Dumping North Sea fish 'immoral'

[wurzel]

Could someone please explain to me what incentive there would be for a prawn fisherman to use gear which allows fish to escape if he is allowed to keep and sell those fish?

At least if he has to put them back dead he is not profiting from using unselective equipment. Personally I think they should have to bring all the fish back and then be fined for it, but obviously that is impossible to police.

 

 

Hello Colin

 

It is not possible to eliminate all fish from a prawn trawl, they can reduce the discards of under sized fish down to minimum, why should they eliminate the fish catch, as seen on the" trawler men" the fish make up a valuable part of the catch it all goes to making the boat viable, the fish catch is made up of several species all except cod have adequate quota.

Why do you consider it wrong to land fish like haddock, lemon sole and monkfish when there is no problem with the stock and the industry is awash with quota for those species?

[barry luxton]

Hello Colin

 

It is not possible to eliminate all fish from a prawn trawl, they can reduce the discards of under sized fish down to minimum, why should they eliminate the fish catch, as seen on the" trawler men" the fish make up a valuable part of the catch it all goes to making the boat viable, the fish catch is made up of several species all except cod have adequate quota.

Why do you consider it wrong to land fish like haddock, lemon sole and monkfish when there is no problem with the stock and the industry is awash with quota for those species?

 

Hi Wurzel, was it not the case earlier this year that defra made several trawlers redundant, paying out a few million over the concern of the sole stock or was that relating to something entirely different. Is it also the case that monkfish have only just come back on line this year. I do not have a problem with the landing of it as long as the stock is there. Can't see the problem with that.

[wurzel]

Hi Wurzel, was it not the case earlier this year that defra made several trawlers redundant, paying out a few million over the concern of the sole stock or was that relating to something entirely different. Is it also the case that monkfish have only just come back on line this year. I do not have a problem with the landing of it as long as the stock is there. Can't see the problem with that.

 

Hello barry

 

I think the beam trawlers were more or less already redundant due to very high running costs, they just managed to wangle decommissioning money from the government on the bases of protecting Dover sole and only relates to the south west nothing to do with the North sea.

There has never been a problem with monk fish, ICES tried to have a issue but had to back track once proved very wrong on their stock assessment.

[Jaffa]

Just to clear one point up,; does anyone have a clear and concise account of exactly what this under 5% discard achieved by the Fruitful Bow is about?

 

I take it that, from what i read in the fishing papers, and the accounts of trips from places like Whitby, that there are more cod on the ground, so have to accept there will be more discards than there were a year or two ago. Just seems obvious but perhaps im thick.

 

These discards, apparently of perfectly edible/marketable fish continue because thats what the cod recovery plan demands. It strikes me that Wurzel has a very good point in asking just which decade the end result of this plan is supposed to place us. Which year in our history has the "correct" spawning biomass of cod?

 

Barry, might be worth your while looking a bit more at the monkfish issue if you want a true glimpse into wonderland For starters, our monkfish are actually two species, not one. For another they are a deepwater species that (iMHO) come up and "invade" our shallow waters when conditions suit. They are capable of swimming/hopping from Shetland to Faroe (think of just what that involves and what it does to any idea of a local population; and because we have never studied them much most of this unknown. Yet we have quotas on them. Qutoas that will have all sorts of knock on effects.

 

"Monk"fish. Perhaps the perfect place to try and get a sense of how nuts it all really is?

 

Chris

[barry luxton]

Just to clear one point up,; does anyone have a clear and concise account of exactly what this under 5% discard achieved by the Fruitful Bow is about?

 

I take it that, from what i read in the fishing papers, and the accounts of trips from places like Whitby, that there are more cod on the ground, so have to accept there will be more discards than there were a year or two ago.

 

 

 

"Monk"fish. Perhaps the perfect place to try and get a sense of how nuts it all really is?

 

Chris

 

Mornin Chris,

 

Hope this helps. Before the infamous video posted by the bbc on the 20th nov, that the minister was clearly basing his argument on and others who have taken up the battle cry that they are trying to impress the general public with, there was an article again posted by the bbc, 30th oct unfortunatly quickly forgotten that shows exactly what the second debarcle was not capable of. Perhaps the bbc ought to do a video of the same, it might well get the attention it deserves for balance.

 

James West's trawler was independantly observed fishing for prawn while under the initative of extra days at sea if cod formed less than 5% of their catch. The peterhead vessel succeeded in meeting the target, Mr West said 'i very much welcome this initative, it worked very well and he would very much recommend it to other skippers who were looking for extra days at sea'.

