Rsa versus Commercial

[wurzel]

mornin Wurzel, l have seen this comment before and i ask you why do you have a quota that little and the dutch so high? Do they actually catch this quota or do they just hold it?

Where abouts would they catch it they was to target it. Is that for all the dutch fleet? Thanks

 

Hello Barry

 

It's complicated,

Several years ago Defra (MAFF) ring fenced a small amount of quota for us small boats, it was never no where near enough, it did not matter much because our catches were never monitored much they just put down what ever figures they needed to keep the EU happy and to balance the books so to speak.

Because DEFRA were threatened with a hefty fine for not keeping accurate books they brought in the buyers and sellers plan, this has showed just how far out they were with their figures on the under ten meter catches, the say they are not able to recoup any of the quota that went into the hands of PO's and other traders so we have to make do with what we have which is not possible. exactly the same has happened to the SW cod.

 

Quite a lot of North Sea sole went to the beamer fleet that was at Lowestoft who swapped a lot of it for plaice from the Dutch, a bit like swapping gold for lead, most seems to be on the so called flag ships, Dutch owned boats working on UK quota, I have never managed to work it all out, all I know is the beamer fleet are having problems with very high fuel cost, several have been decommissioned some are not working or changing to different fisheries, leaving a big chunk of quota uncaught.

 

The knock on effect of this so called management is boats looking to make up the loss by targeting none quota fish such as smooth hounds, tope , roker and bass, I will have to double my bass catches next summer, more boats are turning to potting making a bigger market for bait fish such as flounders and wrasse, this brings commercials into more conflict with anglers.

[barry luxton]

Hello Barry

 

It's complicated,

Several years ago Defra (MAFF) ring fenced a small amount of quota for us small boats, it was never no where near enough, it did not matter much because our catches were never monitored much they just put down what ever figures they needed to keep the EU happy and to balance the books so to speak.

Because DEFRA were threatened with a hefty fine for not keeping accurate books they brought in the buyers and sellers plan, this has showed just how far out they were with their figures on the under ten meter catches, the say they are not able to recoup any of the quota that went into the hands of PO's and other traders so we have to make do with what we have which is not possible. exactly the same has happened to the SW cod.

 

Quite a lot of North Sea sole went to the beamer fleet that was at Lowestoft who swapped a lot of it for plaice from the Dutch, a bit like swapping gold for lead, most seems to be on the so called flag ships, Dutch owned boats working on UK quota, I have never managed to work it all out, all I know is the beamer fleet are having problems with very high fuel cost, several have been decommissioned some are not working or changing to different fisheries, leaving a big chunk of quota uncaught.

 

The knock on effect of this so called management is boats looking to make up the loss by targeting none quota fish such as smooth hounds, tope , roker and bass, I will have to double my bass catches next summer, more boats are turning to potting making a bigger market for bait fish such as flounders and wrasse, this brings commercials into more conflict with anglers.

 

Thanks for that Wurzel. So it's the eu that threaten defra with heavy fines, they are the ones remember who haven't balanced their books for years, big time. Are you referring to the sw beamers being redundant or other. If the chunk of quota remains uncaught why can they not share it out or is it money that talks. Or does it remain uncaught full stop. Remember also defra said that they are trying to sort out more fish for the sw recently, did they sort it? Roker can only be caught as a by-catch. So thats why you increase your bass? Sure, wrasse are an emotive fish for rsa as all of those are put back. I can see why everyone is 'p'd off.

Edited March 4, 2007 by barry luxton

[Jaffa]

The unrealised principle of the unreformed CFP is that the concept of national fleets is redundant and that there should be a single EU fleet comprised of boats of the EU nations all having equal access to all EU waters.

 

(The same principle as exists within the UK whereby Cornish boats can fish Kent waters, and Kent boats can go and fish off Whitby, but on a larger scale).

 

But of course it doesn't work like that.

 

Each EU country has it's own fleet, it's own waters and it's own Fisheries Minister who (believe it or not, sticks up for the interests of his/her own countries fleet - even Bradshaw - er, I did say believe it or not!).

