Multifilament/Monofilament netting - Page 2
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16

Thread: Multifilament/Monofilament netting

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Fleetwood
    Posts
    52

    Default

    Ask the agent to put his comments in writing and explain the reasons for the "threats"..................I would bet there will be a reluctance to do this.

    Are you a member of any fishing organisation that could take up this case for you ??

    To me it sounds like they are just pushing to see how determined you are. Have you contacted anyone else about this - maybe speak to Tim Oliver about an article in the Fishing News ??

    Like you say it needs some thought and possibly some proper legal advice.
    Best of luck
    Keith

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Fraserburgh , Scotland
    Posts
    17,451

    Default

    I was trained in that legislation back in 1987 when I was a Fishery Officer and they are well outside of the law in deciding that multi-filament is the same as mono-filament. It would take any court 2 minutes to rule on that but get good legal advice first. I suppose the way to get around it would be to re-rig your Haaf net with nylon mesh ( use white its basically invisible in the water unlike green or orange ) just to stop their nonsense.

  3. #13

    Default

    Cheers Davie & Keith for the support and advice. I am a member of the Nith Haaf Netters Association but I'm sure they think I am rocking the boat!! I am waiting on a written reply from Ayr Fisheries office and have a meeting with a solicitor tomorrow. We'll take it from there. I don't think I would mind switching to nylon as long as they concede that multi is not mono!!!

  4. #14

    Default

    Had a reply from Ayr fisheries office yesterday. They are going to refer the matter to their legal department in Edinburgh. This is after telling me it was legal and telling the salmon fisheries board it was illegal!!!

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    the rosses, co.donegal
    Posts
    242

    Default

    this seems to be nitpicking over definition-here drifting for salmon we traditionally used flax nets which were laterally superseded by nylon-then we went to monofilament which was banned. at the time of the ban it was deemed that the yarns construction had to be multifilament-it didn`t specify what material could be used so enter multi-mono. which was basically nearly as good as mono but harder to work and prone to getting dirty. now here is my point about the whole lot- a single nylon strand is a monofilament-doesn`t matter what way you look at it-if your netting yarn is made up off 10 of them or a hundred it is still technically a multi monofilament yarn. even courlene trawl yarn is multi mono by definition-say 15/24 the 15 signifying 15 denier and the 24 being the amount of filaments in the twine construction. even braided courlene is braided out of single monofilament strands. so basically everytwine type outside single strand what we would class as `gut`. in the modern industry is multi mono filament of some sort or another be it polypropylene,courlene,terylene,nylon,dyneema,spec tra or whatever (even trawl warp is multi mono filament steel)-does that mean by their definition that there is nothing available for you to use?

  6. #16

    Default

    This is what I am trying to get over to the other haaf netters, that if they agree to stop fishing with multifilament then next year, or whenever, they can say the same applies to nylon because by definition it is also a multifilament, and as you point out what does that leave to make your nets from?? Then it will be cheerio to a thousand year old traditional method of fishing. The key regulation the salmon fisheries board are picking up is the following, "No monfilament netting shall be used in the construction of any net used in the fishing for or taking of salmon". The reply from their solictor is that this means that mono made into twine must be illegal as mono has been used in the "construction". I am convinced, as is everyone else I know with experience in commercial fishing, that this argument would be laughed out of court.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •