are our Bass reports encouraging a change in legislation?

It might take a while to see any come back on paying a fee alright. But like I said it would only be the cost of a couple of lures a year. And to be fair how many anglers will buy some junk they will never use? I also think that if a call came from the angling community looking for a license and protection of stocks it will no doubt cast a shadow over any government U-turns on current legislation. And as I said before if people are willing to buy a license then the amount of money spent and estimates of extras to retailers, local economy's, tourism etc. can be properly quantified. This would mean that economists could work out the benefit of bass as a commodity to angling against a commodity as quotas to commercials.

I also think that if a call came from the angling community looking for a licence and protection of stocks it will no doubt cast a shadow over any Government U-turns on current legislation.

Well put again, its a serious bargaining chip that would put it up to them. Maybe a poll is called for.

Meantime, on Thomas's original question, should SAI members exercise self-censorship on Bass reports? A poll on that too?

....And as I said before if people are willing to buy a license then the amount of money spent and estimates of extras to retailers, local economy's, tourism etc. can be properly quantified. This would mean that economists could work out the benefit of Bass as a commodity to angling against a commodity as quotas to commercials.

Thru the on-line survey, we've been able to work this out.

Very true Pat.

Hang on lads a game licence for Bass? I'm all for conservation of Bass stock's but to be honest I refuse to pay a licence fee purely for Bass, If it was a licence for all sea angling with assurance that the fund would be well managed I would have no problem. I am not intrested in Lure fishing or SWFF and 80% of the Bass I catch are while fishing for something else so I would have an issue with being expected to pay an annual licence for a fish I am likely to encounter but not targeted.

i would be well up for a licence for all sea fishing if it would help the sport but a licence just for bass NO WAY

Hang on lads a game licence for Bass? I'm all for conservation of Bass stock's but to be honest I refuse to pay a licence fee purely for Bass, If it was a licence for all sea angling with assurance that the fund would be well managed I would have no problem. I am not intrested in Lure fishing or SWFF and 80% of the Bass I catch are while fishing for something else so I would have an issue with being expected to pay an annual licence for a fish I am likely to encounter but not targeted.

by chum i think your right!, **** everything else that makes up the eco sytem that is our oceans? i would be in favour of a blanket licence but im not naive enough to think the money generated by the licence would be spent in a constructive manner.

When I fished barbel in england you had to buy a licence, your licence doubled as
a bailif permit and etitled the holder to stop anyone fishing on the river and ask them to produce their licence.
If they didn't have one they were not authorised to fish on the river and could be directed to move on. I was stoped
a couple of times (i did have a licence) the locals never had a gung ho attitude, they were friendly and informative.
There was also a phone line on the card to report names registration numbers of those in breach of regulations.
I think the penalty was hefty enough fines also.
It was a good idea which seemed to work well with the local fisherman from local clubs looking after thier own stretch
of the river.
I wonder could something like that be incorparated into shore angling in ireland, say anyone who is a member of a sea angling club affiliated with the ifsa, along with annual membership and insurance also pays an extra fee for say a licence. Even if your not a member of a club you could make a one off payment for a licence. This licence would also double as a bailif card giving anglers certain powers in relation to upholding of sea angling practices, so if you do encounter people fishing and targetting undersize fish, netting or not adhereing to bye laws, etc, then as i said the angler has certain authority and can take a certain course of action. i.e move them on, or even just to have a dedicated phone line or database to report offenders. Not neccesarily frog marching peole off the beach. The money raised could be put back into prosecution of offenders or something like that.
Just an idea thats all something along those lines might be of interest.

Dont think the issue is catching bass, its keeping them.

Under current rules, anyone generally fishing saltwater for bass, flatfish etc etc who catches a seatrout is not in contravention unless he/she keeps it and doesnt have a licence. I would imagine a Saltwater Game Licence would simply extend this rationale to Bass: ie if you catch them in the course of general fishing, OK, but you cant keep any unless you have a licence. The licence would govern the number of keepers in a season, as for sea trout currently.

The argument as I understood it is that, while a lot of anglers voluntarily catch and release, others dont. A formal licensing system would make things clear-cut and mandatory.

personally i wouldn be bothered paying for a license for bass alone, but for all sea fishing i reckon it would be an excellent idea,
we have laws all ready on bass,
making you pay for a license isnt going to make you stick to the laws if your not all ready

We're maybe wandering off into the undergrowth here.....

The Sea Game Licence idea arose as a suggested way that anglers could become Official Stakeholders in the bass fishery, and if such a licence was proposed by the angling community, it would show the other side we're prepared to put our money where our mouths are on this issue.

The starting point of this thread was the possible effect of bass catch posts on forthcoming decisions about the fishery. Maybe we should start a separate thread on the general licence issue?