Marine Bill

http://www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/consult/...tmarinebill.pdf The future............ plenty in there to go on I am sure, at 686 pages it might take a while to download let alone digest

Catches French pair trawl landings: Estimates indicate 500-1000 tonnes were taken in 1990/91 and 150-650 tonnes in 1992/93, whereas in 1996/97 a catch of 2800-5000 tonnes were taken by this fleet in area VIIe alone. Between 400 and 1600 tonnes were landed in 1998. UK landings: Overall, landings per unit of fishing effort (which provides an index of abundance for the fishable bass population) in the UK inshore fishery have fluctuated around the average level from 1985-1996, with no clear trend, except when the exceptional 1998 year-class recruited to the fishery and catch rates trebled. Annual landings by the UK fishery as a whole were around 600 tonnes between 1985 and 1992, increased to over 2,700 tonnes in 1994 and fell back to around 1,400 tonnes in 1995 and 1996. The UK offshore pair-trawl fishery reported landings of 43 tonnes in 1998 but some 226 tonnes were landed by this fleet in 1999. source http://www.pba.org.uk/Issues/Bass%20Fishery.html source http://www.defra.gov.uk/fish/sea/conserve/trawl.htm Cetaceans > Bass pair-trawl fishery > Council regulation 812/2004 Bass pair-trawl fishery Pair trawling for bass in the south west of England has been demonstrated to have high levels of cetacean by-catch. Sea trials conducted by the Sea Mammal Research Unit (SMRU) showed that there was no easy technical solution for reducing by-catch levels through the use of mitigation devices. As a result of the findings Defra banned pelagic pair trawling for bass by UK vessels within 12 miles of the south west coast of England (within ICES area VIIe) in December 2004. Other bass fisheries, such as gillnetting and hand lining, and pair trawl fisheries targeting other species have not been affected. The UK asked that the ban on pelagic pair trawling for bass be extended to the vessels of other Member States, who are currently permitted to fish between 6 and 12 miles off the south west English coast (under Article 9 of Council Regulation EC No 2371/2002), but this was turned down by the European Commission.

RNLI offer a free sea safety check. You can book online. the site is here http://www.rnliseasafety.org.uk/leisure/seacheck this is from that site. IMO those that are not anxious before going to sea underestimate it. Good luck and good on you for enquiring about this subject. "Boating should be fun. Every year our lifeboats respond to thousands of incidents, many of which could have been prevented with simple safety precautions. Even the most experienced seafarers should prepare for the worst. The RNLI can help make your boat as safe as possible – you owe it to yourself and your crew. Book a SEA Check online today The RNLI would like to offer you a completely free, friendly and confidential service that looks at safety aspects involved with your boat. SEA Check is neither a test nor an inspection and there is no pass or fail. Conducted by one of our highly trained volunteers SEA Check is a personal face-to-face safety advice service that takes place on board your own craft. You set the time and we tailor our visit to your vessel and the type of boating that you do. " http://www.rnliseasafety.org.uk/leisure/seacheck

Now Now Leon you are being deliberately provocative, the minister said the legislation that the SFCs were working with was archiac not the organisations per se. Engage properly now and it will be good for the sport, spending the next months years/complaining that this is not anglers prefered model will be fruitless and will ultimately lead to a less constructive dailogue as the Marine Bill will have been developed. Lets forget historic prejudices and work to ensure our needs are better addressed in future through this reformed organisation.

The reason Sea Fisheries Committees are not adequately covered under the Local Government Act with regard interests, prejudicial, precunnary or otherwise, is that DEFRA 'forgot' to include SFCs in the terms of the LGA 2000 Act. SFCs therefore cannot legally adhere to the 2000 Act. Single Council Committees i.e. Devon and Cornwall are covered by the 2000 Act but multiple funded authorities are not. The Act replaced an earlier law that covered sea fisheries committees. Committees have been asking DEFRA since 2000 to sort this out. I would suggest that members on the Committee request an agenda item to consider the specific issue of RSA engagement given the last recommendation regarding involvement and in the meantime write, requesting explicit instruction, to defra on this isssue, highlighting an urgent need for clarrifaction. I can garantee the following will occur; the Committee will welcome any clarification from DEFRA, DEFRA will fob you off with a holding letter probably referring to the Marine Bill and you will never get the clarrication you require (they have had 6 years to sort it out). It will then go back to the Committee and again interfer with the real business of fisheries management. I would further suggest that you request a meeting with the Clerk and ask that senior Committee members be present and call a number of councillors and explain the importance of recreational sea anglers to their constituents. Rome wasnt built in a day.