So, we have a 'derogation' designed to preserve 'relative stability'.

Before the EU, each nation only had control of it's own waters out to 3 miles.

 

Outside of 3 miles, it was international waters, the 'high seas', and British law stopped at the 3 mile line.

Then Iceland unilaterally decided to take control of its waters out to 200 miles, and domino like all other countries followed suite.

(In Europe, where different countries are closer than 400 miles, it's out to 200 or the median line, the line equidistant between two countries with shores closer to each other than 400 miles)

 

And under the Common Fisheries Policy, the EU nations pooled their extended national waters.

Except for that 'derogation' whereby each nation now exclusively fishes and enforces within 6 miles (double the pre cfp limit), and shares with nations whose vessels traditionally fished what was once the 'high seas' within 12 miles (often only for certain species at certain times of the year, and in certain places).

 

And yes the derogation is reviewed every 10 years (I think it's 7 years until the next review).

And yes it is technically conceivable that the derogation could be lifted, as ministers use it as a bargaining tool, and give every national fleet access to every EU countries beaches, but that just isn't going to happen. (but every ten years it does make a good bogeyman story to stir national fears of those 'orrible garlicky foreigners nicking all our fish off our beaches, and we have no way of saying no).

 

At a recent meeting with fishermen, I was concerned that if we really looked after out local inshore fishery, then the Cornishmen were free to move in and take what we had worked for.

 

But I was assured that it would never happen because to fish the local waters required local knowledge of the physical characteristics of the tides, the bottom, the way fish move in the district and the types of gear and the way to fish it best used for the district etc.

 

But I guess that those Belgians are too stupid to realise that, and if the derogation was to be lifted, they would be over here like a shot, to show those idiot Cornishmen the opportunities that they have been missing all these years.

But lets say there is to be a serious grab by some of our continental neighbours, wanting to fish up to our beaches in 7 years time , and HM Government is wavering over whether it's worth giving that up so that our banks can get a slice of the multi-hundred- billion euros life insurance market throughout Europe.

 

The thing that will stop them isn't the thought of losing the votes of a few thousand fishermen, but they might reconsider if the fishermen are supported by a million or so anglers and their supporters.

 

If at that time anglers think they might as well let the Belgians rape what's left of the inshore stocks as our own 'greedy' fishermen, 'the industry' will find itself in a very lonely and isolated postition.

 

And yet if they had given the needs of RSA some consideration, and had worked to share the resources as I outlined above, anglers sentiment could be very different.

 

Our great lads, who had recognised our right to some fish, and some places, and who'd worked with us to make our inshore fisheries better for everyone, are now at risk of being replaced by those raping b****s who have no interest in the preservation of one of Europe's best recreational sea fisheries, now need us to write letters to MP's, MEPs, send emails, join them to block the Thames with thousands of little craft etc.......

But yes, just a dream (sigh).

Unless there are some fundamental changes of attitude, and some realisation that change happens, and something better can be built out of it, it really makes no difference who is fishing right up to the beaches.

 

Not to anglers anyway.

 

Thanks for the facts on the dates and process, but i have to disagree with your opinion on their meaning.

 

It would be useful imho if you would strip out the crap like

 

"our great lads", "Belgians rape", "greedy" "stupid"

 

FWIW if your Cornishman was telling the truth, then its an unusual place. We have west coast scallop boats fishing out of my local east coast harbour (non of the locals fish scallops or ever have done)

 

You, and the cornish rep who told you that tale, might also be suprised to learn about the Belgian beamers arriving on the Aberdeen banks. Mid eighties one beamer arrived; the "Blue angel"; couple of weeks later there were loads of them.

 

If i get upset about something as an angler about say an EU boat fishing off the beach, and want to make a complaint, then who do i talk to?

Edited March 6, 2007 by Jaffa

[Jaffa]

Next round of fisheries limits dogfight will be 2013? If "RSA" has destroyed the UK lobbying power by then, do they expect to have in place something else to do a similar job?