 

The rural affairs secretary said 'he was delighted that the scheme would work for both conservation and also the fishermen. They will be rewarded for their ability and expertise in avoiding cod in order to allow other forms of fishing with minimal by-catch'.

 

So it's good news for all then? Was the video a con, i know what i would like to beleive.

 

According to the james west article, it does not necessary follow that there will be more discard does it.

 

I'll stay with the codling one at the mo Chris as i think there could still be some 'meat' left in this one, the monkfish one certainly looks appetising though. Thanks.

Edited November 24, 2007 by barry luxton

[wurzel]

Mornin Chris,

 

Hope this helps. Before the infamous video posted by the bbc on the 20th nov, that the minister was clearly basing his argument on and others who have taken up the battle cry that they are trying to impress the general public with, there was an article again posted by the bbc, 30th oct unfortunatly quickly forgotten that shows exactly what the second debarcle was not capable of. Perhaps the bbc ought to do a video of the same, it might well get the attention it deserves for balance.

 

James West's trawler was independantly observed fishing for prawn while under the initative of extra days at sea if cod formed less than 5% of their catch. The peterhead vessel succeeded in meeting the target, Mr West said 'i very much welcome this initative, it worked very well and he would very much recommend it to other skippers who were looking for extra days at sea'.

 

The rural affairs secretary said 'he was delighted that the scheme would work for both conservation and also the fishermen. They will be rewarded for their ability and expertise in avoiding cod in order to allow other forms of fishing with minimal by-catch'.

 

So it's good news for all then? Was the video a con, i know what i would like to beleive.

 

According to the james west article, it does not necessary follow that there will be more discard does it.

 

I'll stay with the codling one at the mo Chris as i think there could still be some 'meat' left in this one, the monkfish one certainly looks appetising though. Thanks.

 

 

Hello Barry

The point that the second video (20th Nov)was trying to make was that even if the cod catch was at 5% they would still have to be dumped. The under tens have zero cod quota, if the skipper had stayed on his normal prawn grounds his cod catch might well have been as low as 5%, he still would have had to dump them.

Another point. I don't know how many box’s The fruitful Bough catches for a 10 day trip 2 or 3 hundred box’s perhaps so 5% cod is still several fish of which he has quota for.

You can't compare the caches of a premier league boat like the Fruitful Bough to a single handed under ten meter day boat where dumping £100 worth of good fish hurts.

Did nobody see the video of the netting boat (similar to mine) fishing from Lowestoft same night on the local Look East programme?

He caught about £200 worth of fish, a few soles and brill and the best part of a box of cod, the cod were not small knits, after dumping the cod he was left with about £125 worth making a poor day into a bad day, and for what reason?

[H.A.]

He caught about £200 worth of fish, a few soles and brill and the best part of a box of cod, the cod were not small knits, after dumping the cod he was left with about £125 worth making a poor day into a bad day, and for what reason?

 

I'll tell you why and it's already happened -

 

"There is such beauty beneath the waves - but this fragile world must not be taken for granted. Some species will be fished to extinction in my lifetime."

 

"A combination of human-related threats to our oceans in the form of relentless over-fishing and global warming place immeasurable pressures on our seas that will inevitably lead to vast swathes of empty ocean."

 

"It's not the regulations set by Governments, but the methods and targeting used by the fishermen themselves which leads to unmarketable and discarded catches."

 

"Around 90% of the big fish are gone. Magnificent marlin, swordfish and bluefin tuna have just vanished. Where is the outrage?"

 

"We looked for three days for areas of control zone sea bed which had not been disturbed for some months, but we could not find a single hectare which did not bear the scars of the trawl."

 

"On a recent assignment to Indonesia, we saw hardly any sharks. The shark-finners had beaten us to it."

 

"When I return to photograph places visited a few years before, I see, with great sorrow, that they are slowly fading before my eyes. I just hope my photographs remind people what is in the balance"

These are comments from eminent marine scientists and wildlife photographers.

 

 

 

The strategy aimed at increasing output was pursued at the expense of necessary new development and the opportunity to restructure and secure the industry in time was missed. By 1975 the industry had reached the end of its productive life-cycle and government investment priorities had shifted to more profitable developments.

 

From an essay about the collapse of UK coal-mining

 

 

Luckily fishes are more infinite than coal (coal can be replenished in around 250 million years!).

 

Unluckily, commercial fishing must stop or 'top itself'!

 

It doesn't matter to me one way or the other since the damage will need 20 years to put right.