http://www.nao.org.uk/publications/nao_rep...3/0203563es.pdf NAO said Defra enforcement wasnt up to much Cabinet Office Report needed to deal with wider issues, this too was damning (in diplomatic prose) MFA created, more jobs off the civil list (though more costly to tax payer), policy/delivery now split. Rn budgets retained (despite NAO data on effectiveness) diverted attention from real issue; CFP useless, DEFRA unflexible and backwards looking NOT LINKED TO WIDER ENVIRONMENT POLICY. stakeholder meetings held with the only industries left; ironically those who have not in the past been 'managed' by them (but have suffered at the hands of their policy and implimentation). result an ill concieved cosultation which, though flawed at least recognised that Defra even manage fisheries for anglers End result probably a strengthened defra fisheries (through Marine Bill). winner civil servants. looser fish/anglers/fishermen has anyone seen 'yes minister'?

see section 4.3 http://www.cefas.co.uk/Publications/lablea...ableaflet75.pdf "discard mortality has not been estimated.....this requires further investigation" that was in 1990!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! http://www.cefas.co.uk/publications/techrep/tech118.pdf See page 16 to understand trawl encounters ( its a 70mm codend, but remember the normal practice is to use 80mm so the results would be comparable). Right so therefore we have a capture rate whereby a majority - inshore - of fish are less than the MLS (36cm) and we dont know our discard mortality and the proposal was to do nothing in the trawl fishery just allow a 10% byecatch for a couple of years making enforcement impossible. Dont get me wrong a mls of 42+ cannot be reasonably argued against - but the the proposal is nonsense, were all being taken for a ride in a political game leading upto a Marine Bill when defra can say how good they are. why are they interested in anglers - because their management regimes have destoyed the offshore fishing fleet, which is o.k. if there was overcapacity (which there was), but for the stocks to still be dessimated - if they dont embrace anglers now they will have nothing to manage - and look out shellfisheries too! we need to mature in our debate and not just take the first carrot waved. I want more fish, i like catching bass. I am actually quite happy catching bass (at the moment - role on overexploitation as quotas go elsewhere). why are we not lobbying for MLS increase on bream (there is none!!!! on skate, on tope, on nursehounds) lets concerntrate on those beam trawlers ripping up the inshore grounds where they all come to spawn, not in the first instance the nets that are selective. lets move to ban the 50m + pair trawlers working south of the Isle of Wight!!! Dont stop me now lets deal with the massive overcapacity in engine power that is ignored because 'it cant be measured' lets register the unlisced vessel even though Europe wont like it because our capacity units will go up. our representatives NFSA et. al. need to get to grips with these issues NOW. the bass issue is a diversion, the Marine Bill is the big one!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

youll need DSC VHF license, Firefighting and first aid at sea Remember the RYA route means that certificates need to be practical and theory and commercially endorsed (ML5, VHF and DSC give you that element). Oh nealy forgot an approved engineering course! (though this depends on you boats hp and distance offshore). All of the above are pretty straight forward and get progressivly tougher towards Offshore Yachtmaster and Ocean Master (OM is not an examined element in practice). Boatmasters - this is administerd through the MCA, an MCA man comes to your craft asks you some questions including nav. and mechanical. Youll need the DoT licenses as well. I would choose Boatmasters if you have a lot of experience and know the theory well. The RYA route if you need to develop skills. Personally I would contact MCA first and seek their advice, and with any luck youll have a Master Marina tell you about how it used to be in his day! There is absolutely no diference in the quality, excellent skippers will have either and many none!

Fisheries management in the UK is devolved. Scottish vessels would not be managed by English S.I.s in British territorial waters. It requires separate legislation by the Scottish Parliament. As for SFC representation Until last year the chairman (for some 8 years) of one SFC was a Vice president of the NFSA. That same SFC has as the chair a member forwarded by the Wildlife Trust. A lot of frustration has built up within the RSA community, given time a much more affective dialogue will develop with SFCs. This is a samilar debate to that that occurred when Environmental organisations entered into proper dialogue with SFCs now they (through the LINK partnership) recommend SFCs are developed and given more powers as they recognise them as the most effective local magement authority. Councillors are BOUND by legislation governing what they can and cannot vote for. They are democratically elected representatives. Mr Eagles report could have equally be applied to the representativeness of elected members on any number of Committees at all levels. Thats why we vote for or against them its called democracy. Although other methods of managment exist Democracy is genreally considered pretty good when compared to the alternatives. If your local government is not representing you, you need to know why. STAVEY ANY accusation of wrong doing by councillors should be referred to you local government members services deprtment. I assure you they will take it very seriously. I guess I have spouted off so I should introduce myself as an angler (mostly Solent area) and a environmental charity professional.

the real cost of diesel Fishing Industry's Fuel Efficiency Gets Worse as Ocean Stocks Get Thinner - New York Times December 20, 2005 By CORNELIA DEAN http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/20/science/earth/20fish.html If the fishing industry were a country, it would rank with the Netherlands as the world's 18th-largest oil consumer, a team of fisheries scientists is reporting. In 2000, the scientists said, fisheries around the world burned about 13 billion gallons of fuel to catch 80 million tons of fish. And although the fish-per-gallon ratio varies widely from species to species, they said, it is getting worse over all because boats must venture farther and farther out to sea in search of dwindling stocks. "This is the only major industry in the world that is getting more and more energy-inefficient," said Daniel Pauly, director of the Fisheries Center of the University of British Columbia and one of the report's authors. While other researchers have compiled fuel data for particular species of fish in particular regions, this report is the first to sum up the global picture, experts said. As such, the new report "adds to the list of concerns about fishing as a destructive practice," said Ellen K. Pikitch, director of the Pew Institute for Ocean Science, who was not involved in the report. But it also shows how vulnerable fishing is to increases in fuel costs, said Peter H. Tyedmers, an ecologist at Dalhousie University in Nova Scotia, who led the work. European experts predict that as much as 30 percent of Europe's fishing fleet may remain at the dock this winter because of fuel costs, he said, adding that the industry's sensitivity to fuel costs is alarming given the importance of fish in the world's diet. In the report, the scientists said fisheries accounted for about 1.2 percent of global oil consumption, and they use about 12.5 times as much energy to catch fish as the fish provide to those who eat them. Their report is in the current issue of Ambio, a journal of the Swedish Academy of Sciences. Fattening beef in feedlots and even growing fish in aquaculture pens can be less energy efficient than fishing, Dr. Pauly said in an interview. But fishing is "a far-from-trivial player" in global oil consumption, the researchers wrote. Dr. Tyedmers said in an interview that cost was not the only issue. "Yankee whalers did a pretty fine job of depleting many populations of whales just with sail and human power," he said. "But it's the wide application of fuel that has allowed fleets to expand and really has underpinned much of the overfishing of stocks and deterioration of aquatic ecosystems." If global fishing efforts are reduced, Dr. Pauly said, stocks may rebound and fewer boats will probably bring in just as many fish. "You could catch the same amount for one-third the energy use," Dr. Pauly said. Dr. Tyedmers said that researchers at Dalhousie showed that 60 or 70 years ago Nova Scotia fleets used only a quarter of the fuel they use today. The researchers based their conclusions on data from "a wide range of published and unpublished sources" on fishing vessels in use, the gear they typically carry, how much fuel they use and the size and composition of their catches. They concentrated on data from 20 major countries that account for 80 percent of the world's fish catch, Dr. Pauly said. But the scientists said their overall fuel-use estimates were almost certainly low, because their data omit freshwater fisheries, illegal or unregulated fisheries and the cost of transporting fish on land. The researchers also noted that people fishing for species like herring and menhaden, usually turned into fish oil, use less fuel per ton of catch than people fishing for high-value species like tuna, swordfish or even shrimp. Boats seeking those species often carry so much fuel "they leave the dock lower in the water than when they return with a hold full of fish," Dr. Tyedmers said. Dr. Tyedmers said he thought fuel studies might one day be used to compare the effort required to catch different kinds of fish, whether it involves lines in the water or lobster traps or other methods. "It has always been a real challenge to compare," he said. The new analysis, while striking, is still crude, Dr. Pikitch said. "It's a great starting point, but a starting point," she said. She added, "You have to start somewhere." Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company