[Jaffa]

2013. UK commercials and anglers have joined forces lobbying sustainable fishing, good and fair management and to keep away all the bad ones of the Johnny foreigners.

 

"Johnny foreigner! ?

 

Not sure i've ever met a racist fishermen; though they must exist.

 

Met plenty of fantastists though

[Ken Davison South Wales]

Next round of fisheries limits dogfight will be 2013? If "RSA" has destroyed the UK lobbying power by then, do they expect to have in place something else to do a similar job?

 

What power is that? we seem (royal and all sweeping we )to take a hammering every time there is an EU meeting concerning sea fisheries, I honestly don't think RSAs can screw up the lobbying power any more than it is already

 

It is surprising how easy it is to screw up a situation, say dear old Benny boy is going in to negotiate on mackerel catches, all the opposition do is point a finger to wards those lads north of the boarder and no matter how good BBs argument is he is treading on quicksand. That's the way of politics, it doesn't even have to be 100% factual, just use the old adage no smoke without fire

 

In order to survive I personally don't think there is a choice, to quote another bit of worthless rubbish "there is strength in numbers" as a combined force we might make a dent in the situation, fighting each other just gives the opposition greater opportunities to crush us, be that the UK mob or the EU mob.

[Leon Roskilly]

If i get upset about something as an angler about say an EU boat fishing off the beach, and want to make a complaint, then who do i talk to?

 

 

Not sure about Scotland, you need to talk to the lads there.

 

But in England and Wales, if there's a foreign vessel fishing within six miles (or any suspected illegal fishing activity), then you need to quickly contact the Local Sea Fisheries Committee http://www.asfc.org.uk/

 

And or the Marine Fisheries Agency http://www.mfa.gov.uk/contact/portoffice.htm

 

(But be aware of some anglo/foreign vessels http://www.defra.gov.uk/fish/sea/manage/pd...nomic%20link%22 that are considered part of the UK fleet, though Idon't know if any of these are small enough to fish close inshore (different SFCs have different byelaws about how close larger vessels can come - in my own district you need to be under 17 metres to come close in)

 

(In some estuaries the EA acts as the SFC, and enforces rules regarding sea-trout, salmon and eels out to 6 miles. Oh! and fishing for salmonoids and freshwater species out to 6 too ie you already need a rod licence out to 6 miles for some fish! - call 0800 807 060 - put it in your mobile now, if you spot something suspicious close inshore. They will pass you onto the right people if it's not their problem)

 

The SFC's (I believe that Scotland is to introduce something similar to the English SFCs in the not too distant future), only enforce their own belaws and national and EU fisheries legislation out to 6 miles within their own district.

 

Outside of 6 miles but within 12, foreign vessels that don't have 'grandfather's rights' (see:http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/pri/en/oj/dat/2002/l_358/l_35820021231en00590080.pdf ) are policed by the MFA (as is all fishing out to our 200 mile or the 'median line' between close neighbours, and UK boats wherever they fish)

Edited March 7, 2007 by Leon Roskilly

[wurzel]

All very commendable Leon

 

What about in 10 years time

[steve good]

The unrealised principle of the unreformed CFP is that the concept of national fleets is redundant and that there should be a single EU fleet comprised of boats of the EU nations all having equal access to all EU waters.

 

(The same principle as exists within the UK whereby Cornish boats can fish Kent waters, and Kent boats can go and fish off Whitby, but on a larger scale).

 

But of course it doesn't work like that.

 

Each EU country has it's own fleet, it's own waters and it's own Fisheries Minister who (believe it or not, sticks up for the interests of his/her own countries fleet - even Bradshaw - er, I did say believe it or not!).

So, we have a 'derogation' designed to preserve 'relative stability'.

Before the EU, each nation only had control of it's own waters out to 3 miles.

 

Outside of 3 miles, it was international waters, the 'high seas', and British law stopped at the 3 mile line.

Then Iceland unilaterally decided to take control of its waters out to 200 miles, and domino like all other countries followed suite.

