Dunlaoghaire-Rathdown restrict angling to designated areas??

A common sense approach never worked in Germany....ANGLING AS A SPORT IS BANNED

County, not Country!!!

we saw fox hunting getting demolished, shooting is on the brink of existence and fishings next, p*ta and tlacs will stop at nothing, until we're vegan! :evil:

A common sense approach never worked in Germany....ANGLING AS A SPORT IS BANNED

County, not Country!!!

I knew what you wrote.......it was the point about common sense I was trying to get across. :lol:

Tom.

If I am not mistaken (or outdated), the Bulloch and Coliemore harbours are under control of the OPW anyway - who would have to assess any decision on health and safety grounds.

.

Indeed you are mistaken Uvox - Bulloch is actually still under the auspices of the Dublin Port Company as an outport. Coliemore was too until a few years ago. Rocks behind however are part of the foreshore and adjoining lands presumably fall under DLRDCC.

I've been keenly interested in the topic and I believe its time for cool heads. I'll be keeping the powder dry on this one. Escalation to neighbouring councils is a potential byproduct of these by-laws. Having seen the macky basher cometh last month on a Dublin venue- I'm not all that surprised that the perception of anglers by some folk is of these twats.

In the absence of regional leadership on the topic and also because of democratic nature of angling (one doesn't Have to be in a club) I will be making my own personal representations to SEO at DLRDCC.

i share you concern and have already written.

Hi

Just to let you know that there is an impact being felt, some good coverage in the Sunday Indo with TDs and councillors all making the right noises, describing it as "nonsense" etc. Keep the pressure on, we've got some contacts in the UK that are helping on the tourism angle...

Tight lines

Don't know if this has appeared yet. Received this AM.

Dear Mr. Long,



I acknowledge receipt of your recent e-mail, re the above issue and note your concerns.



At the moment the "Amendment of 1998 Beach Bye Laws Governing Beaches at Seapoint, Killiney & Corbawn" is on public display and anyone can make a submission till the 28th September (I suggest you make a submission if you have not already done so to the Senior Executive Engineer, Culture, Community Development & Amenities Department, Level 3, County Hall, Marine Road, Dun Laoghaire, Co. Dublin). Then a report based on the submissions received on the Beach Bye Laws will be presented to the Council at a Council meeting for them to pass (I will contact you when the date is confirmed). In the report the Council Officials could make a recommendation about the fishing. If the Council Official's do not make a recommendation I will be discussing with the Labour Group on the Council that we make an amendment to the Beach Bye Laws to reduce these proposed restrictions on fishing.



I shall forward you any information I may receive.



Should you have any query on the above please feel free to contact me.



Kind Regards

Cllr. Carrie Smyth.

Also received and acknowledgment from Cllr. Barry Conway.

As we have until 28th. this month to get submissions in I would suggest that everyone that is interested does so. The only concern I have is the variance of opinion expressed by people in this thread. I can see the argument from both ends - compromise and don't compromise, but a very valid point was made about the people we are dealing with - career bureaucrats and politicians - and probably at a base level the secretaries and assistant of these people. Do we just fire off submissions as individuals or to we look for common ground and try to speak with one voice? I don't know the answer to this, that's why I'm posing the question.

Steven.

got a reply from anothe councillor this morning:

"Wholeheartedly agree with you. My two boys would feel the same way. Don’t know what the logic is, and can’t see myself supporting this proposal.

Best wishes,


Aidan Culhane"

Johnathan,

A common sense approach never worked in Germany....ANGLING AS A SPORT IS BANNED if we let these councilors have their own way, they may do the same here.....who knows what their hidden agenda is...it looks like they have one.

Tom.

Rockhopper!

Don't know if I've got the wrong end of the stick here, but are you saying angling is banned in Germany??? :?

Or should I just not mention the war. :twisted:

Don't know if I've got the wrong end of the stick here, but are you saying angling is banned in Germany??? :?

I'm a bit confused by this too. Just Googling it throws up plenty of info on angling holidays in Germany. I think German residents need a certificate but visitors are exempt from this. Also, it seems to be regulated quite strictly. Maybe Tom can elaborate (briefly, we don't want to stray too far off topic for this discussion!!)

Sport angling is not recognised in Germany.
You must take any fish you catch and are not allowed returns.

It is not a ban as such.

