seaside

At our meeting with the John Brown, Head of Tourism and Architecture Policy Division and Frank Strang, Head of Sea Fisheries Division of the Scottish Executive last week they committed to following up with their understanding of the points discussed and actions agreed. We are pleased to say that we got their email today; it contained four principle areas. To faciltate discussion and ensure no feedback is lost, we'll address each area in seperate postings with the relevant extracts from their email and the odd bit of commentary by ourselves. Thanks to all of you who made the effort in the email campaign which was undoubtably critical in helping set the process in motion; thanks also to those who provided input directly, sometimes very directly :-) . Their email closes with " ...John and I welcomed the renewed dialogue which this meeting symbolised. We suggested – and you agreed – that there should be a further meeting in the not too distant future – perhaps once the initial results from the study have emerged." The results so far have exceeded our initial expectations, BUT, it is only the start of the process. We shall continue to update accordingly.

Typical knee jerk reaction - Mr Trebilcock doesn't know whether the proposal is prejudicial to British fishermen (commercial interests) so they'll investigate, meanwhile he'll just kick out and try to grab emotional headlines.

I'd be interested to hear the views of any anglers on the the local SFC, they should be able to give us a realistic assessment of the issues and whether or not we should support this call.

Steve - I think we're a bit out of synch - I was responding to challenges' post questioning me whether environmentalists would prefer a small fleet of 'altaire' sized boats, or a larger fleet of 'wurzel' sized boats. So my response " Personally I don't know which creates the bigger ecological impact when considering the entire supply chain of fish catch to customer consumption but you may be right when you imply that the way forward is even bigger and more effective vessels, though I must admit I'd hate to be the guy with the mortgage if the fishery collapsed again." related to thet question. Also as I said "From a personal point of view, I'd just sooner see some of the quota transferred, as glenk suggested, from such as the Altaire to the smaller guys" in order to maintain a traditional fishery - as long as quota was transferred and that the fishery remained traditional and the opportunists didn't just dive in.

Of course it would be sensible glen, but unfortunatly that's not the way it works. I've mentioned this before, and make no apolgies for re-stating, the guys on Arran are trying to preserve cockle stocks and the maerl beds by creating a small no take zone, just a few square miles out of the 2000+ in the Clyde area, but they're being strongly opposed by the the cockle dredgers - why - because the the cockle dredgers don't want ANY area set aside - where's the sense in that ? Where's the sense in a west coast prawn industry where the methods used kill millions of fish a year as well as wiping out breeding and nursery areas mainly to provide southern europe with langoustine ? Forget all the 'heartstring' stuff, it's purely business with millions of pounds worth of both exported anually. There's nothing wrong with a business, as long as it conducted in an environmentally balanced manner and stocks are exploited in a sustainable manner. Certain fish industry bodies, wholesalers and retailers do offer some hope as they are trying to introduce ranges committed to the principle of sustainability in seafood sourcing which may go some way to protecting the long-term future of wild fish populations. A lot more needs to be done by Government to implement quota/TAC strategies that address the real impact on stocks, rather than the notional effect implied by landings. Will it all come in time glen - personally I doubt it for several species and perhaps a total collapse of one or two stocks would actually focus minds and speed up a change in attitudes.

challenge - you do seem to take and make things very personal - all I said was "I agree, irrespective of the tradition etc., it's a business, and will only continue as long as there are the right levels of return on the capital invested. Same as for coalmines, steel, cars, wool etc - they all had their day and now they're gone. " Now I'm not saying anything about any guys from Whitby, nor questioning their wisdom, they've obviously assessed what their potential return on investment is - doesn't alter the fact that they'll only continue as long as their returns are sufficient - only basic economics and commonsense, no attack on anybody.

Don't really know what an environmentalists take on this would be. Personally I don't know which creates the bigger ecological impact when considering the entire supply chain of fish catch to customer consumption but you may be right when you imply that the way forward is even bigger and more effective vessels, though I must admit I'd hate to be the guy with the mortgage if the fishery collapsed again. From a personal point of view, I'd just sooner see some of the quota transferred, as glenk suggested, from such as the Altaire to the smaller guys. True, but then again no form of fishing for them is.

