Jump to content

Romantic Cod and Fish Populations?


101_North

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 100
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Over fishing of cod in the north sea has meant that codling once matured at X years (weight 7 lb) (cod) but this is now beginning to happen at Y years (3lb). The species has adapted to cope with the problems of survival of it's species. This however is not a good thing. Energy goes into breeding, not growing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read the post and all I saw was a rather glib statement on the cods sexual practices which has little to do with survival or conservation of the species.

 

Given half a brain the composer of the rubbish would have probably discarded this article, as it is he hasn't got the required half.

I fish, I catches a few, I lose a few, BUT I enjoys. Anglers Trust PM

 

eat.gif

 

http://www.petalsgardencenter.com

 

Petals Florist

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Leon, you old Newtonian :)

 

Vested interests like Fishermen picking the science they like! Next you'll be telling me that vested interests like environmental groups and salaried fisheries scientist do the same :) As if...

 

Robert May ( top Fisheries modeller), in 1980, said "come the millennium, with perfect understanding of the ecology of fish stocks, fishery scientists will be able to predict the likely consequences of alternative management strategies with high accuracy, although because of its stochastic nature no biological process can ever be as cut and dried as the laws of chemistry and physics."

 

I suspect hes beginning to look as silly as the weather guys, who used to believe that just needed to get more data and more computing power and they would be able to make accurate long range forecasts. Some of them even thought they could control the weather to suit us.

 

Chaos theory put the cat among the pigeons though a bit though :D . Wish I understood it but perhaps some do :D

 

101, don't know much about it but I would think the kind of stuff your after can be found with a google search of chaos theroy and fisheries management.

 

http://www.pulitzer.org/year/1997/public-s...vice/works/8-3/

 

 

Not seen much of this new science but I'd imagine if its coming out of chaos theory we are going to see a lot more of it.

 

The old style environmentalists will scream "its big business" and denounce it . Maybe they will be right , on the other hand maybe they are the flat earthers burning heretics, or the creationists of Darwins day :D .

 

Either way I suspect the whole way we are trying to manage things now is going to go nowhere.

 

Me, im going to polish my yak because I just don't understand it all :confused: :rolleyes:

Help predict climate change!

http://climateprediction.net

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Try as I might I cannot find any science in the artical:

 

The European Commission believe they have scientific data to prove this is happening around Kilkeel just off the Co Down coast.

 

They are not certain, which means it has not been proven.

 

"It sounds funny, but this just highlights how out of touch the EU is with reality," he said. "This is the sixth year we are forbidden to go to sea over this period because they think the fish are most vulnerable now"

 

First he quotes them as the essence of his article and then he ridicules them.

 

"There is evidence from around the world that vigorous fishing stimulates population growth. People might say, well, fishermen would say that, but we are not so stupid as to ignorantly destroy our own livelihood. This is scientific evidince

 

He may get support from Japan for this statement but they wanted to kill every whale in the worlds seas.

 

All other major countries have got some form of conservation place and a high number smaller countries also have schemes.

 

And he corrected the statement of people to fishermen. Not the way to write a public statement.

 

Since when has believe been scientific evidence, the whole article is based on conjecture and ridicule, to the extent of finding fault with the suppliers of his first statement and his own writing.

I fish, I catches a few, I lose a few, BUT I enjoys. Anglers Trust PM

 

eat.gif

 

http://www.petalsgardencenter.com

 

Petals Florist

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ken I think hes selectively quoting suggestions, from some scientists, that the safest time to harvest cod stocks is when they gather for breeding.

 

I came across the papers when Leon brought up the subject of the importance of genetic viability. References should be in that thread, but if not i can try and dig them out again if you want.

 

Essentially there is now evidence that the Grandbanks cod were actually made up of many distinct different breeding populations; each of which return to there own specific area to spawn. After spawning they go back to the feeding grounds and all mix togeather.

 

Some scientists believe the reason the Grandbanks fishery crashed so hard and fast, and did not recover was due to the stock being treated as one population: It masked the collapse of one sub population after. It may have be the whole lot would have collapsed even if quotas had been rigidly adhered too - the science had been lacking and the management model bad.

