I just wantb to let all sealine members know that

[strandwolf]

I just wantb to let all sealine members know that yesterday i voiced your concerns as i read at sealine to the meeting. I also voiced the main concern of representation of the recreational sector at this meeting as Cosatu is to restructure the fishing industry, recreational sector is a fital sector. As all of us know there is thousands of associations all representing some sort of sector in the industry, its our view that the reason for all these associations is most is for personal interest and not for the whole of the sector.

As i have said and noted on Sealine, is that we had discussions about Sealine and Cosatu accept that Sealine due to openess, freedom of speech, expertiece etc, need to be on board at the desk. To faciliate access FAWU office in PE and FAWU in Durban will accomodate those area representatives Sealine would want to sit at meets and voice. Western cape directly at the desk.

In short from the meeting:

We want immediate changes in the seafishery act. The stopping of all rights and allocations untill review of the policies and new minister of fisheries. Review of all scientific conclusions and investigations into rightholders etc. Access to sea and slipways by the public. Inputs from the affected parties in all sectors of fishing and review of the regulations with public participation.

I then ask from the moderators of Sealine to elect members in the different provinces, who will attend meetings in the provinces and take the struggle of the recreational sector forward under the banner of sealine. Those members must report back etc.

I will let sealine know of the nect meeting of the desk as well as the date of the PDC conference to restructure the industry.

 

[jb]

[color=#006600]strandwolf[/color] wrote:

I just wantb to let all sealine members know that yesterday i voiced your concerns as i read at sealine to the meeting. I also voiced the main concern of representation of the recreational sector at this meeting as Cosatu is to restructure the fishing industry, recreational sector is a fital sector. As all of us know there is thousands of associations all representing some sort of sector in the industry, its our view that the reason for all these associations is most is for personal interest and not for the whole of the sector.

As i have said and noted on Sealine, is that we had discussions about Sealine and Cosatu accept that Sealine due to openess, freedom of speech, expertiece etc, need to be on board at the desk. To faciliate access FAWU office in PE and FAWU in Durban will accomodate those area representatives Sealine would want to sit at meets and voice. Western cape directly at the desk.

In short from the meeting:

We want immediate changes in the seafishery act. The stopping of all rights and allocations untill review of the policies and new minister of fisheries. Review of all scientific conclusions and investigations into rightholders etc. Access to sea and slipways by the public. Inputs from the affected parties in all sectors of fishing and review of the regulations with public participation.

I then ask from the moderators of Sealine to elect members in the different provinces, who will attend meetings in the provinces and take the struggle of the recreational sector forward under the banner of sealine. Those members must report back etc.

I will let sealine know of the nect meeting of the desk as well as the date of the PDC conference to restructure the industry.

Hi Strandwolf.

If the recreational sector wants less fish caught by commercials and more fish caught by recreationals, would you support them?

It seems like COSATU has a craving to show that they are in some way representative of a portion of fishing interests.

Their views differ strongly from a lot of the existing industry associations. In order to overcome this COSATU has to:

1. Deny the representavity of existing associations and indutry bodies. [/*]
2. Recruit other interest groups to lend credence to COSATU's views.

[/*]
What you are suggesting is a bit of a Zimbabwe scenario. The white farmers were told that they had no legitimate claim to the land and that the land tenure system had to be restructured. So too fishers who have gone through the transfomration based rghts allocation will be told that they must leave their rights to make way for other fishers or "war veterans" as the case may be.

How will you deal with those who have invested heavily in the industry? Will you compensate them? or is it like Zimbabwe, take whatever you can get into your car boot and drive off?

COSATU has supported the ANC backed restructuring of the fishing industry. Why is it now at odds with it?

Once again Strandwolf please do not see this as a personal attack. I have done a lot of pro bono work with small scale fishers and I am familiar with their concerns.

jb

 

[strandwolf]

Hi Strandwolf. Hi JB

If the recreational sector wants less fish caught by commercials and more fish caught by recreationals, would you support them?Topic for a debate depending on species and method, but yes we will support them, because every topic can be debated and a common solution found where both parties accept. Only like the current industry of self enrichment as main objective that all are at loggerheads.

