Intoducing a take home size limit

So marine fish have no size limit?

The only two marine species that come under any type of laws for leisure angling are Bass and Silver eel.

A lot of other endangered species caught by sea anglers should be put on the list i.e. Monk, Undulated ray all types of skate and shark.
And yes there should be a size limit put on all species of sea fish that can be kept for the pot

i tried asking about size limit before viewtopic.php?f=12&t=26477&hilit=size+limit but didn't get too much response i hope you do

I think people like us who have a respect for the eco system of our ocean can sometimes shoot ourselves in the foot due to our concerns. Lets not forget where this damage started and where it continues to come from, and lets not put the blame onto people with rods and reels fishing from the shore. They never have and never will cause harm to fish stocks in the sea. If you think that that is not true well i'm sorry you are mistaken. If commercial fishing is reducing a species to such an extent that it is in danger well then I will take it upon myself to do something about it and I would support efforts to replenish the stock but lets not even start talking about the ant in the room until we sort out the dam elephant. Why do we think, we need policing, we need policing, if I catch a small fish I put it back, simple. If you feel you need to be doing more to protect a species go lobby government to protect our waters from commercial fishing. Of course there are big bucks there so good luck with that. I myself would like to see very high taxes on fish sold in shops and if someone wants to fish for themselves and family let them, for free, no licences, no taxes, no wardens or hi viz people. You would see a turn around then. Angling does wonders for tourism, for the spirit, gives a sense of freedom, one of the last we have left. So lets not feck it up for god sake! Theres my rant over....

I think Wrasse should be designated a sport species with catch and release only.
I have never eaten a wrasse due to its reputation for culinary indistinction.
In the past few Irish anglers would keep wrasse but now we hear stories of wrasse marks been cleared out by foreign nationals.

what about the good old sea trout debate - surely a protected species in a sense one way or another with a take home limit depending on the fishery - even if it is the sea/estuary nearby

[myworldfishing]

I think people like us who have a respect for the eco system of our ocean can sometimes shoot ourselves in the foot due to our concerns. Lets not forget where this damage started and where it continues to come from, and lets not put the blame onto people with rods and reels fishing from the shore. They never have and never will cause harm to fish stocks in the sea. If you think that that is not true well i'm sorry you are mistaken. If commercial fishing is reducing a species to such an extent that it is in danger well then I will take it upon myself to do something about it and I would support efforts to replenish the stock but lets not even start talking about the ant in the room until we sort out the dam elephant. Why do we think, we need policing, we need policing, if I catch a small fish I put it back, simple. If you feel you need to be doing more to protect a species go lobby government to protect our waters from commercial fishing. Of course there are big bucks there so good luck with that. I myself would like to see very high taxes on fish sold in shops and if someone wants to fish for themselves and family let them, for free, no licences, no taxes, no wardens or hi viz people. You would see a turn around then. Angling does wonders for tourism, for the spirit, gives a sense of freedom, one of the last we have left. So lets not feck it up for god sake! Theres my rant over....

What you say above is true to an extent! I tried to work it out on an angler v trawler basis, and it works out that 5 hundred thousand 500,000,00 3lbs cod would have to be caught by rod to match 1 trawler so yes rod anglers dont do damage to fish stocks.....
Just look at the doggie and whiting on the east coast.... They are the only 2 fish you rarely hear of anyone taking home and they are rampant...

BUT when rod anglers are taking every single fish they catch no matter what the size it does do damage... As RockHunter points out on his post, wrasse are being cleared out of marks because of people filling buckets of them ( FN or Irish, thats not the point)....

Bass as another example, the only reason we have any is because of the conservation efforts. Without that the bass would have been a thing of the past......

Then theres the matter of who polices all these conservation laws? The IFI can only do so much due to funding... So why not introduce a see license that is used to fund the IFI, that way the then have funds to actually do what needs doing...

Last edited by myworldfishing on Fri Jun 22, 2012 11:39 am, edited 1 time in total.