It really needs to be for the quota to be shared out differently and not for the ban to be lifted on an opportunistic basis, the Scottish fleet have already been banned since January due to overfishing. The problem I see with re-assigning quotas is that the Scottish fleet is tremendously cost effective, contributing around 30% of fish revenue whilst only employing around 5% of the people - if they were to lose quota then they may no longer be cost efficient and some would go to the wall. Although I am generally in agreement with allowing smaller boats to make a living, I don't see how they will convince the big boys to give up quota.

I agree, irrespective of the tradition etc., it's a business, and will only continue as long as there are the right levels of return on the capital invested. Same as for coalmines, steel, cars, wool etc - they all had their day and now they're gone. As with all the other industries, those with large amounts of capital tied up will continue to do whatever it takes to minmise their losses, but at some point the bigger concerns will call a halt and then the smaller 'Wurzel' type boats will have a market which, as CJS2 infers should pay a premium price. As long as the guys like Wurzel then stick to the levels they've historically worked at, stocks should thenregenerate and we'll have come to the best position for the smaller commercials and RSA and both parties will then have a joint interest in pressurising the Government and the EU.

Over 10 years of monitoring up to 1998, the prawn trawlers in the Clyde area had an average bycatch of around 1760 tons of fish, predominantly whiting, hake, dab, plaice and cod, all in the 8 to 30cm range which equals around 12 million fish - a great percentage of which die. This is accepted as being a low estimate due to the fact that mis-reporting is known to take place - source : FRS Laboratory Aberdeen.

Old Binatone used to love quoting as well. What Galbraith said was " Humor is richly rewarding to the person who employs it. It has some value in gaining and holding attention, but it has no persuasive value at all." As you've also quoted Francis Bacon, another one from him which I'm sure would help from time to time on the forum quote " Read not to contradict and confute, nor to believe and take for granted... but to weigh and consider. "

A health and safety enquiry Oooops Tinkle T shirts Green glass wristbands A support group established A cross party 'leak' enquiry Demands for parity from all other colours of bottles A help-line for all other bottles who felt insecure MPs disassociating themselves from bottles Other MPs supporting bottles Mps supporting MPs and at least one white bottle who used to be a green bottle and would love to be one again but can see numbers falling off now.

Steve - a clear response which addresses reality, similar was seen the other night with the prawn trawler guy and his bycatch of cod --- but surely you wouldn't recommend a total free for all, so what alternative solution would you propose.

I must say the buzz from that trip was still with you when we went into the meeting with the Scottish Exec. I'd presume everyone else was much the same. Best of luck to Malcom, the Yorkshire coast needs diverse attitudes and approaches in order to attract a variety of anglers.

The Wash is app 110,000 hectares = 425 sq miles Each exclusion zone is just over 3sq miles So say equivalent of 130 structures. There certainly aren't that many platforms in the UK sector, but including sub-sea completions you'd probably get to 1/3 rd of a 'Wash' worth. BTW the N Sea sedimentary basin is about 250,000 sq miles so the exclusion zones represent less than 0.05% of the available area. These structures ( and pipelines ) do act as attractors for fish. Now JB says "......the North Sea is a vast place and, apart from the activity around the shores, very little other than industrial (sandeel) fishing happens in the middle of it" So what chance creating no take zones by creating artificial reefs / underwater structures ?

Peter - you don't have to be an expert to recognise that leaving an area 'fallow', or that not fishing spawning or nursery grounds or not using techniques which destroy environments or habitats, will rejuvenate or preserve fisheries, but, you do need to be an expert in something (I don't know what) to understand why it isn't done.

