Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED

Options
  • 27-04-2013 12:05pm
    #1
    jkchambers
    Registered Users Posts: 380 ✭✭


    The Dept are bringing in a new Fisheries Act which will make many major changes to the previous Fisheries Acts. These changes will IMPACT ON YOU
    The main proposed changes are to introduce a COMPULSORY ANGLER CHARGE and completely revamp the WATERKEEPER SYSTEM. There will be lots of other major changes
    The CONSULTATION PROCESS starts on MONDAY.
    There will be at least 5 meetings around the country.
    DONT LEAVE IT TO OTHERS. GO ALONG AND AIR YOUR VIEWS.
    Link to other thread with details of meetings
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056928158


«13

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Zzippy
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 14,166 Mod ✭✭✭✭Zzippy


    Have you seen the heads of bill John? Is there definitely a provision for an angler charge?


  • Options
    #3
    ytpe2r5bxkn0c1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 32,688 ✭✭✭✭ytpe2r5bxkn0c1


    The charge in itself would not be problem for me. What I would have an interest in is the level of charge.


  • Options
    #4
    jkchambers
    Registered Users Posts: 380 ✭✭jkchambers


    Zzippy wrote: »
    Have you seen the heads of bill John? Is there definitely a provision for an angler charge?
    No heads of bill drawn up yet. Well, thats what I am told.
    They will definitely be proposing some sort of compulsory angling charge.


  • Options
    #5
    EireIceMan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 419 ✭✭EireIceMan


    jkchambers wrote: »
    No heads of bill drawn up yet. Well, thats what I am told.
    They will definitely be proposing some sort of compulsory angling charge.

    what, like a rod licence of some sort? Where will the money go have you any idea?


  • Options
    #6
    jkchambers
    Registered Users Posts: 380 ✭✭jkchambers


    EireIceMan wrote: »
    what, like a rod licence of some sort? Where will the money go have you any idea?
    Thats what these meetings are all about.
    There are suggestions that funds raised may be split with half going to Inland Fisheries Ireland and the other half being ringfenced for angling development. Its all to be discussed at these meetings


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    jimmymcg
    Registered Users Posts: 29 ✭jimmymcg


    we need to fight this angling licence like our fathers did 20 or 30 years ago..we need to mobilise very fast...

    they are not going to recruit new protection staff with this money i am sure????


    and the idea of fishermen becoming guardians of the water is ludicrous. it needs to be left to the state..not individuals on a power trip.


  • Options
    #8
    gumbo1
    Registered Users Posts: 681 ✭✭✭gumbo1


    In fairness, anglers are kinda guardians of the waters!! If you see a net in the water do you pull it out or leave it?? Same with traps, do you leave it upto a waterkeeper, who may not see it, to remove?? Personally if I see traps or nets n the waters I'll pull them out an destroy them, not on a power trip just pissed of with the current state of affairs!!
    I personally have no problem paying a small fee each year if there was to be a visible increase in the number of waterkeepers and or fishery protection officers about the rivers and lakes of Ireland!!


  • Options
    #9
    demanufactured
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,756 ✭✭✭demanufactured


    More taxes


  • Options
    #10
    8k2q1gfcz9s5d4
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,616 ✭✭✭8k2q1gfcz9s5d4


    jimmymcg wrote: »

    and the idea of fishermen becoming guardians of the water is ludicrous. it needs to be left to the state..not individuals on a power trip.

    The state have no money to hire enough waterkeepers. I'm all for anglers becoming guardians of the water. I have seen poachers kill pike a few yards away from me, but I couldn't approach them, as i have no power and they needed to be caught in the act by a waterkeeper to be fined.


  • Options
    #11
    Zzippy
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 14,166 Mod ✭✭✭✭Zzippy


    Jorge Rough Letterhead wrote: »
    The state have no money to hire enough waterkeepers. I'm all for anglers becoming guardians of the water. I have seen poachers kill pike a few yards away from me, but I couldn't approach them, as i have no power and they needed to be caught in the act by a waterkeeper to be fined.

    They don't actually, once you call IFI and they come out and apprehend the offenders - if you are prepared to give evidence in court that is enough. Your word of what you saw is enough to initiate a case, particularly if other evidence backs it up, such as said persons being in possession of the pike you saw killed, over size or bag limit, etc.
    For an offence like that it is usually an on-the-spot fine anyway, so you would not need to give evidence unless they failed to pay the fine and were prosecuted.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    jkchambers
    Registered Users Posts: 380 ✭✭jkchambers


    I will be in Drogheda this evening. I hope to attend some of the others too to see what anglers are saying


  • Options
    #13
    Daroxtar
    Registered Users Posts: 4,331 ✭✭✭Daroxtar


    demanufactured wrote: »
    More taxes
    This^^

    I'm disgusted that the bastards have got me thinking about politics when I want to be thinking about fishing.