It seems like COSATU has a craving to show that they are in some way representative of a portion of fishing interests. Cosatu always had a fishing interest thru FAWU, fish and alied workers union, where all main fishing processors employment are members, as well as fishing unions like ourself HKVV who became affiliate in 1993. Yes only now after talks did Cosatu see that all active in the industry must be protected.

Their views differ strongly from a lot of the existing industry associations (All run by the previous elite clan who raped our seas under the old . In order to overcome this COSATU has to:

1. Deny the representavity of existing associations and indutry bodies.Glad you open your eyes, the time has come that real science prevail, with everyone sharing our marine resources. Those Associations etc. have been using the scientists to their advantage all the years and used their ill gotten money to get away with raping the oceans. Sorry this will stop. [/*]
2. Recruit other interest groups to lend credence to COSATU's views. Cosatu dont dictate to us what our views must be, we get views from the ground working upwards thru representatives, members etc then the desk discuss this with Cosato. Cosatu can decide if they back us or not.[/*]

What you are suggesting is a bit of a Zimbabwe scenario. The white farmers were told that they had no legitimate claim to the land and that the land tenure system had to be restructured. So too fishers who have gone through the transfomration based rghts allocation will be told that they must leave their rights to make way for other fishers or "war veterans" as the case may be.This is SA and the big companies with the associations not representing the true fishers made policies to protect their self interests. This is a democratic SA and all policies was written in straight conflict with democracy, our constitution and human rights. All policies will be scrapped and new policies be adopted after full consultation by those affected via the policies. You thought traditional fishers would stand idle whilst their livelihood is taken away, fishing communities destroyed and people with outside job experience get rights. Sorry all those pakket vissers can go back to there jobs and pensioners stay at home.

How will you deal with those who have invested heavily in the industry?if those who invested are true they have nothing to fear Will you compensate themwhen these pakket vissers and paper right holders got rights thru lies and deciet did they compensate those fishers who have been starving for two years already.? or is it like Zimbabwe, take whatever you can get into your car boot and drive off?nope, we will buy all the pakket vissers boats etc on auctions espesially those 25ft cape crafts.

COSATU has supported the ANC backed restructuring of the fishing industry. Why is it now at odds with it?7 factories employ 200 members each and threat retrenchment everytime tac is to be reduced or new entrants involved, meanwhile 300 small factories employing 20 members each with 10 fisher families are now jobless.

Once again Strandwolf please do not see this as a personal attack.attack or not fact is a fact I have done a lot of pro bono work with small scale fishers and I am familiar with their concerns. tell me their concerns maybe i can help.

jb

 

[muhaha]

 

[kitefisher]

MUHAHA

A part of me agrees with you ,but I must say for me as an ill-informed recreational rock and surf angler,this topic is very important to gain insight and knowledge.The two gentleman in question have had debates about it before and it was conducted in a manner condusive to the ethics of this forum.In fact if memory serves me right there was even a challenge/invite to a beer at some or other stage .

Nice as it is to keep the peace ,there are some burning questions here,and opiniated inputs are not necessary attacks,as I sincerely hope you interpret my response,knowing you I am sure you will (chuckle).

cheers

 

[Marthin]

I quite actually like this discussion as long as it stays decent. Strandwolf i don't know what side of which fence u or JB sit on quite yet. I do think that having whole fishing communities sitting there with nothing to eat and no jobs so that a few can make money is not right. I asked on another forum about those Red Steenbras or something that was caught and JB or somebody else said there are Taiwanese boats allocated rights. Not that it's the same fishing industry but how can we NOT allocate rights to local fishermen and then give them to a boat from another country.

Again i have very little knowledge but that's just one thing that sprung to mind.

 

[strandwolf]

to the recreationals
Let me ask the question, did any of you gave inputs to the recreational regulations ie species and limits?

