Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Dumping North Sea fish 'immoral'


  • Please log in to reply
96 replies to this topic

#1 UK_Ozzie

UK_Ozzie

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 54 posts

Posted 20 November 2007 - 01:14 PM

I thought trawlers had been redesigned to allow fish escape? :headhurt:
Does this demonstrate how much damage trawlers do? :yucky:
What about the fish they don't want to send to market? :blink:
So little prawns so much fish? :yucky:
Have they caught them all?

Fishing today is a tough business to be in.

Strict quotas have been put into place to try to rebuild depleted stocks by limiting the number of fish that vessels can bring back to port.

But are they doing the job they are supposed to?

Watch the videos below to find out why thousands of tonnes of dead fish are being thrown back into the sea and what it takes to be a fisherman in today's climate.
http://news.bbc.co.u.../uk/7102041.stm


Paradise is exactly like where you are right now, only much, much better!

#2 Norm B

Norm B

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,246 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hampshire UK
  • Interests:Sea Angling, Conservation and shooting.

Posted 20 November 2007 - 02:09 PM

I thought trawlers had been redesigned to allow fish escape? :headhurt:
Does this demonstrate how much damage trawlers do? :yucky:
What about the fish they don't want to send to market? :blink:
So little prawns so much fish? :yucky:
Have they caught them all?

:clap2: Unfortunately the commercials have this government by the short hairs with their block votes of the fishing ports and their unions votes. Anglers will never get anything substantial from DEFRA while the bosses are Labour toadies. :clap2:

#3 UK_Ozzie

UK_Ozzie

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 54 posts

Posted 20 November 2007 - 02:41 PM

:clap2: Unfortunately the commercials have this government by the short hairs with their block votes of the fishing ports and their unions votes. Anglers will never get anything substantial from DEFRA while the bosses are Labour toadies.



That explains why the representatives were very careful about what they said?

Given the technology on boats like sounders, GPS you would think that they know its a waste of time before putting the net down and driving through schools of fish dragging the net along the bottom destroying all the habitat then tipping the obvious tonne of fish and 4 prawns on the deck? :headhurt:

The fish were obviously more alive when he dumped on the fish on the deck? :yucky:
For 6 prawns wouldn't it be just smarter to dump the net straight back in the water?

This obviously points to ,

A. 6 prawns stop the prawn season and there will be more fish for the public? :unsure:
B. Redistribute the total allowable catch? :unsure:
C. Take what they like and the government takes the consequences from the public when theres no chippy because the place ends up a desert?

Personally I cant believe the arrogance of the commercial operator? :blink:

Personally Id like to thank the commercial operator demonstrating how destructive this type of fishing is. :yucky:

He however didnt show the dead fish that doesn't go to market that he has been throwing back in the water for years. :yucky:
Paradise is exactly like where you are right now, only much, much better!

#4 Diabolos

Diabolos

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 120 posts

Posted 20 November 2007 - 03:27 PM

Please explain to me why this grumbling sea rapist had to wait until all those 'live' fish were dead before he threw them back!!!!! There was no need. Making a point is one thing, but inventing a point is something else entirely.
In Nomine Satanas

#5 SandTiger

SandTiger

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,050 posts
  • Location:Scrabster, Scotland
  • Interests:Extreme Fishing

Posted 20 November 2007 - 06:54 PM

Please explain to me why this grumbling sea rapist...


Starting with the basic premise that people need food then the key issues are:
  • Sustainability
  • Efficient use of anything caught
  • Minimising habitat destruction
  • Maintaining biodiversity
Recent estimates by the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation put the quantity of bycatch near 20 million metric tonnes, or 25% of all fish caught.

Maybe your anger would be more constructivly channeled towards the gorvernment who implement the discard system rather then a fisherman that is working within the law, why not contact your MP about the utter waste that the bycatch system results in as it clearly doesn't work?

Even before the 'on deck exposure time' there are a number of other factors that could render the fish as good a dead. See: http://www.fao.org/d...1e/y6981e06.htm

#6 barry luxton

barry luxton

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,345 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:rochester
  • Interests:Boat fishing and more boat fishing. Some times i have to go to work so it does interfere with my boat fishing, but not much.

Posted 20 November 2007 - 07:10 PM

Starting with the basic premise that people need food then the key issues are:

  • Sustainability
  • Efficient use of anything caught
  • Minimising habitat destruction
  • Maintaining biodiversity
Recent estimates by the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation put the quantity of bycatch near 20 million metric tonnes, or 25% of all fish caught.

Maybe your anger would be more constructivly channeled towards the gorvernment who implement the discard system rather then a fisherman that is working within the law, why not contact your MP about the utter waste that the bycatch system results in as it clearly doesn't work?

Even before the 'on deck exposure time' there are a number of other factors that could render the fish as good a dead. See: http://www.fao.org/d...1e/y6981e06.htm


Would you please comment on the pilot scheme by the trawler fruitfull bough skipperd by James west where he has demonstrated that it is possible to fish for prawn with a 5% discard. He goes on to say that he would recommend it to any skipper who requires further days at sea.

