North East England Netting consultation: 4 days left to comment !!

noeyedeer

Active member
Messages
1,046
Reaction score
22
Location
Ribble Valley
From Angling Trust: "Only 4 days left to submit a response to the Environment Agency's consultation to seek views on the potential to extend the beach netting season for sea trout in Yorkshire and the North East. The closing date for this consultation is 21 February 2020. We feel that it is absolutely key that as many anglers and angling clubs as possible respond to this consultation. Please share this post and spread the word amongst your angling friends and colleagues. Click the link to the consultation"

Potential extension to the Yorkshire and North East coastal sea trout netting season
- Environment Agency
- Citizen Space
 

Durham Ranger

Member
Messages
205
Reaction score
3
Location
Cheshire
Finally got round to replying - being lazy I've borrowed heavily (excepting the royal "we") from the WTT :

‘The Wild Trout Trust believes that there is no justification for any extension to the season for sea trout in the north east beach net fishery. Indeed, we believe that there is sufficient evidence, as highlighted in the consultation report and elsewhere, that the north east sea trout beach fishery is a mixed stock fishery, exploiting at-risk populations with no demonstrable, sustainable surplus. The precautionary principle would dictate that the fishery should cease with appropriate compensation paid to the net licencees, at least until such time that the management of the fishery is underpinned by reliable information on stock composition and the presence (or absence) of a harvestable surplus.’

DR
 

Walleye

Well-known member
Messages
2,012
Reaction score
102
My response was along the same lines....how can they even consider extending the season when the fish counters and their own net catch returns show a big decrease in sea trout numbers in 2019?
If they go ahead and extend the netting season, it's akin to reducing the voluntary catch and release target for anglers from 90% down to 10% after a season on the Wear when the fish counts were the lowest on record. The EA would never even consider this action for anglers, yet for the nets it's no problem.

If this goes ahead, all this will do is alienate anglers even more. I reckon a few hundred at most sea trout are killed by anglers on the Wear and we pay handsomely for the privilege. All we face are further method restrictions and the inevitable CCR. A few nets take 40,000 to 60,000 off the coast and that is OK.

All this is nothing at all to do with conservation. It's about marginalising the sport of game fishing to a point that when it is fly only, size 16 rubber hooks only, when it's banned nobody will notice or care.
 

Loxie

Well-known member
Messages
10,144
Reaction score
86
It's an indication that the EA is completely broken and totally unfit for purpose.
 

offshore

Active member
Messages
1,664
Reaction score
20
Just completed my own reply. The process is much shorter and quicker than some other forms I have seen in previous years. It takes about the same time as posting a response to a thread on here.

I can see salmon fishing failing completely, so the chance to fish for ST is worth fighting for IMHO.
 

fixedspool

New member
Messages
440
Reaction score
0
Sad there are so few replies to a post like this. A fraction of those on ' what reel' discussions. Say it all really. Our own worst enemy/
 

AwesomeOrchy

Member
Messages
162
Reaction score
0
I have just submitted my response. Should n:confused:ot be removing salmon and sea trout by nets when us anglers are being asked by all the powers that be to return everything we catch in the name of conservation!!
 

charlieH

Well-known member
Messages
2,993
Reaction score
43
Sad there are so few replies to a post like this. A fraction of those on ' what reel' discussions. Say it all really. Our own worst enemy/
Replies on forums don't actually achieve anything. You may feel that responses to the EA don't get very far either, but I'd rather that people actually responded to the consultation instead of just venting their indignation here!
 

Grassy_Knollington

Well-known member
Messages
3,141
Reaction score
45
Given this is at least the 3rd time this has been posted on the forum it’s not surprising that the indignation has petered out somewhat.

There is as much chance of the EA agreeing to a season extension for netting as there is of them repealing Spring Salmon conservation measures. They’re running a consultation to run a consultation and no amount of huffing and puffing on either side will change that.

