BBC's Trawlermen

[Guest challenge]

Fishing for prawns, yes, or prawning. Still, the less prawn available for sale, the higher the price.

 

If there were lots of fish (prawns) they wouldn't have to be all in the same area.

 

Irish lad did indeed say that. Would the value of those fish have covered costs? I wouldn't think so.

The where not allowed to catch such a heavy by catch of fish, (I believe they explained that to us in the film) but they where catching prawns. They moved because they where not justifying what they where doing (catching to much fish) regarding the amount of prawns they where catching. And when asked (the crew by the skipper) they said they where not in the job to dump fish back over the side. So they decided to move.

Then again I suppose they could of staged managed all this dialogue for the sake of the cameras? If they did then I think that they are wasting there time messing around on boats when there must be a lucrative living for them to be made in the acting business.

[A Norfolk Boy]

I somehow can't believe that they moved out of the goodness of their hearts to avoid wasting the by catch. If there was enough monies worth of prawns in the nets I think they would have carried on regardless.

Edited August 3, 2006 by A Norfolk Boy

[glennk]

I was under the impression they moved because the fish quota ran out not because they were catching fish - Plenty of room on that boat to bring in a few more tiddlers.

[seaside]

hi steve

 

..................

 

sorry we are all taken a bit of the cake we are all adding pressure to fish stocks one way or other and collectively we are all RESPONSIBLE

 

regards steve

 

We are all certainly responsible - the actions over the years of politicians, scientists, anglers, domestic and industrial commercial fishing sectors combined with global warming, fish diseases, etc etc have all impacted fish stocks and generally to their detriment.

 

To me, it's not a question of who WAS responsible - there was plenty of bad practice all round - but who has the heart, will, drive and commitment to come out of denial and change the situation, get rid of bad practice and look at ways to help create sustainable stocks for both sectors.

 

Too much energy is wasted on this forum in pointless peeing contests and 'lamp swinging' tales instead of rational discussion between the various sectors on practices, policies or processes that could help create a sustainable future.

[corydoras]

They said they paid 29p a litre. At my local garage, where all the local businesses buy it, it's 94p a litre. Why are they allowed to use "red diesel"? Builders can't use it, HGV drivers can't use it, taxi drivers can't use it, so why the special dispensation for fishermen? As I said, they are not providing some essential service, like farmers do, they are just making money like everyone else.

Farmers get to use red deisel because the don't use it on the public highway. Trawlers get to use red diesel because they don't use it on the public highway. Joe Public is allowed to burn red diesel in boats too AFAIK, or at least they could when I worked at boatyard (mind you that was 30 years ago in Scotland).

[Guest challenge]

I somehow can't believe that they moved out of the goodness of their hearts to avoid wasting the by catch. If there was enough monies worth of prawns in the nets I think they would have carried on regardless.

You know these lads do you? Or are you assuming that every fisherman (commercial) is as untrustworthy and unjust as you assume that they would be?

[A Norfolk Boy]

Well, I believe by-catch figures to be around 1/3 of total catch, I doubt if most are sentimental....

 

Unlike many, I have a lot of sympathy for the commercial boys, my local industry is virtually dead, 2 full time at yarmouth I believe (people that is, not boats) and no more deep sea activity from the coastline for well, years.

[A Norfolk Boy]

Unlike many, I have a lot of sympathy for the commercial boys, my local industry is virtually dead, 2 full time at yarmouth I believe (people that is, not boats) and no more deep sea activity from the coastline for well, years.

 

 

Unemployment at Yarmouth is joint highest in the country with Tower Hamlets in London. I believe this to be 19%. Bet the children of wish their fathers hadn't taken quite so many fish.

[Guest challenge]

Well, I believe by-catch figures to be around 1/3 of total catch, I doubt if most are sentimental....

 

Unlike many, I have a lot of sympathy for the commercial boys, my local industry is virtually dead, 2 full time at yarmouth I believe (people that is, not boats) and no more deep sea activity from the coastline for well, years.

I was looking at a couple of prawn trawls on the quay at home the other day as some lads where repairing them. You find it hard to believe that they catch round fish. They only stand a few inches from bottom rope to head line. But this programme proved that they still do catch fish.

Did you notice that one boat was more or less having clean hauls of prawns yet the other was getting a lot of by catch? Both boats working more or less the same area? With more or less the same nets?

[A Norfolk Boy]

I think by catch is simply a huge waste. It cannot be right that it can not be counted in a quota in some way. I understand that there are technologies and design to limit waste. I recall some years back there was a square as opposed to diamond(?) net which did not close up when trawled. alowing the smaller fish out but because the overall hole size was smaller, it was not allowed by the EU, despite the fact that it would have helped preserve stocks! If anybody knows this to be wrong, I stand corrected.