Well we ( Ian Burrett (SACN), Barry Scholes and myself (SFSA)) had our meeting yesterday with the Scottish Executive's John Brown, Head of Tourism and Architecture Policy Division and Frank Strang, Head of Sea Fisheries Division. Ian focused on the various fish stocks and fishing locations under threat, Barry covered the issues around Social and Political Inclusion and I gave a presentation on what we believe to be the value of RSA and RSA tourism to the Scottish economy. Our thanks go to those on this forum who contributed ideas, gave input to the various areas, especially on spend, and generally helped us put it all together. I must admit we did hog the time somewhat at the meeting, but both John Brown and Frank Strang showed good interest, asked several challenging questions and also introduced some interesting points for consideration. We all consider we were given an extremely fair hearing and we are optimistic that we have taken that first step of the journey. To ensure there is no confusion, the guys from the Executive have committed to producing their understanding of the meeting and to outline their ideas on how we can progress some of the suggestions made. They committed to deliver this before the end of next week and once we've received it we shall post an update. Once again, many thanks to those who took the time to provide us with input.

Be ashore at the other end of a video link to the guy catching it

The last figures for bycatch that I have for the Clyde are for 1998 and show Tons 4107 --------------------- Prawns landed 845 --------------------- Prawn discards 1886 --------------------- Fish discards - mean length 19cm 554 ---------------------- Fish landed Over a 17 year period the average discard ratio was around 70% equal to around 1750 tons/yr. Discarded fish were in the main Whiting present in 100% of haul samples down through Dab, Hake, Pout, to Plaice, present in more then 70% of hauls. Mortality rates of the discards are said to be between 20 and 30%.

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.

That area just of the Isle of Man was certainly showed it very effectively. What the piece off Arran didn't say was that the COAST guys (http://www.arrancoast.co.uk/) mentioned on the film, have been fighting for years to : # make Lamlash Bay a Marine Protected Area from which mobile fishing gear is prohibited to regenerate and enhance local fish and shellfish populations, scallops in particular; # establish a No Take Zone to protect the maerl beds; # investigate the fishery benefits of the No Take Zone and Marine Protected Area, particularly with regard to scallops. What I can't understand is why the scallop industry elsewhere is fighting tooth and nail against no fishing zones. All the COAST guys are looking for is a few square miles out of the 2000+ in the Clyde area, but the scallopers keep fighting to ensure no-one takes any of 'their' area - Mr Finnie of course keeps bowing to the pressure.

http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/contactus...spapercontacts/ is a useful page if one wishes to educate the Bournemouth Echo

One you can reinforce next week when we have the meeting with the Head of the Executive's Sea Fisheries Conservation Division and the Head of Tourism Policy - will be interesting to see what they say !

Must be the air in Whitby - but I haven't the faintest idea what you are on about. What do you think fishingfine is trying to sell ? Are you suggesting that those who currently represent sea anglers such as the NFSA, WFSA, SFSA, BASS, SACN, SOS,.... etc should quietly chuck it all in and disband ? Or are you suggesting that they should be replaced by such as yourself ? Or that perhaps that the netting element of the commercial sector should become a lead agency for RSA ? Now please don't accuse me of putting words in your mouth, I'm not, but as I can't filter the rhetoric I really don't understand what you are proposing or what your response is to the question raised at the beginning of this thread.

As I've said before, the term commercial is to broad. It seems to me that the greatest resistance is coming from those sectors that work inshore and are mobile, fish/nephrops trawlers, cockle dredgers etc. Statics, as Ian Burrett indicated, have similar issues with the mobile fleets. My take, statics and RSA can work together, but inshore mobile fleets are wedded to methods, approaches and a mentality that does not allow any 'restriction' of their 'rights'. A good example of this is the fact that the cockle dredgers and prawn trawlers off Arran are fighting setting aside a few square miles in order to make Lamlash Bay a Marine Protected Area and also to establish a No Take Zone to protect the local maerl beds. These guys are not willing to compromise, even though there are another 1000+ sq miles of the Inner Clyde in which to work. http://www.arrancoast.co.uk/ for more info.