BTW the fish in the vidio where quite clearly alive until they sorted them into many plastic buckets before dumping them, why couldn't they have just put them back before rummaging around for the camera?

Tried to do a link but was unable to sorry.

Edited by barry luxton, 20 November 2007 - 07:25 PM.

 Free to choose apart from the ones where the trust poked their nose in. Common eel. tope. Bass and sea bream. All restricted.

 
New for 2016 TAT are the main instigators for the demise of the u k bass charter boat industry, where they went screaming off to parliament and for the first time assisting so called angling gurus set up bass take bans with the e u using rubbish exaggerated info collected by ices from anglers, they must be very proud.

Upgrade, the door has been closed with regards to anglers being linked to the e u superstate and the failed c f p. So TAT will no longer need to pay monies to the EAA anymore as that org is no longer relevant to the u k . Goodbye to the europeon anglers alliance and pathetic restrictions from the e u.

Angling is better than politics, ban politics from angling.
 
Consumer of bass. where is the evidence that the u k bass stock need angling trust protection. Why won't you work with your peers instead of castigating them. They have the answer.

Recipie's for mullet stew more than welcomed.
 
Angling sanitation trust and kent and sussex sea anglers org delete's and blocks rsa's alternative opinion on their face book site. Although they claim to rep all.
 
new for 2014. where is the evidence that the south coast bream stock need the angling trust? Your campaign has no evidence. Why won't you work with your peers, the inshore under tens? As opposed to alienating them? Angling trust failed big time re bait digging, even fish legal attempted to intervene and failed, all for what, nothing.
 
Looks like the sea angling reps have been coerced by the ifca's to compose sea angling strategy's that the ifca's at some stage will look at drafting into legislation to manage the rsa, because  they like wasting tax payers money. That's without asking the rsa btw. You know who you are.. 


#7 SandTiger

SandTiger

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,050 posts
  • Location:Scrabster, Scotland
  • Interests:Extreme Fishing

Posted 20 November 2007 - 07:22 PM

Would you please comment on the attached link where this prawn trawler demonstrates that it is perfectly possible to catch prawn with less than a 5% discard. Thanks.

http://news.bbc.co.u...ast/7069127.stm


I'm not quite sure what you're angling after Barry, sorry.

#8 barry luxton

barry luxton

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,345 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:rochester
  • Interests:Boat fishing and more boat fishing. Some times i have to go to work so it does interfere with my boat fishing, but not much.

Posted 20 November 2007 - 07:26 PM

I'm not quite sure what you're angling after Barry, sorry.

I have amended my post thanks, i hope it helps. Cheers.

 Free to choose apart from the ones where the trust poked their nose in. Common eel. tope. Bass and sea bream. All restricted.

 
New for 2016 TAT are the main instigators for the demise of the u k bass charter boat industry, where they went screaming off to parliament and for the first time assisting so called angling gurus set up bass take bans with the e u using rubbish exaggerated info collected by ices from anglers, they must be very proud.

Upgrade, the door has been closed with regards to anglers being linked to the e u superstate and the failed c f p. So TAT will no longer need to pay monies to the EAA anymore as that org is no longer relevant to the u k . Goodbye to the europeon anglers alliance and pathetic restrictions from the e u.

Angling is better than politics, ban politics from angling.
 
Consumer of bass. where is the evidence that the u k bass stock need angling trust protection. Why won't you work with your peers instead of castigating them. They have the answer.

Recipie's for mullet stew more than welcomed.
 
Angling sanitation trust and kent and sussex sea anglers org delete's and blocks rsa's alternative opinion on their face book site. Although they claim to rep all.
 
new for 2014. where is the evidence that the south coast bream stock need the angling trust? Your campaign has no evidence. Why won't you work with your peers, the inshore under tens? As opposed to alienating them? Angling trust failed big time re bait digging, even fish legal attempted to intervene and failed, all for what, nothing.
 
Looks like the sea angling reps have been coerced by the ifca's to compose sea angling strategy's that the ifca's at some stage will look at drafting into legislation to manage the rsa, because  they like wasting tax payers money. That's without asking the rsa btw. You know who you are.. 


#9 SandTiger

SandTiger

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,050 posts
  • Location:Scrabster, Scotland
  • Interests:Extreme Fishing

Posted 20 November 2007 - 07:52 PM

Would you please comment on the pilot scheme by the trawler fruitfull bough skipperd by James west where he has demonstrated that it is possible to fish for prawn with a 5% discard. He goes on to say that he would recommend it to any skipper who requires further days at sea.


I think this is the link - http://news.bbc.co.u...ast/7069127.stm?

The prawn boat Fruitful Bough was independently observed while it avoided catching cod.
Under the initiative, skippers are given extra days at sea if cod forms less than 5% of their catch.
The Peterhead vessel, skippered by James West, succeeded in meeting that target.
The scheme is part of a bid to stop unwanted fish being caught, protecting vulnerable stocks.


On a first reading of it it looks like it should be welcomed - Are there any areas of concern that have been raised as a result of this pilot?