Why allow 10 yellowfin per angler even the swordfish? Was this not to protect the charter boats interests and offshore angling clubs running costs.? Why allow a beach angler east of Aghulas 1 cob , but boat anglers 5. Why not shad in Natal. etc etc
Look at the regulations and think who are those actually benefitting and ten to one it was those who gave inputs to make these regulations.

 

[Marthin]

To be honest i wasnt even aware that we could give inputs. Another big up to Sealine, as here is a forum where people can be informed of when and where these kinds of discussions take place.

 

[Marthin]

While we are on the topic of 5 kob per boat...

Say you catch 5 kob each in the 1st hour all in the 5kg class... they don't stop fishing. If the other guy now get's a 20kg kob on, that also gets taken on board. IFFFF MCM is then standing at the slip at Gouritz, you can watch the guys dump the smaller kob out there in the river, and actually see the fish come floating past!!!

 

[strandwolf]

[color=#006600]Marthin[/color] wrote:

I quite actually like this discussion as long as it stays decent. Strandwolf i don't know what side of which fence u(i sit on the side of our constitution, human rights and the protocol of good fishing practices. Rectifying the wrongs of the past and the wrongs of today. All South Africans have the right of access to the sea, which are regulated by law but that law may not regulate some and not others. I have stated openly who i am and my expertees. Idont hide behind a name as the one i use is one of my vessel's names. or JB (cant comment as i dont know this person)sit on quite yet. I do think that having whole fishing communities sitting there with nothing to eat and no jobs so that a few can make money is not right( i agree so how can these pakket vissers, charter companies etc. live with themselve as their actions destroy the fishers). I asked on another forum about those Red Steenbras or something that was caught and JB or somebody else said there are Taiwanese boats allocated rights(Nobody has a right to target Red Steenbras solely, RS are a target specie on recreational and linefishers list. The vessel caught was owned by combine abalone utilizing a tuna pole permit.. Not that it's the same fishing industry but how can we NOT allocate rights to local fishermen and then give them to a boat from another country. (This is a question to MCM, as the law state foreign owners may not be granted rights. Loophole is double citizenship. Then by granting rights to paper right holders, this meant they had to get a vessel to harvest and as the big five charge to much etc. they were allowed to charter foreign vessels. This is why we oppose trawling because from 7 huge trawlers there is now more than twenty.)

Again i have very little knowledge but that's just one thing that sprung to mind.( i will let you on in the best: in the linefish sector science dictated effort be fixed at 450 vessels with combined crew of 3450 fishers. We gave our input as agreed but that the fisher must be granted his/her own right. Reason was that the fisher can go on any vessel even from shore to earn an income. Self interest groups pressed for vessel rights only. 2005 = 455 vessels with 3450 crew, 2006 = 410 vessels with 3120 crew, 2007 = 370 vessels with 2740 crew, 2008 = 331 vessels with 1800 crew. This means 1600 fishers sit at home with no income. The truth actually is that although 331 vessels collected their permits 60% are not operating and submitt false fishing reports etc. This is the reason for the outcry of the fishing communities.

 

[jb2]

[color=#006600]Marthin[/color] wrote:

I quite actually like this discussion as long as it stays decent. Strandwolf i don't know what side of which fence u or JB sit on quite yet. I do think that having whole fishing communities sitting there with nothing to eat and no jobs so that a few can make money is not right. I asked on another forum about those Red Steenbras or something that was caught and JB or somebody else said there are Taiwanese boats allocated rights. Not that it's the same fishing industry but how can we NOT allocate rights to local fishermen and then give them to a boat from another country.

Again i have very little knowledge but that's just one thing that sprung to mind.

Hi Marthin

All large pelagic rights are allocated to South Africans. The foreign registered vessels that are fishing here are doing so in a joint venture environment.

There are all kinds of requirements for skills transfers and South Africanisation that are way beyond the scope of this discussion.

There was previously a bilateral agreement between South Africa and Taiwan from around 1978 to around 2001 that allowed the Taiwanese fishing fleet to employ around 60 vessels in our waters.

