we are,going to sea in any old little boat,maybe no c.o.p,vhf,epirb,flares but expecting to be bailed out by the coastguard free of charge if something goes wrong,catch/keep what we like unlogged unregulated.if we expect our government to control and save our seas then we all have to be registered/regulated.quota would be from the one source and recreational licence fee would probably be about 10% that of the commercial sector eg.60euro/kw,200euro/tonne.with commercial fishing no longer viable availability of licence should be no problem.i think article 47 will be very beneficial to our sport especially in the longterm.

Believe me article 47 in it's current form could be the death knell of Sea Angling.

I haven't any old tub I have a fully registered and licensed Charter boat, if tonnes and kw's are to be introduced you will not see a charter boat in Ireland or the UK I can assure you that! As for small private boats If you have to register your boat as a commercial ship which is exactly what tonnage is, you will have to pay commercial harbour rates in all Irish harbours that you use and these are not cheap! Another issue you seem to not be aware of of is that a vessel engaged in commercial fishing is the only type of "REGISTERED" vessel in Ireland that is exempt by law from requiring a "Loadline" or a "Loadline exemption" to put "to Sea". That will be an even more serious can of worms to open up that this art 47!

You are under some misapprehension that art 47 is going to fix the commercial fishing problems that have been made worse by the very quotas you are hoping we will be forced to become part of! What art 47 is proposing is that you will no longer be an angler but a commercial, or worse a criminal if you breach the terms of same! There is only going to be a very small portion of quota distributed among all the EU countries for the recreational sea anglers and I doubt their is going to be enough for everyone!

The problems with quotas and commercial fishing are not of our making, it would be suicidal of us to become a part of that!

[Tanglerat]

The problems with quotas and commercial fishing are not of our making, it would be suicidal of us to become a part of that!

Indeedy. That just about sums up the whole arguement.

If the Powers want RSA to be part of the quota system then let them reform the system first to something that demonstrably works, and is of benefit to RSA joining. And I just can't see that happening anytime soon.

[captain AHAB]

the only alternatives to a quota system that i can think of would be no fishing atall or a free forall...neither of which are acceptable.all our stock levels are very low and we wont defeat this ,so,as we are part of the problem(albeit a very minor part)and part of the solution i think maybe we should work with it.we would definitely have a voice and be heard in future debates/discussions.alot of anglers bemoan the fact that the seas are practically empty but continue to take 4,6,10 fish home from a good session,multiply this by maybe 100 or 1000 boats over a given weekend and you get alot of fish.stocks really need to be managed but so do anglers to a certain degree as we have our share of rogues too.

[doggie3131]

Re:Recreational fisheries article 47

I had a meeting with Sean O Neachtain M.E.P. member of the commission of fisheries on Saturday 24th jan, Sean agrees that article 47 is unworkable in its present format and that all Irelands m.e.p.s are in agreement on this, and this is the advice that will be given to our member of state Tony Killeen dept of fisheries, But the same commission is heavily populated by the Spanish who are trying to push this through, he feels that a compromise will be introduced that each member state will make up there own minds on whither to introduce a recreational sea fishing licence. He thinks that Irelands stance will be not to introduce one. Sturt Stevenson chair of the fisheries commission is a Scottish consertive who is very against article 47 Sean feels as long as the Irish, English, and French oppose this article then it will not get through the preliminary vote which he thinks will be voted on in April, and then the council of ministers will vote in may or June. Sean’s feeling is that while we keep the pressure on our m.e.p.s the real vote will be made by the council of ministers, which is made up by the fisheries ministers from each of the twenty seven states. In other words our minister of fisheries Tony Killeen will be the guy to vote, and would be the guy to lobby to let our views be known.

[Tanglerat]

More, on another forum:

http://www.worldseafishing.com/forums/s ... ost1653345

who is http://www.fipsmer.org/ anyway? Is the IFSA members of it?

[timmy]

YesTanglerat!
IFSA has been a member of FIPs M For many years now.
Timmy.

[Tanglerat]

YesTanglerat!
IFSA has been a member of FIPs M For many years now.
Timmy.

so, that begs the question, did FIPs M inform/consult with the IFSA about what they intended proposing?

If not, why not?

If so, who in the IFSA knew, and what did they do?

[choco]

02/02/2009 - 18:56:08
The EU tonight rubbished reports it intends reeling in recreational fishing by imposing quotas on all sea anglers in a bid to protect endangered species.

Fishermen feared the proposal, cast late last year, would mark the end of the line for the popular hobby.

But the European Commission’s office insisted the plan was closing a loop-hole and was aimed only at pleasure boat fishermen in the open sea and not those in row boats or on shore.

The Central Fisheries Board, however, refused to take the bait and demanded more detail from the EU.