Sport angling is not recognised in Germany.
You must take any fish you catch and are not allowed returns.

It is not a ban as such.

If its not a ban then what is it.....you cant fish for sport...because its banned.....if you pass a 30 hour test over a period of time you are allowed to fish for your table (not for other tables though) after getting a license and your not allowed to put any fish (even undersize) back into the water.

Tom.

Sport angling is not recognised in Germany.
You must take any fish you catch and are not allowed returns.

It is not a ban as such.

If its not a ban then what is it.....you cant fish for sport...because its banned.....if you pass a 30 hour test over a period of time you are allowed to fish for your table (not for other tables though) after getting a license and your not allowed to put any fish (even undersize) back into the water.

Tom.

I don't have much of a problem with that system to be honest, apart from the test part, but that's not the argument here and it's not on the table in Ireland so I wouldn't worry about it as of yet.

Update.

Received a similar email from Aidan Culhan that uvox mentioned.

Also got an email with from Cllr. Tom Kivlehan with an invitation to ring him. Spent about 15 minutes speaking to him about these proposals.

Basically, as has been stated before, these are proposals in the first draft stage. In no way are they set in concrete. He welcomed the high level of interest we are showing and urged that we keep it up. He mentioned that he fishes these areas himself and would not consider banning angling to the level appearant in the draft document.

From my conversation with Tom, the main problem seems to be that there are no by-laws relating to beach management which address what is actually happening on the beaches in this day and age. This means, for example, that no one can stop water-skiing or jet-skiing in areas where bathers (or anglers) are. He also mentioned the problem of 'mackeral bashers' coming in to where bathers are without due caution, and the dangers this can be to the bathers.

His view is that any area which is covered by life guards should be reserved for bathers and any bather going outside these areas does so in the knowledge that they do so at their own risk.

He also suggested that there should be some level of protection for anglers, from the likes of jet skiers, etc, coming too close to the shore, included in these by-laws. I know that in the place we holiday in in France, there are designated locations where jet skies can be launched and come ashore, but once in the water ther must stay a certain distance off shore; this applies to kite boarders as well.

Looking at this carefully, we could get a lot of benefits if we handle this correctly. As part of our submissions, could we throw in something like declaring beaches, bays, etc. as areas of preservation to be avoided by commercial interests, for example? We could enshrine our right to fish in the by-laws, if we play it right.

Any way, that's all I have for now.

I received a message from a councillor to the effect that since she wasn't representing a coastal ward and since I wasn't in her ward, it had nothing to do with her.

I thought all of the councillors would be voting on this and should therefore take an interest but I was obviously mistaken.

Guys have a look at the conversations going on over in UK at the moment about the whole "stakeholder" and giving rights to anglers etc, the rights are there, they are trying to take them away.
Let them regulate it too much and you'll be sorry what happens.

I dont think anybody should be suggesting giving up our rights to fish [b]anywhere[/b] we want.

I know compromise is a good and neccessary thing but not in this case. If anglers/mackerel fishers are a hazard to the general public then a lifeguard or someone else can call the gardaí and they will surely be able to deal with it.

I woud have absolutely no problem with the cops dealing with antisocial behaviour - including obnoxious anglers, but to concede the right of safety conscious, decent anglers to fish in certain areas is I believe simply playing into the hands of those who wish to limit angling.

like [b]slowarm [/b]I also got a call from Councillor Tom Kivlehan. I spent about 30 mins on the phone with him. He said these bye laws pertain to the BEACH only, and are an attempt to put some order into the bye laws so that ALL stakeholders can continue to share and use beaches safely. right now, there's nothing really covering this. He said there was no blanket ban on angling intended or likely.

Again, yiz needs to get yizzer written submissions in by Sept 28.

IMHO I think emphasizing that there is strength in cooperating with other beach users is a good point, maybe even suggest that the council hold life-saving or sea-vigilance classes for everyone so that anglers could tell when someone swimming is in trouble, what to do, swimmers watching out for anglers on rocks when big waves come, wakes from ferries, etc. just a thought.

I received a message from a councillor to the effect that since she wasn't representing a coastal ward and since I wasn't in her ward, it had nothing to do with her.

I thought all of the councillors would be voting on this and should therefore take an interest but I was obviously mistaken.

Care to share with us the name of this uninterested party?

Care to share with us the name of this uninterested party?

Better not. It was a voice mail and I deleted it.