BTW the fish in the vidio where quite clearly alive until they sorted them into many plastic buckets before dumping them, why couldn't they have just put them back before rummaging around for the camera?

Tried to do a link but was unable to sorry.


The fish appeared alive but also consider the impact of the presence of gas-filled organs and overall fragility along with tow duration, catch quantity, stress etc...

Now it maybe on a normal trawl by-catch is tossed over the side, rather then placed in baskets and what survives survives? Or it may be that the fish are always placed in baskets before being tossed? I don't know the answer to that one and no doubt different boats will have different practices.

However, with figures showing by-catch at 20 million metric tonnes then I really do not have a problem with using 20 odd baskets of fish to drive home a very valid point. The whole point of the article is to show the needless waste that a by-catch system imposess with regard to food fisheries. To sling them all back and say that they will all be fine would be entirely disengenious in my view as I think that when fish have been through a trawl common sense dictates they would be pretty much knackered.

If he was saying by-catch is wonderful and works then I guess a few eyebrows would be raised :)

edit to remove duplicate word - Fingers faster then brain :)

Edited by SandTiger, 20 November 2007 - 07:54 PM.


#10 barry luxton

barry luxton

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,345 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:rochester
  • Interests:Boat fishing and more boat fishing. Some times i have to go to work so it does interfere with my boat fishing, but not much.

Posted 20 November 2007 - 08:05 PM

I think this is the link - http://news.bbc.co.u...ast/7069127.stm?

The prawn boat Fruitful Bough was independently observed while it avoided catching cod.
Under the initiative, skippers are given extra days at sea if cod forms less than 5% of their catch.
The Peterhead vessel, skippered by James West, succeeded in meeting that target.
The scheme is part of a bid to stop unwanted fish being caught, protecting vulnerable stocks.


On a first reading of it it looks like it should be welcomed - Are there any areas of concern that have been raised as a result of this pilot?



The fish appeared alive but also consider the impact of the presence of gas-filled organs and overall fragility along with tow duration, catch quantity, stress etc...

Now it maybe on a normal trawl by-catch is tossed over the side, rather then placed in baskets and what survives survives? Or it may be that the fish are always placed in baskets before being tossed? I don't know the answer to that one and no doubt different boats will have different practices.

However, with figures showing by-catch at 20 million metric tonnes then I really do not have a problem with using 20 odd baskets of fish to drive home a very valid point. The whole point of the article is to show the needless waste that a by-catch system imposess with regard to food fisheries. To sling them all back and say that they will all be fine would be entirely disengenious in my view as I think that when fish have been through a trawl common sense dictates they would be pretty much knackered.

If he was saying by-catch is wonderful and works then I guess a few eyebrows would be raised :)

edit to remove duplicate word - Fingers faster then brain :)


Thats the one, thanks Sand Tiger. If it was possible to fish with a disgard of five % then there really wouldn't be a problem you have to agree on that. The vidio this morning however and also the comments from the minister and other commercial aspects in all this demonstrates a massive discard that is certainly not sustainable nor is the fish stock. UK Ossie has also made a good point where he has said that the guys who have made this vidio clearly shows the destructive method of fishing. The difficulty i have is knowing who to beleive.If it is so destructive, why can't the fishing practices change? So is it all down to the skipper of fruitfull bough to educate the rest?

Is the electronics on a commercial very different to that of a charter boat. If the charter boat skipper tells you that today we will target so and so, invaribly that is what is done. Again to that end the amount of discard waste that is being highlighted by commercial fishing is baffling to me.

Edited by barry luxton, 20 November 2007 - 08:10 PM.

 Free to choose apart from the ones where the trust poked their nose in. Common eel. tope. Bass and sea bream. All restricted.

 
New for 2016 TAT are the main instigators for the demise of the u k bass charter boat industry, where they went screaming off to parliament and for the first time assisting so called angling gurus set up bass take bans with the e u using rubbish exaggerated info collected by ices from anglers, they must be very proud.

Upgrade, the door has been closed with regards to anglers being linked to the e u superstate and the failed c f p. So TAT will no longer need to pay monies to the EAA anymore as that org is no longer relevant to the u k . Goodbye to the europeon anglers alliance and pathetic restrictions from the e u.

Angling is better than politics, ban politics from angling.
 
Consumer of bass. where is the evidence that the u k bass stock need angling trust protection. Why won't you work with your peers instead of castigating them. They have the answer.

Recipie's for mullet stew more than welcomed.
 
Angling sanitation trust and kent and sussex sea anglers org delete's and blocks rsa's alternative opinion on their face book site. Although they claim to rep all.
 
new for 2014. where is the evidence that the south coast bream stock need the angling trust? Your campaign has no evidence. Why won't you work with your peers, the inshore under tens? As opposed to alienating them? Angling trust failed big time re bait digging, even fish legal attempted to intervene and failed, all for what, nothing.
 
Looks like the sea angling reps have been coerced by the ifca's to compose sea angling strategy's that the ifca's at some stage will look at drafting into legislation to manage the rsa, because  they like wasting tax payers money. That's without asking the rsa btw. You know who you are..