 

We have the same problem in our waters; the ICES recommendations don't match the reality of the number of sub poulations we know of. I understand the SW has a seperate population for instance. Who knows how many more there actually are.

 

Off Norway they are realising the "Barent Sea" stock that spawns off Lofoten actually has, or maybe had ! ,unique individual sub stocks that broke off from the main group and spawned in particular Fjords all down the coast.

 

The same danger is there as in the Grandbanks collapse; while the overall stock may appear okay, you are actually losing whole populations even if the numbers ICES gets excited about are on target!. Even if all the scientific advice is followed we may be losing stock after stock.

 

They argue the safest way to harvest cod may therefore be too fish them on the spawning grounds and to treat every spawning stock seperately.

 

I'd guess this is what he was going on about.

 

Of course he does not give the rest of that argument; That its inherently unsafe to fish for cod when they are anywhere else, as once on the feeding grounds the stocks all mix up. :D

 

Did I explain that so it made any sense?

 

[ 15. February 2005, 04:47 PM: Message edited by: Jaffa ]

Help predict climate change!

http://climateprediction.net

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You make good sense Jaffa, cod are like salmon returning to point of origin for reproduction.

 

Having reread the artical I still cannot make this connection.

 

I guess the general idea he is trying very badly to put forward is "if you catch at these locations instead of the feeding grounds you catch mature fish while those in growth are still on the feeding grounds".

 

Again I could not see that in the article.

 

One thing I did note and hate was the bleeding heart story of we had forty boats and now we only have fifteen.

 

When will these idiots realise they started out with one boat and through greed and not understanding the enviroment they were exploiting they got more and more boats until they screwed the fish stocks and themselves.

 

Then they turn round and try to blame everyone but themselves.

I fish, I catches a few, I lose a few, BUT I enjoys. Anglers Trust PM

 

eat.gif

 

http://www.petalsgardencenter.com

 

Petals Florist

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I took it he meant independant scientists have said, better to take the spawning fish , while the EU are saying you can't fish now because its a bad because they are spawning. Not surprised fishermen are confused.

 

Those 15 boats no doubt have more catching power than the 40 they replaced but I think its unfair to blame only the fishermen: nobody comes out of the last 40 years of fisheries management with much to be proud about IMO.

 

The scientists often got the models wrong, fishery managers placed to much emphasis on only a select body of scientific advice and goverments failed to have any clear thinking on it or any spine in enforcement.

 

Departments like DAFS and MAFF were hidebound, lazy and slow to react to change: Zero imagination of what was to follow when new methods arrived or what the implications of restrictions they introduced would be.

 

Enforcement was a total joke. I once spent a week sitting in a DAFS office in thurso armed with a camp bed and a pair of binos - mission to "prove" if a boat had been fishing east or west coast quotas; they were supposed to radio me , show themselves and that would be the proof !! Ken , believe me the whole thing was barking. 1 did turn up and I never saw it through the mist anyway :D !! Damn scrabster weather :P

 

Much of the actions taken to manage stocks IMO only ended up increased fishing pressure and hastened the development of new technologies which meant hitting of new species and areas.

 

No serious thought was ever put into encouraging the fleet into sustainable methods of gear, or closed areas ; rather EU and HIDB cash poured into the industry to meet other targets like safety at sea, etc etc etc. Nanny knew best.

 

At the same money was poured into advertising by first the WFA, then SFIA to promote new species to the public. OUr money! and monkfish that @winter@ mentions went from worthless, used by dodgy merchants in false scampi, to valuable enough, and quota free, to encoourage even more investment in power and technology.

 

Sorry Ken, but to me just blaming the fishermen is not only incorrect but lets the real problems get ignored and we will keep going until there is nothing left :(

 

Just my opinion like :D and not that it bothers me. Wheres that polishing cloth.

 

Cheers M8

 

[ 15. February 2005, 09:49 PM: Message edited by: Jaffa ]

Help predict climate change!

http://climateprediction.net

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We and our partners use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences, repeat visits and to show you personalised advertisements. By clicking “I Agree”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies. However, you may visit Cookie Settings to provide a controlled consent.