Does the European minimum landing size not apply to RSAs ??
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Fishery_MLS

I think people like us who have a respect for the eco system of our ocean can sometimes shoot ourselves in the foot due to our concerns. Lets not forget where this damage started and where it continues to come from, and lets not put the blame onto people with rods and reels fishing from the shore. They never have and never will cause harm to fish stocks in the sea. If you think that that is not true well i'm sorry you are mistaken. If commercial fishing is reducing a species to such an extent that it is in danger well then I will take it upon myself to do something about it and I would support efforts to replenish the stock but lets not even start talking about the ant in the room until we sort out the dam elephant. Why do we think, we need policing, we need policing, if I catch a small fish I put it back, simple. If you feel you need to be doing more to protect a species go lobby government to protect our waters from commercial fishing. Of course there are big bucks there so good luck with that. I myself would like to see very high taxes on fish sold in shops and if someone wants to fish for themselves and family let them, for free, no licences, no taxes, no wardens or hi viz people. You would see a turn around then. Angling does wonders for tourism, for the spirit, gives a sense of freedom, one of the last we have left. So lets not feck it up for god sake! Theres my rant over....

What you say above is true to an extent! I tried to work it out on an angler v trawler basis, and it works out that 5 hundred thousand 500,000,00 3lbs cod would have to be caught by rod to match 1 trawler so yes rod anglers dont do damage to fish stocks.....
Just look at the doggie and whiting on the east coast.... They are the only 2 fish you rarely hear of anyone taking home and they are rampant...

BUT when rod anglers are taking every single fish they catch no matter what the size it does do damage... As RockHunter points out on his post, wrasse are being cleared out of marks because of people filling buckets of them ( FN or Irish, thats not the point)....

Bass as another example, the only reason we have any is because of the conservation efforts. Without that the Bass would have been a thing of the passed......

Then theres the matter of who polices all these conservation laws? The IFI can only do so much due to funding... So why not introduce a see license that is used to fund the IFI, that way the then have funds to actually do what needs doing...

No one would buy it, and with no one buying it there would be no income to police it. The coastline is too vast for any amount of effective cover and then what would we get for the money? Sea anglers here make up a small amount of the population. The majority of people you speak to who say they go sea fishing mean they go mackereling a few times in the summer. Any revenue that was raised would go on administration and not towards conservation. It would just be another form of taxation on a country that is on its knees.

oes the European minimum landing size not apply to RSAs ??

As far as I know that just applies to commercial fishing.

Lets not forget where this damage started and where it continues to come from, and lets not put the blame onto people with rods and reels fishing from the shore. They never have and never will cause harm to fish stocks in the sea. If you think that that is not true well i'm sorry you are mistaken. "

Hi Tony,
while i agree in general with your sentiments regarding commercial fishing,i beg to differ big time on people with rods and reels making no differance.What about terratorial fish like wrasse very easy to wipe out if all the fish in an area are removed by anglers,some spots become barren for years.
You may not be aware of this but a spot near where you do a lot of your bass fishing in east cork was fished out by anglers a few years back because a few of the local rods fished it several times a week taking the allowed 2 fish and legally sizeable but as the fish were nearly all the same year class the area become fished out,why because again bass are terratorial and take years to repopulate an area and no nets did damage in this spot.
What about the populations of immature fish around our piers ,does the removal of these fish by rod and reel have an effect on populations ,you bet it does.Not to mention the resident congers that reside here.Ive yet to see any commercial fisherman set nets up the side of a pier wall .
Morally anybody taking palm sized wrasse,flounder, turbot,pollack, coalies etc home are not anglers at all and its just wrong if doing such a thing intentionally.As a rule of thumb if a fish on its own is too small to eat then its too small to keep.Thats what i was thought by the older generation of anglers when i was a nipper and its what i tell my young nephews and there friends.
Would be brillant if the fishery authorities produced a set of guidelines of sizes for retaining fish.Maybe something to go with the signs around piers and tourist offices that outline the species of fish that allegedley reside at the mark.Obviously no laws will ever become enforceable due to lack of resources etc,but if a recommened size limit for a species was on view it may just make people think twice[morally] before taking home a handful of fingerling pollack
Tight lines

oes the European minimum landing size not apply to RSAs ??

