| Management
option |
Advantages
|
Disadvantages
|
| National
code of conduct for bait collection |
- Primarily intended to influence the conduct
of collection activities, e.g. by voluntary
agreement on methodology of collection and
informal bag limits. Potentially an extremely
important and valuable means of bait collection
regulation.
- Should reduce conflicts with other users.
- May improve yields.
- May be self-regulating.
- Already promoted by several user groups.
|
- Must be supported by resources and personnel
for education and promotion, on and off-site,
particularly for those who are not members
of national user groups.
|
| Local/regional
code of conduct |
- Potentially an important and valuable
means of bait collection regulation. As
above, aims may include reducing conflicts
(by changing methodology or zoning activity),
and improving quality and quantity of stocks.
- User groups already promote several such
codes, often within an estuary management
plan or SAC forum.
- May be self-regulating.
|
- Difficult to implement if some collectors
are not members of recognised user groups
participating in the local management forum,
or are based outside the area.
- Requires significant resource input for
on and off-site education and promotion.
|
| Participation
of collectors in local management plans |
- The management plan process for MNRs,
Estuaries, SACs or other areas provides
an unmatched opportunity for discussing
and resolving apparent or actual conflicts
between intertidal species collection and
other coastal uses. It may promote sound
management, through any of the techniques
listed here.
|
- Resources required for long-term commitment
to participation in the plan.
|
| Prohibition
or licensing of commercial bait collection activities |
- Commercial bait collection is a potential
source of conflict among bait collectors
and between collectors and other users.
It is not part of the public right to fish,
but widely tolerated and provides an important
source of bait for many anglers.
- Commercial bait collection may be licensed
formally by landowners (who may not, however,
regulate competing non-commercial collection
activities). A very few collectors have
rights to collect bait commercially in specified
areas.
|
- Extremely difficult to enforce ban because
of the difficulty of proving commercial
collection in court.
- Loss of commercial supplies and rising
retail bait prices may result in increased
recreational bait collection activity and
conflict with other users in many locations
(collectors may supply retail outlets over
a very large area).
|
| Bag
limits |
- Intended to conserve stocks and reduce
impacts by limiting activity, particularly
commercial collection.
- Generally acceptable to recreational collectors.
|
- Very difficult to enforce, even with resources
for education and policing.
- May increase collection effort.
|
| Licensing |
- No discrimination is possible; all applicants
must be issued with licences and conditions
applied equally.
- The application licencing process ensures
that all licence holders are informed of
management issues and requirements.
|
- Successful implementation requires significant
resources for education, administration
and enforcement.
|
| Zonation |
- May be voluntary or backed by legislation.
Could consist of:
- permanent exclusion zones (to protect
core areas of reserves, recreational beach
quality, coastal structures, commercial
or recreational shipping infrastructure
etc.) or
- temporary, rotational zonation. The latter
is likely to be more acceptable to anglers
(because larger quantities of target species
may be collected as areas are rotated).
|
- Permanent exclusion is more effective
because easily understood and cheaper to
administer and manage.
- Rotational zonation is more difficult
to enforce and will not protect habitats,
coastal structures, or long-lived species.
|
| Closed
seasons |
- May prevent damage to bait stocks or other
wildlife at vulnerable periods, such as
breeding or migrating seasons.
|
- Peak bait demand occurs during lugworm
breeding and bird migration/ overwintering
season.
|
| Closure
of bait beds |
- If voluntary agreements fail, complete
prohibition of collection at a site is easier
for managers to administer and enforce than
any other management option.
- Closure must not completely stop bait
collection in an area, but ensure that alternative
sources remain accessible.
|
- Closure of a bait collection site will
increase pressure on stocks and may cause
conflicts at sites up to 100 miles away.
Requires careful assessment of the effects
of closure before introduction.
|
| Improving
retail sources of bait |
- Increasing quantities of bait are now
available through retail suppliers derived
from farmed stocks of native species.
- Imports of native bait species take place
from Ireland and the Netherlands. Such imports
are of great importance for angling and
if good quality should reduce pressure on
local stocks, but should be from sustainably
managed stocks.
|
- Imports of non-native species (e.g. from
Japan or Korea) are illegal and must actively
be discouraged among retailers.
- Import of unmanaged, unsustainable commercially
dug worm stocks from other areas is undesirable.
|
| Fisheries
legislation |
- Most shellfish already fall under the
remit of Sea Fisheries Committees/MAFF and
Scottish Office Agriculture, Environment
and Fisheries Department (SERAD).
- Other species may be added.
- Fisheries legislation and byelaws are
a well-established means of controlling
fisheries activities, with Fisheries Officers
responsible for policing and enforcement.
|
- Limited resources for fisheries management
will make enforcement of regulations for
non-commercial collection or addition of
new species to statutes an extremely low
priority.
|