(In Europe, where different countries are closer than 400 miles, it's out to 200 or the median line, the line equidistant between two countries with shores closer to each other than 400 miles)

 

And under the Common Fisheries Policy, the EU nations pooled their extended national waters.

Except for that 'derogation' whereby each nation now exclusively fishes and enforces within 6 miles (double the pre cfp limit), and shares with nations whose vessels traditionally fished what was once the 'high seas' within 12 miles (often only for certain species at certain times of the year, and in certain places).

 

And yes the derogation is reviewed every 10 years (I think it's 7 years until the next review).

And yes it is technically conceivable that the derogation could be lifted, as ministers use it as a bargaining tool, and give every national fleet access to every EU countries beaches, but that just isn't going to happen. (but every ten years it does make a good bogeyman story to stir national fears of those 'orrible garlicky foreigners nicking all our fish off our beaches, and we have no way of saying no).

 

At a recent meeting with fishermen, I was concerned that if we really looked after out local inshore fishery, then the Cornishmen were free to move in and take what we had worked for.

 

But I was assured that it would never happen because to fish the local waters required local knowledge of the physical characteristics of the tides, the bottom, the way fish move in the district and the types of gear and the way to fish it best used for the district etc.

 

But I guess that those Belgians are too stupid to realise that, and if the derogation was to be lifted, they would be over here like a shot, to show those idiot Cornishmen the opportunities that they have been missing all these years.

But lets say there is to be a serious grab by some of our continental neighbours, wanting to fish up to our beaches in 7 years time , and HM Government is wavering over whether it's worth giving that up so that our banks can get a slice of the multi-hundred- billion euros life insurance market throughout Europe.

 

The thing that will stop them isn't the thought of losing the votes of a few thousand fishermen, but they might reconsider if the fishermen are supported by a million or so anglers and their supporters.

 

If at that time anglers think they might as well let the Belgians rape what's left of the inshore stocks as our own 'greedy' fishermen, 'the industry' will find itself in a very lonely and isolated postition.

 

And yet if they had given the needs of RSA some consideration, and had worked to share the resources as I outlined above, anglers sentiment could be very different.

 

Our great lads, who had recognised our right to some fish, and some places, and who'd worked with us to make our inshore fisheries better for everyone, are now at risk of being replaced by those raping b****s who have no interest in the preservation of one of Europe's best recreational sea fisheries, now need us to write letters to MP's, MEPs, send emails, join them to block the Thames with thousands of little craft etc.......

But yes, just a dream (sigh).

Unless there are some fundamental changes of attitude, and some realisation that change happens, and something better can be built out of it, it really makes no difference who is fishing right up to the beaches.

 

Not to anglers anyway.

 

Hi Leon

 

We just pull out of the CFP and declare a 200 mile fishing limit same as Iceland

 

steve

[Leon Roskilly]

Hi Leon

 

We just pull out of the CFP and declare a 200 mile fishing limit same as Iceland

 

steve

 

 

Hi Steve,

 

To be the same as Iceland, we also need to relocate our island somewhere quite a long way from mainland Europe, so that 'our' fish can't stray into 'their' waters (and vice versa).

 

Oh! and someone better explain to the Scottish lads why they will not be welcome in Norway's waters in future and why (failing being able to relocate the island much further offshore) our boats will be fired upon if they go too far over the median line, chasing 'English' fish who for some reason want to swim to over there (where the French will probably grab them before they can make it back to 'safety')

 

If we weren't in the CFP, we'd have to figure out a system like it to manage the stocks we mutally share with other nations, and as one nation agains all those in the EU (as opposed to being part of it), we might find ouselves unable to even negotiate the less han favourable terms we are able to manage now.

 

Still it's easier to think that all our problems will be solved by pulling out, rather than making your head hurt trying to think of ways to fix the system I suppose.

 

Even though there isn't a cat in hell's chance of a workable alternative.

 

I can't remember exactly now, but I think that whereas Iceland has around a dozen species that require International management agreements, we have in the region of 80!