As far as I know that just applies to commercial fishing.

Frank I know it is only wiki and cannot be regarded as the font of all knowledge but in the definition on the front page it states

Minimum landing size
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

The minimum landing size (MLS) is the smallest length at which it is legal to keep or sell a fish. What the MLS is depends on the species of fish. Sizes also vary around the world, as they are legal definitions which are defined by the local regulatory authority. Commercial trawl and seine fisheries can control the size of their catch by adjusting the mesh size of their nets.[1]

European Union European Union - A single set of minimum landing sizes applies to all EU member states.

It quite clearly states that it is illegal to keep fish below these sizes why should the method of taking them, rsa or commercial make any difference. A European law would be broken if you kept smaller fish than the stated sizes.

I will have a look later when I have a bit more time to see if there is a more reliable source of information.

From http://www.anglingtrust.net/page.asp?section=163&sectionTitle=Recommended+Retention+Size+Limits+%28RRSLs
"Our interpretation of the current minimum landing sizes set by the EU is that they only apply to motorised vessels holding a commercial fishing license and not to recreational catches"

From http://www.anglingtrust.net/page.asp?section=163&sectionTitle=Recommended+Retention+Size+Limits+%28RRSLs
"Our interpretation of the current minimum landing sizes set by the EU is that they only apply to motorised vessels holding a commercial fishing license and not to recreational catches"

The angling trust is a UK body and it is only their interpretation. However I agree this is a very grey area and open to many personal interpretations.
I have sent an email to the relevant government department to see if we can come up with some clarification as to whether or not there is a MLS for recreational anglers. I am not holding my breath for a reply as I haven't had much success in the past with questions.
Enforcing any such regulations would be a nightmare for instance if there were a minimum size for mackerel I would be guilty of taking them. Whilst the tinsel tossers around me are decrying joeys to me they are perfect bait size and highly prized. If a fish wont go back and I am sure that at some stage or other we have all seen this should we just throw it and watch it float away(which could be a legal requirement) or take it home and make some use of it?
I have a feeling that most people reading this will be self regulating and return many if not all of what we catch. Without education and legislation we can never expect the casual angler to do the same.

The angling trust is a UK body and it is only their interpretation. However I agree this is a very grey area and open to many personal interpretations.
I have sent an email to the relevant government department to see if we can come up with some clarification as to whether or not there is a MLS for recreational anglers. I am not holding my breath for a reply as I haven't had much success in the past with questions.
Enforcing any such regulations would be a nightmare for instance if there were a minimum size for mackerel I would be guilty of taking them. Whilst the tinsel tossers around me are decrying joeys to me they are perfect bait size and highly prized. If a fish wont go back and I am sure that at some stage or other we have all seen this should we just throw it and watch it float away(which could be a legal requirement) or take it home and make some use of it?
I have a feeling that most people reading this will be self regulating and return many if not all of what we catch. Without education and legislation we can never expect the casual angler to do the same.

Yes it is their interpretation and as you say it seems a grey area - I had a quick look through the regulations, there is no mention that MLS is restricted to commercial fishing but the documentation appears to be focused on the commercials.

Hopefully you will get a reply to your email which will clarify it for us all.

I am sure most "real" anglers take a sensible approach to fish sizes, it's the guys that keep everything regardless of size that are doing the harm to our piers etc. If the MLS applied to recreational angling then it would be great if the fisheries officers would take a walk down to our piers some evening and start issuing on the spot fines and/or confiscating rods. The word would get out soon enough and while it would not totally prevent the taking of small fish it might contribute to a marked reduction in the practice.

Yes it is their interpretation and as you say it seems a grey area - I had a quick look through the regulations, there is no mention that MLS is restricted to commercial fishing but the documentation appears to be focused on the commercials.