In England Grants are few and far between, except in Merseyside and Cornwall. they were being administered through FIFG Financial Instruments for Fisheries Guidance (by the MFA). But this is being changed from 2007. Information on grants can be found here: http://www.mfa.gov.uk/grants/default.htm there is very little money left in the fund, despite uptake being relatively poor, but it is worth noting that I would have thought that the grants would have been applicable to Recreation Sea Anglers for example: Production and development of aquatic resources (e.g. artificial reefs). These grants were limited in the percentage that they would provide to a total poroject cost (often 20%) and were mostly designed to innovate and to conserve (well that was the theory) - i.e. Cornwall Sea Fisheries Committee's lobster Hatchery. They have also been used to make more safe port facilities. A letter to the MFA requesting details under the terms of the Freedom of Information Act would clarfy all those points The situation differs in the devolved administrations as they attract more support and investment due to dependance on fishing, but the principles of conservation and diversification underpin the grants, this principle being better established under the last review of the CFP. The diference between grants to farmers and to fishers is vast both in scale and impact on the structure of the industry.

the only outcome of a further restriction in the number of days at sea for vessels using 120mm codends will be a reduction in the size of codends they use. The implications for the British fleet, who will often not have suffice quota to switch to other TAC managed spoecies, will be an increase in effort on non pressure stock species. as a result of these proposal we can expect an increase in effort for Bass. Important that the RSA understand this, particulaly as mobile gear fishers (of all nationalities) already represent the most significant effort on Bass and the present consultation on further bass management measures will go no why to address this situation. *=total allowable catch = pressure stock

pair trawling, scallop dredging, beam trawling, stern trawling (pelagic/demersal) with single rigged multi rigged and triple rigged trawls by French, German, Dutch, Belguim registered vessels etc. etc. are variously permittted within the 6-12 mile limit, by way of historic rights exist, these rights varu by location. The fishermen who lost their lives were fishing in a position they were legally entitled to be in.

Altair case was mentioned. An MP actually submitted that as the offenders were made to pay c. 1M (gbp/E?) back (as part of the profits from crime rules), that should be considered as their penalty. It was interesting also that certain members did not accept that black fish was the problem some recent cases have shown it to be. I missed the earlier part of the debate, was there any mention of Inshore management and Angling interests? It was illuded to a number of times later in the debate, but nothing substantive.

Maximum fine under byelaw £5000 triable summarily Maximum under s.i. usually £50,000 triable either way Home office guidelines for cautioning of offenders will be applicable. E.A. are the Sea Fisheries Committee in the upper Bristol Channel

The powers to regulate in the 6-12nm. zone are here: COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 2371/2002 of 20 December 2002 on the conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources under the Common Fisheries Policy stating: (11) In their 12 nautical mile zone, Member States should be allowed to adopt conservation and management measures applicable to all fishing vessels, provided that, where such measures apply to fishing vessels from other Member States, the measures adopted are non-discriminatory and prior consultation has taken place, and that the Community has not adopted measures specifically addressing conservation and management within this area.

http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/pri/en/oj/dat...1en00590080.pdf p.72 the s.i. is not online it predates the electronic versions (1983), but nevertheless the Regulation above lists access. Remember also that all EU waters are for EU, it is only a derogation that permits coastal state exclusive access to 6nm. The 'scale' of activity in the 6-12 mile zone is much greater that that in the 0-6nm in some parts of the UK than others. the UK CAN regulate international activity with delegated legislation, so it COULD propose restrictions in the 6-12 but it requires international agreement.

A beam trawler with 221kw or 300hp cannot fish within 12 miles (from baselines), and his aggregate beam length is restricted. (EU regs.) No more than 8 scallop dredges per side inside 6nm. baslines (S.i.) the type of dredge is also restricted (heavily) Numerous further restrictions on inshore use, by Sea Fisheries Committee's, though byelaw, including prohibitions in many areas, closed seasons and further restrictions on the number of dredges (4 is common). SFC's all restrict the class (size usually, sometimes power) of vessel that can operate inshore, though this varies.

Article 31 (1) Council Regulation (EC) No 850/98. The catching of marine organisms using methods oncorporating the use of explosives, poisonous or stupefying substances or electric current shall be prohibited. Extant Law in the UK