Ciaran Byrne, chief executive, said: “We have to look at it in the context of what we’re trying to do in terms of getting our own people as well as international tourists to fish.

“We need to understand exactly what it is that they are proposing because there are an awful lot of smoke and daggers, and I haven’t seen any documents exactly specifying what the EU is proposing.”

Sea angling is a major part of Ireland’s tourist industry and is valued at around €60m a year.

Martin Territt, European Commission Representation in Ireland director, said: “The Commission has no intention of subjecting anglers in rowing boats and on beaches to quotas and log books – this is just a load of old cod.

“There is a proposal to protect fish under threat of extinction from all fishing in open sea. Only fish threatened by collapsing stocks are covered – and only fishing taking place out at sea.

“This proposal closes a loop-hole which allowed recreational fishermen to take fish which were off-limits to commercial fishermen.”

Mr Territt said the recreational sector is having a significant impact on the populations of endangered species, such as blue-fin and cod, and can no longer be let off the hook.

In Italy 20% of the blue-fin tuna quota and in Germany 50% of the national cod quota is taken by pleasure anglers.

“We believe it’s not realistic to let these fish stocks just disappear while commercial fishermen are subject to tight controls,” Mr Territt said.

The proposal, tabled last November, is aimed at anglers on board vessels in open sea who are taking threatened species such as blue-fin tuna and cod.


« Previous

[JOHN1]

i wonder could someone tell me what the definition of OPEN SEA is

and what is a row boat is it a boat that is only propelled with oars or can you have an engine as backup to the oars just in-case your arms get tired 12 miles out

or is this going to be looking at charter boats in particular,
i know of one very well known charter boat operator in cork that put 3 fish boxes on the deck and said (right lads fill them 3) and you can keep the rest after that for yourselves . that is recreational commercial fishing

it the likes of this that is causing the problems.

[cortaz]

?the thin edge of the edge tuna an cod today, tuna,cod,bass.tope,ect tomorrow??offshore today inshore tomorrow?, big boats, small boats then him with the rod anywere>>>>>>>remember these are the guys responsable for the lack of fish in our waters in the first place, they sent 1000s of supertrawlers from all over europe into our waters with pretty much a free hand!! and now they want to tell us wath we can and cant do............why ido i find this funny i recon they think were all stupid

[jd]

from The Irish Times

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ire ... 84188.html

EU denies planning fish quotas for sea anglers


Director of the European Commission Representation in Ireland Martin Territt confirmed yesterday that there is a proposal to protect certain vulnerable stocks in open sea from deep sea rod fishing.

This would close off a loophole which allows recreational game fishermen to take fish such as blue-fin tuna and cod which are “off-limits” to commercial catchers, Mr Territt said.

It was a “typical distortion of EU policy” to suggest that anglers in rowing boats and on beaches would be subject to quotas and logbooks, he said.

However, he added: “It’s simply not true to say that recreational vessels account for 1 per cent of the EU fish catch.

“In Germany, up to 50 per cent of the national cod quota is taken by recreational fishermen.”

“In Italy, 20 per cent of the blue-fin tuna quota is taken like this. So it is by no means small numbers.
“We believe it’s not realistic to let these fish stocks just disappear while commercial fishermen are subject to tight controls.”

Some EU states already have national rules in place for anglers, and recreational fishermen in the US are subject to the same limitations as the commercial sector on certain sensitive species, he pointed out.

Very selective use of statistics above (in italics) to justify what the EC propose in relation to Recreational Deep Sea Angling. What proportion of the British,Irish, French or Spanish quota is caught by their respective recreational boat anglers?

[Seancelt]

02/02/2009 - 18:56:08
“This proposal closes a loop-hole which allowed recreational fishermen to take fish which were off-limits to commercial fishermen.”
« Previous

I can think of one fish straight away that recreational fishermen can take but is off limits to commercials....... BASS!!!!

Could Article 47 be used by the "Powers-That-Be" to allow commercials take Bass again? Could they use it as justification to level the playing field in favour of commercial rape of a slowly recovering stock? I for one could see this government doing just that in the hope of gaining some brownie points from the fishing sector.

Am I being paranoid?