 

[barry luxton]

As a lay person when it comes to trawling, cod, please correct me if i'm wrong and i do welcome it. Last year after the annual tac was set for the uk, we were hearing warning sounds that the trawlers have had a brillant winter or spring and unfortunatly we were nearly up to the limit at the beginning of this year, correct? during the course of the year i hear that there was a small amount of quota allocated per month and this was subsequently increased a short while ago? Unfortunatly either the quota has been reached or the little inshore boats are not able to buy, lease quota due to the high cost. Is that correct? So do we now have to wait for the next round of plea bargining for the next load of quota to be released? If all that i have detailed is nearly correct, why have the big boys got all the quota, is it due to the gov or eu share out or is it put beyond reach due to cost or both. Why for example, have the french got most of the tac up and down the channel. Is that right and fair, please don't tell me that the last item is due to historic rights or my answer to that is another argument with the french would be in order.

[wurzel]

 

I'll tell you why and it's already happened -

 

"There is such beauty beneath the waves - but this fragile world must not be taken for granted. Some species will be fished to extinction in my lifetime."

 

"A combination of human-related threats to our oceans in the form of relentless over-fishing and global warming place immeasurable pressures on our seas that will inevitably lead to vast swathes of empty ocean."

 

"It's not the regulations set by Governments, but the methods and targeting used by the fishermen themselves which leads to unmarketable and discarded catches."

 

"Around 90% of the big fish are gone. Magnificent marlin, swordfish and bluefin tuna have just vanished. Where is the outrage?"

 

"We looked for three days for areas of control zone sea bed which had not been disturbed for some months, but we could not find a single hectare which did not bear the scars of the trawl."

 

"On a recent assignment to Indonesia, we saw hardly any sharks. The shark-finners had beaten us to it."

 

"When I return to photograph places visited a few years before, I see, with great sorrow, that they are slowly fading before my eyes. I just hope my photographs remind people what is in the balance"

These are comments from eminent marine scientists and wildlife photographers.

From an essay about the collapse of UK coal-mining

Luckily fishes are more infinite than coal (coal can be replenished in around 250 million years!).

 

Unluckily, commercial fishing must stop or 'top itself'!

 

It doesn't matter to me one way or the other since the damage will need 20 years to put right.

 

 

Well misery guts until commercial fishing is totally banned and punishable by death if caught. how does dumping that fish help anything?

[wurzel]

As a lay person when it comes to trawling, cod, please correct me if i'm wrong and i do welcome it. Last year after the annual tac was set for the uk, we were hearing warning sounds that the trawlers have had a brillant winter or spring and unfortunatly we were nearly up to the limit at the beginning of this year, correct? during the course of the year i hear that there was a small amount of quota allocated per month and this was subsequently increased a short while ago? Unfortunatly either the quota has been reached or the little inshore boats are not able to buy, lease quota due to the high cost. Is that correct? So do we now have to wait for the next round of plea bargining for the next load of quota to be released? If all that i have detailed is nearly correct, why have the big boys got all the quota, is it due to the gov or eu share out or is it put beyond reach due to cost or both. Why for example, have the french got most of the tac up and down the channel. Is that right and fair, please don't tell me that the last item is due to historic rights or my answer to that is another argument with the french would be in order.

 

Bloody hell Barry this is becoming hard work. I'm sure I have tried to explain what is a complicated issue several times before. Perhaps you could paste and copy it some where for future reference

 

When they first introduced quotas some 20 odd years ago the government (DEFRA) set aside a small pool of quota for the under ten meter boats the rest was turned in to a commodity to be bought or sold not only by fishermen but any trader with the money even football clubs hold quota to be leased out to fishermen. Defra were told then that the small amount set aside for the under ten boats was nowhere near enough, I myself was once told by a high ranking DEFRA official "not to draw attention to yourself " as under tens don't have to fill in log books or landing declarations the amount they caught was just estimated, other words DEFRA could put what ever catch figures they wanted or suited them.

They were warned that introducing the buyers and sellers registration would show the huge difference that they estimated and what was actually caught by the under ten boats as it meant collecting very accurate catch figures. It also put DEFRA in an awkward position because it would also show to the EU inspectors how incompetent they had been at showing the true UK catch figures in the past, remember they were under investigation and likely to be fined as France were.

It was not legally possible to relocate quota from the over ten sector so the buyers and sellers went a head as planned and straight away the under tens were in a mess with tiny amounts of quota to fish for. Defra are trying to make it possible for us to lease extra quota from the traders but its either not there as in cod or just not viable for the average small boat owner.

The trawlers you refer to as " having a brilliant winter or spring" only applied to the under ten meter boats, in reality they caught no more or no less that previous years just that DEFRA's new figures made it look like they had.

 

The French did acquire the loins share of Channel cod through historic rights.