PAC and EA News Nov 2018

Find out what your club is getting up to.
rob Shallcroft
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2018 10:50 pm

Re: PAC and EA News Nov 2018

Post by rob Shallcroft » Mon Dec 17, 2018 8:42 pm

Hi John,

This to me is a club principle issue. I do not think it is acceptable that any region for all it's best intentions should be able to push through a law change that effects pike angling without a wider consultation of the PAC of GB membership. This appears to be the situation here. A small committee (5?) of which you are a leading component and driver then discuss and OK it to progress. Zero consultaion with the PAC Advisory Panel - Zero consolation with other regions - Zero consultation with GB members. Keen and loyal members like myself get to read about the conclusion of events on Facebook!

I do not believe this type of negotiation is either fair, transparent or healthy. I would like to see an independent look at the way this has been conducted. The PAC Advisory panel would be a good call for a way in which this could quickly be facilitated.

We will go around in circles on the extent of use of pike as bait. I offer written historical evidence of minimal use, you offer little in return. Poll 100 PAC of GB members on their use of pike as bait and the result will come back as tiny use. Do this and my opinion of minimal use of pike taken as bait by PAC members will be proven 100% right. I'm disappointed this type of simple to obtain evidence was not supplied or asked for by the EA in order to make considered decisions based on evidence in the banning of said natural coarse bait.

I have not once used the term 'live-bait' in our discussion - this is about the right to use natural baits, dead or alive. Questions surround this: Will it be OK for me to bring a small pike, legally caught and despatched from my local carp gravel pit, within the national size guidelines, frozen in a freezer box from home and use it on the river Thurne? Does this time served, natural, harmless, cost effective and simple way of pike fishing become a law breaker in Norfolk?

Here’s a fictional senario to consider!

Mortimer Gravy Browning, PAC Committee member, RO/LO for the Devon PAC and others recognise the decline in their pike on their local rivers Exe, Dart and Tamar. Their water abstraction and farming waste problems are widely recognised, their low lying rivers are subject to increased salt water incursion, global warming and rising sea level predictions make worrying reading. With hard earned relationships built with local EA guys and others who care, lots of good work is done and this is followed and much appreciated by the members of the PAC of GB membership.

Mortimer at a local meeting with the EA are brainstorming initiatives to conserve pike populations on their rivers to add to their great and much respected work. Lots of great ideas come forward for consideration. One recommendation to come forward from Mortimer is to have the rule of single hook only use for pike anglers in Devon. Mortimer's rationale for this rule change is the belief that single hooks will cause less fatalities to captured pike when compared to using two sets of trebble hooks. The scientists look at this and agree, the science and mechanics add up, a pike swallowing a single hook would indeed be in less danger than a pike that has swallowed six hook points. All agreed then, the rule change is put forward for recommendation to the top brass at the EA to rubber stamp. Mortimer discusses this with his four fellow committee members and things are now good to go!

Keen and loyal members of the PAC first learn of this rule change on a internet posting on Facebook. Questions are asked along the lines of ‘is it right for a local region to recommend such a angling law change without having the curtesy to discuss the subject at a wider level with the clubs membership’?

Mortimer replies “Why not?... the science adds up with the experts and Norfolk did a similar thing in 2018”

I do go on a bit!

rob

john currie
Posts: 44
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2017 10:05 pm

Re: PAC and EA News Nov 2018

Post by john currie » Tue Dec 18, 2018 11:21 am

Hallo Rob
I have said a few times in this thread that along with the Pac committee a number of scientists ,fisheries officers ,experienced local anglers with in depth knowledge of the problem and others have been consulted .I have also said that we cannot ask for a ban on taking for the table and say its ok to use a declining pike stock for your bait ,and i still say pike are used as bait more often than you believe.The dead pike bait scenario you mention would be just that a dead bait.The Mr Browning scenario would of been challenged at Pac committee level as not accurate and without proof.Rob i think it best you talk to another committee member or chairman to see what they think you should or can do regarding your objections.As has been stated these are proposals that were well met.If they were dropped by the Pac they would be taken up by Norwich and district pike club and at least one other group to push forward,again only for the broads.As I have said before rather than been perceived as decisive the fens are suggesting the same line of action ,so im not getting the same feelings you are.I hope you see we are just going round in circles now so hope you can pass on all of your objections etc to Mr x and they can deal with them to present to the rest of the commitee .Happy Christmas .

rob Shallcroft
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2018 10:50 pm

Re: PAC and EA News Nov 2018

Post by rob Shallcroft » Tue Dec 18, 2018 12:41 pm

Thanks John for the reply. Yes, we agree to disagree on this subject pretty much in total!

That's fair enough and good to have robust debate in a grown up way, this is appreciated at my end. I have full admiration and respect for the work you and the committee do on behalf of the club. Just not this bit!

This will be my last post on the subject, here or anywhere else (thank God i hear some sigh!)

I do think it would be healthy for the PAC to look at my point of view as a member and will ask if this can be accomidated and for my observations and point of view to be considered fair, reasonable or rubbish!