[tunaorlater]

Hi lads
i believe the implications of these proposals are indeed VERY far reaching!
unfortunately the average "joe" angler has little if any voice on these matters
so we should all be making a determined concerted effort to lobby our MEPs to voice
our disatisfaction at the proposed article 47. Furtermore two species namely cod and tuna
are been used in media spin, however the truth is that the tuna "purse seiners " in the med
have taken such a toll on bluefin tuna stock levels that the USA have taken legal action against
the EU due to over exploitation.
And on the issue of cod , what sortof management system allow the largest gillnetting fleet in ireland,
to currently congregate in cobh,crosshaven,ballycotton ,helvic etc in order to slaughter the cod as they arrive
off our south coast for their annual breeding period during feb/march.
In other countries with proper fishery management , breeding species are protected by closed seasons
instead of pursuing them when most vulnerable.These fish are normaly harvested in large eneough numbers
as to drive down the market price rendering them almost worthless.
however the same policy makers that legislate for "crooked bananas" now want to licence us for doing what we
love so much , and these same eu parliamentarians want us to reconsider our No vote on the lisbon treaty !!!
they sure have a great way of focusing our attention .

PLEASE lads lobby your local meps

[Tanglerat]

found this on that link I put in above:

I've been told that CIPS have not endorsed Article 47.

It's up for discussion at the General Assembly which takes place in Dresden on 17/18th April.

Just over 40 countries are each entitled to send 2 delegates who can speak on the issue, but each country has but one vote (England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales each have a vote).

The Angling Trust has instructed their delegate(s) (who cover their own travel and hotel expenses etc) to vote against Article 47.

It's only when the result of this vote is known, that CIPS will have an official position on article 47.

So, who's representing Ireland, and how do they intend to vote?

[Tanglerat]

I've been checking up on my own questions ie who represents Ireland. I've exchanged email with Chris Clark, an English angler who's an International competitor. This is what he told me:

I shall be attending the meeting in Dresden as I sit on the FIPSm board representing shore anglers worldwide and not just England, I am the only shore angling delegate on the board. The governing body of each member country is allowed one vote but they often send two or more delegates, in the case of Ireland it is the Irish Federation of Sea Anglers who will have the vote, normally the Chairman and Secretary attend but I understand there has been some changes in that deparment during the past twelve months so I am not sure who will be attending the meeting, a list will not be issued until we arrive. Having said that I am pretty certain that the delegate from Ireland would be voting against the motion the same as I shall be doing, I hope this helps

So now we know that the IFSA is a member of FIPS-M, the body promoting Article 47.

FIPS-M is part of CIPS, who are holding a General Assembly on April 17,18 to decide their stance on Article 47. Ireland will have a vote, and is usually represented by the Chairman and Secretary of IFSA.


Is it not now time for the IFSA to tell us what they've known and done so far, and what they intend to do at the CIPS General Assembly.

Why the deafening silence from the hierarcy of IFSA?

[corbyeire]

i would like to hear something also from the IFSA, we had a thread here encouraging people to be a member as there wasnt time to organise another body - we should just use one in place already to lobby our views - that being the IFSA

now i dont know that the ranks of the IFSA bulged on this call - but all the same they are the representatives of a good fraction of the users on this site

i havent heard anything via my club on some circular or the like - so if anybody has anything post here please

[jd]

Hugh O'Rorke, the secretary of the IFSA, has already been quoted on this site (from a newspaper piece) as saying that the IFSA oppose Article 47 and are looking for an urgent meeting with the minister. I don't have it to hand here, but I presume the ifsa diary '09 has contact details for the secretary if anyone is looking for an update. Otherwise updates would normally be through club, provincial council and national council meetings.

[corbyeire]

thanks for that jd

[jd]

A bit more info on this. The IFSA, as part of the Angling Council of Ireland, is a member of the European Anglers Alliance. http://www.eaa-europe.org/ (needs updating)
There is a full time lobbyist in Europe for the EAA, and she is working on Article 47 in particular at the moment.

This is also up for discussion at AGM of CIPs in April.

[uvox]

For the record, I wrote to the following in January, asking for clarification and how this proposal might be brought into the needs of anglers. I've included the latest.

Angling Council of Ireland: No acknowledgment or response.
Irish Federation of Sea Anglers (President): No acknowledgment or response.
Recreational Angling Ireland: No acknowledgment or response.
Dick Roche, Minister for European Affairs: Acknowledgment, passed it to Mary Coughlan TD.
Mary Lou McDonald, MEP: No acknowledgment or response.
Senator Shane Ross: Acknowledged, agreed with sentiments and would follow up with Minister.
Senator Ivana Bacik: Acknowledged, agreed with sentiments and would follow up with Minister.
Ruari Quinn MP: No acknowledgment or response.
Eoin Ryan MEP: No acknowledgment or response
Lucinda Creighton TD: No acknowledgment or response.
Chris Andrews TD: Passed it to Brendan Smith TD, who passed it to Eamon Ryan, and followed up.
John Gormley, Minister for Environment, etc: Who passed it to Brendan Smith.

And so on...

Eventually, a letter arrived back from Tony Killeen, TD, dated 19th February. I'v included it verbatim, redacted, here: