Treknetters, False Bay, Muizenberg

D

Dave Rorke

New member
I honestly don't know which letter you are referring to regarding a longline found off the Eastern Cape.  I would most certainly have responded.

As for not commenting on issues regarding locals who are employing foreign longliners to do their dirty work, I suggest you brush up on what I have said about this by visiting www.africanangler.com.  And as for MCM people not commenting on criticism, well, if you've ever dealt with them of DEAT, you'd know exactly what the real situation is.  They have people whose job it is to deal with the media, and they usually assign the answering of your questions and allegations to a junior lackey with zero knowhow who, in the end, simply hasn't the brains nor acumen to respond, so he doesn't.  Occasionally I do get a response, but it's normally a wishy-washy ten-liner saying that the matter is being investigated and they'll respond once the investigation is complete.  In spite of regular reminders, nothing further ever transpires.

The fact is (and shoot me down if you want to), MCM and DEAT are currently populated by a bunch of incompetents who are under the directorship of an incompetent, whose bosses in parliament (two ministerial portfolios now try to run environment and fisheries) wouldn't know one fish species from another, let alone how and where they are caught.  Idiots, the lot of them.
 
J

jb2

Sealiner
Dave Rorke wrote:
I honestly don't know which letter you are referring to regarding a longline found off the Eastern Cape.  I would most certainly have responded.

As for not commenting on issues regarding locals who are employing foreign longliners to do their dirty work, I suggest you brush up on what I have said about this by visiting http://www.africanangler.com.  And as for MCM people not commenting on criticism, well, if you've ever dealt with them of DEAT, you'd know exactly what the real situation is.  They have people whose job it is to deal with the media, and they usually assign the answering of your questions and allegations to a junior lackey with zero knowhow who, in the end, simply hasn't the brains nor acumen to respond, so he doesn't.  Occasionally I do get a response, but it's normally a wishy-washy ten-liner saying that the matter is being investigated and they'll respond once the investigation is complete.  In spite of regular reminders, nothing further ever transpires.

The fact is (and shoot me down if you want to), MCM and DEAT are currently populated by a bunch of incompetents who are under the directorship of an incompetent, whose bosses in parliament (two ministerial portfolios now try to run environment and fisheries) wouldn't know one fish species from another, let alone how and where they are caught.  Idiots, the lot of them.
Click to expand...

Hi Dave

The letter was printed about a year or two ago and featured photos of the gear and the fish that was removed.

I do save some back issues since they are brilliant sources of info and are my reference texts when I need to remember anything.

I agree with you that the communications department of MCM is shocking and I have mentioned to MCM on countless occasions that they do more harm than good.

Carol Moses has very little insight into what is going on and insists that everything goes through her.

I have often wondered why you have not gone to the Freedom of Expression Institute to challenge the gag order that is in place.  (I have personally contacted the FXI to ask for their assistance on this issue.)

You still do not engage with the issue of the need to have a record of performance at the tuna bodies. (what do we do about the 40T at the CCSBT?????)

I have dealt with a wide variety of people at MCM. My experience has been that the inshore resource managers are lacklustre. The compliance staff are often unskilled and have little insight into what they are doing.

The offshore resource managers are often exceptional. Have you ever thought about Johan capturing our pilchard landings in real time down to the last kilo. It staggers me. You have to concede that when the TAC when up to 200 000T this is superhuman.

 
 
J

jb2

Sealiner
strikerpro wrote:
our representative on CCBST is Mr Mongezi Nqoro in Pretoria. very likely that he knows, well very little...JB2 you are pulling at straws.

JB2 i think you are referring to the letter published in ski-boat by a reader with a photo of the longliner. i don't recall the letter stating that the writer kept any of the tuna from the longliner....if he kept a tuna how EXACTLY would that have been used as evidence? the photos surely would be sufficient?....you suggesting this so that MCM could have sold the tuna again to pay their own salaries....you pulling at straws....

DEAT, MCM is doing south africa a gross injustice in the incompetent fashion and the clear neglect in the way they are managing our fish stocks. the reason their communications officer is without words is that they don't have answers, they are to incompetent.

JB2.....Good luck with trying to say MCM is competent to an informed person like Dave Rorke.

To Dave Rorke thanks for your excellent magazine and to your excellent editorials!!!
Click to expand...

Hi Stikerpro

Let's start with the issue of the tuna and the letter that records its removal from gear.

 If you are acting to further a law enforcement objective then you hand everything over to the cops or enforcement officials. If you suspect that the fishing is illegal then it is not yours to keep and should be handed in as evidence.

If the tuna was not captured illegally then the proceeds of the sale of the fish can be returned to the owner. By refusing to hand it over you have frustrated this claim and you are little more than a thief.

You must concede that seeing the tuna only as an item of evidence is unhelpful and inaccurate.

Please have a look at section 63 of the Marine Living Resources Act which deals with the whole mechanism of disposing of perishables.

Your suggestion that the photos would be sufficient is possibly a superficial view of the process and I feel that it is not really appropriate.

If you are acting to further a fish braai objective then you go home and braai the fish.

Dave Rorke had conceded that the information that he gets from MCM  is very badly blurred and filtered by MCM's internal policy of restricting communication with the press. I agree with him.

I agreed with him tht it is restictive that he is not allowed to speak to the people in charge because of the gag order.

The editorials have regaled against the foreign vessels. I have asked how a record of performance is to be developed. Neither you nor Dave have engaged with that.

What alternative do you offer? Why do you avoid the issue. Surely if you say that the vessels shouldn't be there then say what else should happen to develope a record of performance.

The CCSBT and IOTC performance issues are real. I am not sure of the value of wishing them away.

You do me a grave injustice by suggesting that I am trying to say that MCM is competent. I have consistently pointed out that it is a complex multifaceted organisation that has some really low points and some excellent points.

The overly reductionist approach of saying that they are all a useless bunch.

The suggestion that they are all a useless bunch is simplistic and the constant refrain in editorials reduces the value of the editorials as a source of information on conservation and environmental issues.

 
 
J

jb2

Sealiner
strikerpro wrote:
JB2 said:

"So...

Just a short summary of some of the issues for the sake of clarity.

Strikerpro and I had discussed a decision to print a letter where a tuna was removed from gear and not handed to the authorities. This is theft and a contravention of the Marine Living Resources Act. (The Act prohibits interference with gear.)

I had expressed my misgivings about publishing the letter without the appropriate editorial comment.

We have discussed the arbitrary ban at MCM that prevents the media (including "Ski Boat") from speaking to officials at MCM.

All info has to be funneled through the Communications directorate who can not really engage with the issues.

This frustrates the attempts by the media to clarify issues with the officials concerned.

I had mentioned the constant criticism of the use of foreign vessels in the tuna sector. I had asked what alternative is suggested in light of our need to build a record of performance.

I have not had a clear reply to this vexed issue. I don't think that there are easy answers but I would have liked some guidance."

If you take minutes then make sure they are accurate -> this is not an accurate reflection of what was said but rather a cunning attempt to portray things as you saw fit.
Click to expand...

Apologies please feel free to provide an alternative digestible summary.

Thanks for the date of the publication of the letter
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top