The agreement is no longer in place and there are currently no Taiwanese vessels fishing in South Africa.

jb

 

 

[jb2]

[color=#006600]Marthin[/color] wrote:

To be honest i wasnt even aware that we could give inputs. Another big up to Sealine, as here is a forum where people can be informed of when and where these kinds of discussions take place.

Marthin

The recreational sector is quite well represented at SAMLMA (The South African Marine Linefish Management Association).

The South African Deep Sea Angling Association and several others raise their concerns in this forum.

Changes in linefish catches and bag restrictions are usually discussed here.

The issue of one big kob North of East London is designed to protect breeding aggregations that form up there.

The same goes for the elf. The basis for the measures  is ecological not political.

 

 

[Marthin]

Ok again all the things needed to be considered from all points are way above my head and personal fathom...

BUT... i feel a south african boat owned by a south african company should be skippered and manned by south african fishermen.

NOT a south african registered boat funded by an overseas company....

If that makes sense

 

[Marthin]

Off the topic but something i read on the sound tagging piece also here on the forum of kob in a river. This study is proving kob actually breed out to sea and not inshore and in the esturies as we have long suspected.

Does this not mean the heftier restrictions should be on the vessels/anglers that are more likely to catch fish ready to spawn? If the decision is then an ecological and not financial one?

 

[jb2]

[color=#006600]strandwolf[/color] wrote:

[color=#006600]Marthin[/color] wrote:

 Not that it's the same fishing industry but how can we NOT allocate rights to local fishermen and then give them to a boat from another country. (This is a question to MCM, as the law state foreign owners may not be granted rights. Loophole is double citizenship. Then by granting rights to paper right holders, this meant they had to get a vessel to harvest and as the big five charge to much etc. they were allowed to charter foreign vessels. This is why we oppose trawling because from 7 huge trawlers there is now more than twenty.)

hi Strandwolf.

We need to clear up the issue of foreign vessels. The hake trawlers that are fishing in South Africa are all South African registered.

The suggestion that they were foreign emerged when the bigger companies created the impression that they were foreign owned.

I am not a huge fan of the trawl sector and I do not feel that the trawling of linefish species should be allowed.

It is officers in COSATU's alliance partner the ANC that make up the  that are now directors of the trawl companies.

I would rather see a linefisher being paid for working a bokstang and catching a snoek than see the beneficiary of a BEE deal get another few rand as directors salary but COSATU's alliance partners are very clear on the subject.

 

 

 

 

[strandwolf]

[color=#006600]jb2[/color] wrote:

[color=#006600]strandwolf[/color] wrote:

[color=#006600]Marthin[/color] wrote:

 Not that it's the same fishing industry but how can we NOT allocate rights to local fishermen and then give them to a boat from another country. (This is a question to MCM, as the law state foreign owners may not be granted rights. Loophole is double citizenship. Then by granting rights to paper right holders, this meant they had to get a vessel to harvest and as the big five charge to much etc. they were allowed to charter foreign vessels. This is why we oppose trawling because from 7 huge trawlers there is now more than twenty.)

hi Strandwolf.

We need to clear up the issue of foreign vessels. The hake trawlers that are fishing in South Africa are all South African registered. Correct as long as the JV state 51% south african shareholding.

The suggestion that they were foreign emerged when the bigger companies created the impression that they were foreign owned. Only when the big companies relised that right holders dont look at them for assistance, because of over exploiting those rightholders by local companies, did right holders look for vessels .

I am not a huge fan of the trawl sector and I do not feel that the trawling of linefish species should be allowed. due to the fact of self interest by the trawl industry big companies and their association they saw to the destruction of the resource. Why, because not assisting upcoming right holders and always robbing them did these right holders get other vessels and markets. the fact is that after counting all the bottomtrawl vessels today i state as a fact, in our seas active 117 bottom trawlers. now you tell me that selfinterest did not cause this.

It is officers in COSATU's alliance partner the ANC that make up the  that are now directors of the trawl companies. so do mechanics, lawyers, accountants etc have fishing rights and they not ANC.

