THE ULTIMATE ANGLING BUCKET LIST

One thing the EU most certainly is not is a collection of equals, and therefore political bullying is rife,
such as by the French not wanting the minimum size limit for bass to go up from thirty six cm, at which
stage bass have yet to reproduce, to forty two cm when some of them might have replaced themselves,
because believe it or not, a thirty six cm bass supposedly fits better on a dinner plate.
Forget the science. It's house wife and restaurateur driven, which could very easily be satisfied by
hatchery reared fish, were it not for the fact that there is a premium paid for wild fish, and more
especially in posh nosh gaffs, for large wild fish, where customers prefer a bigger, meatier, bone-free
lump on their plate.
For these reasons and more, commercial exploitation is never going to go away until the economics of
cost in pursuit of catching bass is out-weighed by the income they deliver. The law of diminishing
returns.
Adding further insult to injury here is the blame culture of finger pointing by the EU at anglers, holding
us responsible for the bulk of the species decline by imposing a three fish per day bag limit from April
2015.
I have no problem at all with bag limits as part of a package of measures aimed at rehabilitating the
species, providing they are universally applied. But to single out rod and line fishing is ludicrous.
Like most anglers, I would not want to take three bass per trip anyway, and would be happy if I could
occasionally catch three in a session these days. So in that sense it doesn't affect me, and I dare say
many other anglers. Yet now incredibly, I find myself opposing bag limits, simply because of the
implication they carry in terms of blame.
Being a recreational fishing representative on the Inshore Fisheries Conservation Authority (IFCA), as
you might expect, I get bombarded by arguments and counter arguments on the current bass situation
quite literally on a daily basis. It comes from being on so many interested parties block email lists. So
I think to an extent I do have my finger on the pulse.
Equally, I also have my own opinions, which I can say without fear of contradiction will ruffle a few
feathers amongst the angling community. But before I give them, let me first say that they have been
well thought through, so at least give them a fair hearing, even if you disagree.
The first thing I want to say in connection with this is that I feel I have done as much as the next man
to champion the cause of the bass, which is something I will continue to do, even though it invariably
feels like swimming against the tide.
At the time of first daft writing here, and flying in the face of all the scientific wisdom, bass could still
legally be taken at thirty six cm in length, despite the fact that forty two cm probably represents a fish
about to spawn for the first time, with forty five cm a more responsible figure to ensure all have done
so at least once.
To its credit, the Irish government has just announced a proposal for fifty cm. Yet despite the fact that
the various regional IFCA's have the legal right to unilaterally change size limits, providing they are
raised and not lowered, and let's face it, why would anyone with even half a brain want to lower them,
still nothing is done.
Certainly not by my regional IFCA, other than to complain about work loads, though by the time I was
proof reading the final draft here, realising the species was now finally looking over the edge of the
abyss, the EU through a majority vote, finally but reluctantly agreed to up the minimum size limit to 42
cm. Not only that, this time it would apply to everybody.
Meanwhile, in the face of dire warnings from the International Council for Exploitation of the Seas
(ICES) in 2014 saying that unless there was an eighty percent reduction in bass landings to allow some
170