Hopefully you will get a reply to your email which will clarify it for us all.

I am sure most "real" anglers take a sensible approach to fish sizes, it's the guys that keep everything regardless of size that are doing the harm to our piers etc. If the MLS applied to recreational angling then it would be great if the fisheries officers would take a walk down to our piers some evening and start issuing on the spot fines and/or confiscating rods. The word would get out soon enough and while it would not totally prevent the taking of small fish it might contribute to a marked reduction in the practice.

There may well be a problem policing anything like that and I fear that within a week of starting it there would be reports of assault on fisheries officers. There is no point denying that for many who this may apply to English would not be their first language and "no speak english" would be a constant excuse. I am not by any means saying the problem is restricted to us non-nationals just as the rubbish left by the mackerel bashers is not all non-nationals but in my experience they would be more likely to offend. It isnt a race issue but an education issue.

Another problem that concerns real anglers is that to the general public there is no difference between real anglers and beer swilling loud mouth idiots with mackerel rods, we are all tarred with the same brush.

personally i think there should be and it should be set at above the breeding size, give the fish a chance to start the next generation at least once

Lets not forget where this damage started and where it continues to come from, and lets not put the blame onto people with rods and reels fishing from the shore. They never have and never will cause harm to fish stocks in the sea. If you think that that is not true well i'm sorry you are mistaken. "

Hi Tony,
while i agree in general with your sentiments regarding commercial fishing,i beg to differ big time on people with rods and reels making no differance.What about terratorial fish like wrasse very easy to wipe out if all the fish in an area are removed by anglers,some spots become barren for years.
You may not be aware of this but a spot near where you do a lot of your Bass fishing in east cork was fished out by anglers a few years back because a few of the local rods fished it several times a week taking the allowed 2 fish and legally sizeable but as the fish were nearly all the same year class the area become fished out,why because again Bass are terratorial and take years to repopulate an area and no nets did damage in this spot.
What about the populations of immature fish around our piers ,does the removal of these fish by rod and reel have an effect on populations ,you bet it does.Not to mention the resident congers that reside here.Ive yet to see any commercial fisherman set nets up the side of a pier wall .
Morally anybody taking palm sized wrasse,flounder, turbot,pollack, coalies etc home are not anglers at all and its just wrong if doing such a thing intentionally.As a rule of thumb if a fish on its own is too small to eat then its too small to keep.Thats what i was thought by the older generation of anglers when i was a nipper and its what i tell my young nephews and there friends.
Would be brillant if the fishery authorities produced a set of guidelines of sizes for retaining fish.Maybe something to go with the signs around piers and tourist offices that outline the species of fish that allegedley reside at the mark.Obviously no laws will ever become enforceable due to lack of resources etc,but if a recommened size limit for a species was on view it may just make people think twice[morally] before taking home a handful of fingerling pollack
Tight lines

Well said mike.......

Lets not forget where this damage started and where it continues to come from, and lets not put the blame onto people with rods and reels fishing from the shore. They never have and never will cause harm to fish stocks in the sea. If you think that that is not true well i'm sorry you are mistaken. "

Hi Tony,
while i agree in general with your sentiments regarding commercial fishing,i beg to differ big time on people with rods and reels making no differance.What about terratorial fish like wrasse very easy to wipe out if all the fish in an area are removed by anglers,some spots become barren for years.
You may not be aware of this but a spot near where you do a lot of your Bass fishing in east cork was fished out by anglers a few years back because a few of the local rods fished it several times a week taking the allowed 2 fish and legally sizeable but as the fish were nearly all the same year class the area become fished out,why because again Bass are terratorial and take years to repopulate an area and no nets did damage in this spot.
What about the populations of immature fish around our piers ,does the removal of these fish by rod and reel have an effect on populations ,you bet it does.Not to mention the resident congers that reside here.Ive yet to see any commercial fisherman set nets up the side of a pier wall .
Morally anybody taking palm sized wrasse,flounder, turbot,pollack, coalies etc home are not anglers at all and its just wrong if doing such a thing intentionally.As a rule of thumb if a fish on its own is too small to eat then its too small to keep.Thats what i was thought by the older generation of anglers when i was a nipper and its what i tell my young nephews and there friends.
Would be brillant if the fishery authorities produced a set of guidelines of sizes for retaining fish.Maybe something to go with the signs around piers and tourist offices that outline the species of fish that allegedley reside at the mark.Obviously no laws will ever become enforceable due to lack of resources etc,but if a recommened size limit for a species was on view it may just make people think twice[morally] before taking home a handful of fingerling pollack
Tight lines