I would rather see a linefisher being paid for working a bokstang and catching a snoek than see the beneficiary of a BEE deal get another few rand as directors salary but COSATU's alliance partners are very clear on the subject.Lets see if Zuma delivers what he promised

 

 

 

 

[strandwolf]

[color=#006600]jb2[/color] wrote:

[color=#006600]Marthin[/color] wrote:

To be honest i wasnt even aware that we could give inputs. Another big up to Sealine, as here is a forum where people can be informed of when and where these kinds of discussions take place.

Marthin

The recreational sector is quite well represented at SAMLMA (The South African Marine Linefish Management Association). i disagree as SAMLMA is a self interest group. The associations worry about themselves, even one man associations, no mandates by others, even no memberships in associations. fishing clubs also protect their own interests. SAMLMA AND SADSAA is run from top to bottom and do not regard recreational inputs as the first anyone hear or see is a new regulation. I know there is a couple of dedicated organizations but this is not the forum todiscuss the bad ones. SAMLMA should review itself.

The South African Deep Sea Angling Association and several others raise their concerns in this forum. Again self interest prevail, why give 10 yellowfin per angler and only 2 galjoen to another. Who eat those fish? SADSAA want lot of tuna and swordfish why? duh to pay their expensis, did SADSAA forget that the sport is recreational and if you moan about the cost of vessel, bait ,tackle etc get another sport or hobby.

Changes in linefish catches and bag restrictions are usually discussed here. YEP without consulting the real affected party namely the bloke with his rod in hand on the beach.

The issue of one big kob North of East London is designed to protect breeding aggregations that form up there. Bull, cob breed in estauries rivers etc, why keep a big cob on the west coast full of roe,  and may not at stilbay. the point was why the beach angler may catch 1 cob and if the same angler on a boat may catch 5. again a SAMLMA SCIENTIFIC BLOOPER.

The same goes for the elf. The basis for the measures  is ecological Do not make statements that cannot be proven, shad do not only breed in Natal not political. As i said i am open to discuss anything in the industry, but words must be factual. 

 

 

[strandwolf]

[color=#006600]Marthin[/color] wrote:

Off the topic but something i read on the sound tagging piece also here on the forum of kob in a river. This study is proving kob actually breed out to sea and not inshore and in the esturies as we have long suspected. I would like to see that data, as we thought cob spawn at sea with the juvinile return to estauries etc to grow a bit then take on the ocean.

Does this not mean the heftier restrictions should be on the vessels/anglers that are more likely to catch fish ready to spawn? There is a stupid regulation alowing 1 cob of 110cm per person east of Aghulas but trawl can catch what they what, look at the landings in Mosselbay, better dont as a heart attack is of grave concern. bycatches of 100t carpenter and still SAMLMA want to say with their friends curb the recreational. If the decision is then an ecological and not financial one? on the spot everything is financial driven, and money makes u blind. Look at all those people who once worked for MCM, now all are assisting people to get acsess into the resources because its money driven. The same to these so-called helpers of poor fishers, help to steal the fishers money.

 

[Marthin]

Strandwolf like i said just another piece of information i read...

Here is the thread perhaps obsession can shed more light...

http://www.sealine.co.za/view_topic.php?id=10218&forum_id=1

 

[strandwolf]

Thanks Marthin
I left a comment at that post and hope to be answered. Personally I take that with a straw as a lot of Rudi's so-called research was proven wrong already. The days are over of being a scientist, saying something and everyone must believe.

Take the biggest publicly displayed farce the scientiest told us 1. there are only 60tn of breeding stock Cape salmon left in our ocean. Then within 6mnths of that statement the boats delivered more than 300tn, where did the 240tn come from. 2. there is approx 20tn of lobster available at Elandsbay. Duh 300tn walkout a month later.

All the time the fishers told the science they lie. Now we want evidence and dont believe the crap they make up. a fish grow just as big as the tank allows and the grow rate is affected by how many other in the tank. Fish in a tank is not fish in the sea.