If the AT and S&TC and whoever else all got together and requested a change in the Spring Salmon conservation rules there would also be a consultation to have a consultation.

In a few months the EA will announce that a netting extension cannot be granted at this time. Then the AT, S&TC and all other organisations will proclaim loudly that their efforts have helped to save April, May and September Salmon and Sea Trout from the nets.

The reality is more likely to be that no consultation will do anything to change the decision that the EA will have already made on netting, or any other subject.

It’s a total waste of time, energy and indignation.
 
Last edited:

offshore

Active member
Messages
1,664
Reaction score
20
I think the EA upper management love photographs of leaping salmon on Country File Calendars, to prove to the gullible public that are rivers are NOT full of raw sewage and toxic residues - even though the rivers are.

I doubt very few of the public know Sea Trout exist, let alone care if they are plundered; yet the salmon is recognised by most as an Environmental totem.

I think the EA would be quite happy to sacrifice the whole of the sea trout run (top placate a few former salmon nets-men) if they could get away with it - to get a few leaping salar photos annually and prove what a great job the EA are doing.

I think the EA will do what they think they can get away with. The decision on an extension has probably already been taken - but a failure for anglers to respond to this, will shape the liberties the EA will try and take in future.

I doubt very few Forum members have, or will, fill in the consultation 'document' - it is just an irony of human nature (as Fixedspool has mentioned above).
 

fixedspool

New member
Messages
440
Reaction score
0
Replies on forums don't actually achieve anything. You may feel that responses to the EA don't get very far either, but I'd rather that people actually responded to the consultation instead of just venting their indignation here!
If your remarks are directed at me CharlieH then you are of course wrong. I have previously responded. You may well be right that responses to EA, certainly NRW don't get very far. However you may be wrong and could at least make the effort. have you?
 

offshore

Active member
Messages
1,664
Reaction score
20
To put it in perspective, using data from 'Salmonid_and_fisheries_statistics_for_England_and_Wales_2017'
page 19, table 6.7 - states 36,358 Seatrout were netted from the North East region.

This compares to 3,200 ST caught by rod and line from rivers in the same region - the majority of which will have been released (table 6.10 page 23).

The ST netted figure for the NE region in 2015 was 65,000.

https://assets.publishing.service.g...ies_statistics_for_England_and_Wales_2017.pdf

https://assets.publishing.service.g...onid_and_Freshwater_Fisheries_Report_2015.pdf
 

Esk1

Member
Messages
240
Reaction score
1
Location
North Yorkshire
Sadly I feel this ‘consultation’ is a fait accompli, I would like to think otherwise and have submitted my comments anyway.
Lets hope they take on board the strength of feeling of rod anglers who are releasing 90% of their fish.
Esk1.
 

Rrrr

Well-known member
Messages
6,072
Reaction score
59
Sadly I feel this ‘consultation’ is a fait accompli, I would like to think otherwise and have submitted my comments anyway.
Lets hope they take on board the strength of feeling of rod anglers who are releasing 90% of their fish.
Esk1.
Ive filled it in anyway but do see it as pointless as the decisions will have allready been made one way or another.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
 

charlieH

Well-known member
Messages
2,993
Reaction score
43
If your remarks are directed at me CharlieH then you are of course wrong. I have previously responded. You may well be right that responses to EA, certainly NRW don't get very far. However you may be wrong and could at least make the effort. have you?
My comment wasn't aimed at you personally, and frankly I don't know why you would take it as such. You were bemoaning the fact that this thread hadn't garnered many replies, and I was merely pointing out that replies on a forum won't have any influence on the EA. If people are going to engage with the issue at all, it would be better if they spent their time and energy replying to the consultation, rather than to this thread.

For the record, I have responded, but I didn't feel the need to post 'signed' or anything like that on this or any of the other threads on the subject. To be honest, that always feels to me more like virtue signalling than contributing anything useful. I am glad to hear that you have responded too.
 
Top