Well said mike.......

Lets not forget where this damage started and where it continues to come from, and lets not put the blame onto people with rods and reels fishing from the shore. They never have and never will cause harm to fish stocks in the sea. If you think that that is not true well i'm sorry you are mistaken. "

Hi Tony,
while i agree in general with your sentiments regarding commercial fishing,i beg to differ big time on people with rods and reels making no differance.What about terratorial fish like wrasse very easy to wipe out if all the fish in an area are removed by anglers,some spots become barren for years.
You may not be aware of this but a spot near where you do a lot of your Bass fishing in east cork was fished out by anglers a few years back because a few of the local rods fished it several times a week taking the allowed 2 fish and legally sizeable but as the fish were nearly all the same year class the area become fished out,why because again Bass are terratorial and take years to repopulate an area and no nets did damage in this spot.
What about the populations of immature fish around our piers ,does the removal of these fish by rod and reel have an effect on populations ,you bet it does.Not to mention the resident congers that reside here.Ive yet to see any commercial fisherman set nets up the side of a pier wall .
Morally anybody taking palm sized wrasse,flounder, turbot,pollack, coalies etc home are not anglers at all and its just wrong if doing such a thing intentionally.As a rule of thumb if a fish on its own is too small to eat then its too small to keep.Thats what i was thought by the older generation of anglers when i was a nipper and its what i tell my young nephews and there friends.
Would be brillant if the fishery authorities produced a set of guidelines of sizes for retaining fish.Maybe something to go with the signs around piers and tourist offices that outline the species of fish that allegedley reside at the mark.Obviously no laws will ever become enforceable due to lack of resources etc,but if a recommened size limit for a species was on view it may just make people think twice[morally] before taking home a handful of fingerling pollack
Tight lines

Well said mike.......

This is a very interesting topic that I can never see being policed. It would be an impossible task to police size limits unless you have dedicated teams that patrol specific areas ie; Kerry storm beaches for Bass or Wexford estuaries for Flounder etc. It has been said before in this thread but the majority of people on this island that go sea fishing are only interested in filling bags with Mackerel. It might look unpleasant for us to see constant 6 feather strings of these fine fish go into a black sack when you know that the majority will be wasted but even catches like that do nothing to the population in the grand scheme of things. I've spent time on trawlers in the past and the sheer scale of the operation would make you go weak at the knees. I can assure anybody who still harbours doubts. Angling has nil effect on population densities.

Bass are a slow maturing fish and Wrasse live in the same area for most of the year so they can be susceptible to over fishing as can Flounder but it would still take a serious effort to wipe out stocks. A harsh winter like we had 2 years ago will do more to decimate Wrasse stocks than all but the most determined pot anglers. Wrasse aren't that bad to eat either. It's how you cook them that matters. I've no idea why people think they're inedible.

Back to size limits and we have one body already that can police this. The IFSA. If it was run a bit more professionally and ran some open days for juniors and non matchmen/serious anglers to try an educate people on size limits and more importantly for me - bag limits, then we might see a change in peoples attitudes. Why can't it be done?

In the meantime, I think everybody who uses this forum knows the difference between right and wrong. There's nothing wrong with tapping a few fish on the head once we're all sensible with it. The digital camera in my opinion is a great conservation measure. Take a picture and put them back.