  • Options
    #14
    tootsy70
    Registered Users Posts: 195 ✭✭tootsy70


    What will this be, is it that everyone will have to pay for a license to fish for any aul fish.


  • Options
    #15
    jkchambers
    Registered Users Posts: 380 ✭✭jkchambers


    tootsy70 wrote: »
    What will this be, is it that everyone will have to pay for a license to fish for any aul fish.
    Thats the way its looking


  • Options
    #16
    Zzippy
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 14,166 Mod ✭✭✭✭Zzippy


    jkchambers wrote: »
    Thats the way its looking

    John

    As you said yourself, this isn't contained in the heads of bill. Have you other information that that is definitely on the cards, or are you just speculating here to gauge the reaction?


  • Options
    #17
    jkchambers
    Registered Users Posts: 380 ✭✭jkchambers


    Zzippy wrote: »
    John

    As you said yourself, this isn't contained in the heads of bill. Have you other information that that is definitely on the cards, or are you just speculating here to gauge the reaction?
    I have been attending the public consultation meetings and other Fed/Ifi meetings. It is on the way.


  • Options
    #18
    tootsy70
    Registered Users Posts: 195 ✭✭tootsy70


    jkchambers wrote: »
    Thats the way its looking

    Shocking! We'll be getting taxed soon for every footstep we have to take in the city centres and theyll make up some bull**** law thats its good for the enviroment this new tax lol


  • Options
    #19
    COYW
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,930 ✭✭✭COYW


    tootsy70 wrote: »
    What will this be, is it that everyone will have to pay for a license to fish for any aul fish.

    And how is it going to be enforced? Can't see the guards traversing the banks to check licenses.


  • Options
    #20
    jimmymcg
    Registered Users Posts: 29 ✭jimmymcg


    lets set up an anti-licence organisation?? we need to mobile and stamp this out ASAP.


  • Options
    #21
    dardevle
    Registered Users Posts: 771 ✭✭✭dardevle


    quite possibly some gobshyte in government thinks that a suitable period of time has passed since the last rod license debacle and is trying to make a name for themselves like Brendan Daly did 20+ years ago,

    when hell freezes over is the phrase that comes to mind!........anyone that thinks this money will be ringfenced for the needs of the angling community is completely naïve....


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    Zzippy
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 14,166 Mod ✭✭✭✭Zzippy


    dardevle wrote: »
    quite possibly some gobshyte in government thinks that a suitable period of time has passed since the last rod license debacle and is trying to make a name for themselves like Brendan Daly did 20+ years ago,

    when hell freezes over is the phrase that comes to mind!........anyone that thinks this money will be ringfenced for the needs of the angling community is completely naïve....

    Playing devils advocate here, but there is already a precedent - salmon and sea trout anglers pay a licence for their fishing, some people would ask why should other anglers not also pay for their fishing?
    Half of the salmon licence fee is ringfenced and the money spent on habitat restoration projects on salmon rivers. If other anglers paid a licence this could well be the case for trout/coarse/pike waters too.


  • Options
    #23
    jkchambers
    Registered Users Posts: 380 ✭✭jkchambers


    Zzippy wrote: »
    Playing devils advocate here, but there is already a precedent - salmon and sea trout anglers pay a licence for their fishing, some people would ask why should other anglers not also pay for their fishing?
    Half of the salmon licence fee is ringfenced and the money spent on habitat restoration projects on salmon rivers. If other anglers paid a licence this could well be the case for trout/coarse/pike waters too.
    That is what is been suggested. Ringfencing of funds raised from trout, pike, coarse AND sea anglers. It may well come down to the amount to be ringfenced. There are some other issues that need to be sorted.
    1 We need a scrapping of the section 294 waterkeepers and replacement by a properly trained and monitored fisheries reserve force. Appointed and trained by IFI
    2 Under the 2010 Act the Board of IFI is made up of the CEO, an elected staff member and 8 appointed by Ministers etc. Before the current board of IFI was appointed we met the then Minister Conor Lenehan. He bluntly told us that he wanted NO ANGLERS on the board of IFI , just business people. He added that he would have to appoint some women and that our best chance of getting someone on the board was if he had a female angler who was also a businesswoman. I kid you not !. As it happened 5 game anglers managed to get themselves appointed (whats new about that). Anglers should have several seats on the board allocated to them as a RIGHT. There should be a balance of representation sea,coarse, game etc.