Best regards,
rob

john currie
Posts: 44
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2017 10:05 pm

Re: PAC and EA News Nov 2018

Post by john currie » Wed Dec 19, 2018 9:40 am

rob Shallcroft wrote:
Tue Dec 18, 2018 12:41 pm
Thanks John for the reply. Yes, we agree to disagree on this subject pretty much in total!

That's fair enough and good to have robust debate in a grown up way, this is appreciated at my end. I have full admiration and respect for the work you and the committee do on behalf of the club. Just not this bit!

This will be my last post on the subject, here or anywhere else (thank God i hear some sigh!)

I do think it would be healthy for the PAC to look at my point of view as a member and will ask if this can be accomidated and for my observations and point of view to be considered fair, reasonable or rubbish!

Best regards,
rob
I have already spoken to Steve Harper and asked him to have a look at what you have pointed out and to contact you in the near future with his and the committees findings.My part in that will be to answer any questions they have .
Cheers.

Eric Edwards
Posts: 49
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 8:43 pm

Re: PAC and EA News Nov 2018

Post by Eric Edwards » Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:58 am

This byelaw review has been long in coming, I've previously posted on this forum about it. It is, however, likely to actually happen this year and I've just spoken to a member of the EA fisheries' team about it. It seems the plan is to standardise local byelaws across the country, there is currently a mish-mash of byelaws with different ones applying to different regions for no particular reason. This is confusing for anglers and confusing for those who have to police the byelaws and the EA are looking to remove the confusion, that seems fair enough to me.
This can go one of two ways for each byelaw of course, a local byelaw could simply be dropped, in which case we need not worry about it too much, or it could be adopted countrywide. Now in this latter case, I think we need to be on our guard since there are some restrictive byelaws which we would not want to see rolled out across the country. The two that spring to mind are trolling - this is not allowed in the Anglian region, even with an electric outboard, and the use of lures on salmon rivers, there are some restrictions here.


Are there any local byelaws in your region that you would like to be rid of? Are there some you would like to be put in place? I've made sure the Specialist Group will have the opportunity for input on this.

Jason Skilton
Posts: 148
Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2017 10:00 am
Contact:

Re: PAC and EA News Nov 2018

Post by Jason Skilton » Tue Feb 12, 2019 12:14 pm

Eric Edwards wrote:
Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:58 am
Are there any local byelaws in your region that you would like to be rid of? Are there some you would like to be put in place? I've made sure the Specialist Group will have the opportunity for input on this.
Which specialist group Eric and which organisation are you representing?
PAC RO Suffolk & LO East Anglia
PAC14 Press Officer and Social Media Manager

Eric Edwards
Posts: 49
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 8:43 pm

Re: PAC and EA News Nov 2018

Post by Eric Edwards » Tue Feb 12, 2019 12:35 pm

I chair the Specialist Group on behalf of the Angling Trust. The group is made up of representatives from most of the major specialist angling groups, PAC's representative is Dave Mutton. Groups who regularly attend include the PAC, LAS, BCSG, CS, Tenchfishers and new members the Perchfishers who are yet to attend. In the past we've also had the Chub Study Group and Barbel Society, though the latter are in dispute with the Trust and no longer come.

Jason Skilton
Posts: 148
Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2017 10:00 am
Contact:

Re: PAC and EA News Nov 2018

Post by Jason Skilton » Tue Feb 12, 2019 12:53 pm

Eric Edwards wrote:
Tue Feb 12, 2019 12:35 pm
In the past we've also had the Chub Study Group and Barbel Society, though the latter are in dispute with the Trust and no longer come.
Not surprised :lol:
PAC RO Suffolk & LO East Anglia
PAC14 Press Officer and Social Media Manager

davelumb
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2017 6:01 pm

Re: PAC and EA News Nov 2018

Post by davelumb » Tue Feb 12, 2019 9:04 pm

Eric Edwards wrote:
Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:58 am
It seems the plan is to standardise local byelaws across the country...
Which is why I have concerns about the PAC's support for proposals to limit summer piking in Broadland. I'd welcome a guarantee that this would be specifically for an area where pike stocks are deemed to be in decline or threatened.

Jason Skilton
Posts: 148
Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2017 10:00 am
Contact:

Re: PAC and EA News Nov 2018

Post by Jason Skilton » Wed Feb 13, 2019 8:11 am

davelumb wrote:
Tue Feb 12, 2019 9:04 pm
Eric Edwards wrote:
Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:58 am
It seems the plan is to standardise local byelaws across the country...
Which is why I have concerns about the PAC's support for proposals to limit summer piking in Broadland. I'd welcome a guarantee that this would be specifically for an area where pike stocks are deemed to be in decline or threatened.
Dave, you quite correct. If the EA plan is to nationalise bylaws then it would be nice to get clarity on the matter re how you can protect one area without impacting on another.
PAC RO Suffolk & LO East Anglia
PAC14 Press Officer and Social Media Manager

Post Reply