  • Options
    #24
    mattcullen
    Registered Users Posts: 282 ✭✭mattcullen


    jkchambers wrote: »
    That is what is been suggested. Ringfencing of funds raised from trout, pike, coarse AND sea anglers. It may well come down to the amount to be ringfenced. There are some other issues that need to be sorted.
    1 We need a scrapping of the section 294 waterkeepers and replacement by a properly trained and monitored fisheries reserve force. Appointed and trained by IFI
    2 Under the 2010 Act the Board of IFI is made up of the CEO, an elected staff member and 8 appointed by Ministers etc. Before the current board of IFI was appointed we met the then Minister Conor Lenehan. He bluntly told us that he wanted NO ANGLERS on the board of IFI , just business people. He added that he would have to appoint some women and that our best chance of getting someone on the board was if he had a female angler who was also a businesswoman. I kid you not !. As it happened 5 game anglers managed to get themselves appointed (whats new about that). Anglers should have several seats on the board allocated to them as a RIGHT. There should be a balance of representation sea,coarse, game etc.

    The idea of a rod licence for sea fishing is crazy. Sure what could they even pretend to use the money on to improve sea fishing when the problem is clearly overfishing


  • Options
    #25
    EmptyTree
    Registered Users Posts: 748 ✭✭✭EmptyTree


    mattcullen wrote: »
    The idea of a rod licence for sea fishing is crazy.

    While I would not have any particular problem with paying for some sort of a licence if I thought the money was going to be ring-fenced and put back into the sport, I can’t imagine a licence for sea fishing would be introduced as I think it would be simply unenforceable (in my mind anyway).


    It’s early days yet, but would it be a case of one licence for game, one for coarse (and one for sea)? Or would the one licence cover all three?


  • Options
    #26
    jkchambers
    Registered Users Posts: 380 ✭✭jkchambers


    EmptyTree wrote: »
    While I would not have any particular problem with paying for some sort of a licence if I thought the money was going to be ring-fenced and put back into the sport, I can’t imagine a licence for sea fishing would be introduced as I think it would be simply unenforceable (in my mind anyway).


    It’s early days yet, but would it be a case of one licence for game, one for coarse (and one for sea)? Or would the one licence cover all three?
    If they want it to run the one payment is going to have to cover sea, trout, pike and coarse


  • Options
    #27
    jkchambers
    Registered Users Posts: 380 ✭✭jkchambers


    I would think that there were about 50 anglers at last nights meeting in the Spa Hotel in Lucan. There was a good turnout of pike anglers. Lots of good points made. The Minister did seem to be genuine in wanting to hear all anglers concerns and does seem anxious to make sure that the new legislation will be acceptable to anglers. He clearly said that if we wanted an angler registration fee/permit all funds would be ringfenced and if we didnt want to contribute it wouldnt be in the legislation. He also said that when the Bill was drawn up he would be willing to come back to meet us again to make sure that we were happy. His principle officer in the Dept Dennis Maher, while only in the inland fisheries 14 months was well in command of his brief and could answer all questions well.
    I attended 3 of these meetings and the main thing that struck me was the complete lack of sea anglers in attendance. According to a recent survey sea anglers are supposed to be the most numerous.


  • Options
    #28
    ytpe2r5bxkn0c1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 32,688 ✭✭✭✭ytpe2r5bxkn0c1


    Maybe sea anglers don't read Boards. I know I only heard of all this from Boards.ie. No mention on the river bank, lakeside, shore, or boat around here.


  • Options
    #29
    Dfmnoc
    Registered Users Posts: 183 ✭✭Dfmnoc


    Can someone say what the rules are at the moment, i taught anglers had to get a licence to salmon fish, and pay membership fees to a club to fish on most rivers anyway.


  • Options
    #30
    jkchambers
    Registered Users Posts: 380 ✭✭jkchambers


    Dfmnoc wrote: »
    Can someone say what the rules are at the moment, i taught anglers had to get a licence to salmon fish, and pay membership fees to a club to fish on most rivers anyway.
    Yes they do. What is now suggested that trout, sea, pike and coarse anglers make a contribution


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    Zzippy
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 14,166 Mod ✭✭✭✭Zzippy


    jkchambers wrote: »
    Yes they do. What is now suggested that trout, sea, pike and coarse anglers make a contribution

    John, you seem to be the only one suggesting this. You've even posted yourself that the minister said if anglers don't want it it won't be in the legislation. Nothing I have heard has indicated that IFI are pushing a licence - most people in IFI remember only too well the last licence fiasco. I've not heard the minister or government pushing it.
    So who exactly is suggesting that anglers make a contribution??? I'm not saying its a bad idea, just that you're the only person anywhere who seems to be keeping this going. Do you want a licence?


Advertisement