£5m To Scrap Fishing Boats

[Elton]

Saw this on the news earlier:

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7775593.stm

[glennk]

Just as predicted really. The fishing fleet will become monopolised but this will suit DEFRA as it will be easier to manage. The focuss will then shift onto managing the 1million sea anglers.

[Leon Roskilly]

http://www.defra.gov.uk/marine/pdf/fisheri...hore-letter.pdf Edited December 10, 2008 by Leon Roskilly

[Elton]

Does this mean that Wurzel will be worth knowing? I always said he was a top bloke.

 

P.S. Wurzel - sorry my grandad clipped you round the ear when you were a kid. He didn't mean it

[barry luxton]

http://www.defra.gov.uk/marine/pdf/fisheri...hore-letter.pdf

 

According to this link, the rsa ain't got nothing to gripe about compared with whats happening to the undertens. Looks like defra has them by the buster browns and is tightning the grip. 5 mill don't seen to be a lot, for those who wish to get out.

 

There is three dredgers at the top end of the channel doing a bit of gardening at present, don't suppose they will volunteer.

[glennk]

Its really sad I think. I was born and brought up in a town famed for its fishing port. Just like many other places around the coastline there was a fleet of trawlers and a larger fleet of under 10m vessels that would work long lines, gill nets and pots.

 

Everyone made a living, some lived more comfortably than others but noone got mega rich. Then along came bigger trawlers, more horse power, bigger nets and pair trawling. This is whats killed the fishing industry. The debate over who was to blaim and who let it happen would go on for ever. The fact is it did happen. Suddenly the gap widened. Some trawler skippers got rich, very rich, and bought more boats. They became millionaires at the expense of the small timers.

 

In the last few years their power at the table helped them steel quota from the under 10m fleet. Now look where its going. Soon there will be no under 10m boats left and the fat cats are winners once again. All those families who were supported by their small boat will in future have to look elsewhere for their income. A culture and a way of life is now no more

 

Its a sad sad day for the ports around our coastline.

[Elton]

Can someone explain to me, in a rational way and without emotion, what the reason behind decommissioning small boats and giving their quota to larger boats is?

[Leon Roskilly]

Can someone explain to me, in a rational way and without emotion, what the reason behind decommissioning small boats and giving their quota to larger boats is?

 

 

At one time no one really knew what the under 10s were landing.

 

Nor cared about very much.

 

Compared with the larger boats capacity to remove fish, they were regarded as mostly harmles, but an important part of small coastal communities fishing traditions.

 

Not required to declare landings, there was little point in fighting for notional quota for the sector, at the expense of the larger boats to whom quota was everything.

 

And any concerns they might have had were dismissed with 'nobody's counting what you are taking so don't worry about it' (with a nod and a wink from officialdom.

 

So with increasing regulation and control of the larger boats, for some the under 10 started to become attractive, and ways were found to pack more punch into an under 10m, changing the chararcteristics of the fishery and the sector (boats were physically shortened, and power packed into under 10s, which became known as 'rule-beaters' or 'super under 10s').

 

The big change came with the EU insisting on a crackdown on enforcement at the same time as buyers and sellers came in.

 

Boats that were landing uncounted fish in excess of unimportant quota, found that the fish were being counted, and quota had become important.

 

And the quota allocation for a 'mostly harmless' under 10 sector, could not now support the new look under 10s contining boats that might be under 10 in physical length, but with far greater fishing capacity than the under more traditional under 10 fleet.

 

And the bigger boats were unprepared to sacrifice any of their quota share back to that sector.

 

So the decision is to cut back the size of the under 10 fleet so that a reasonable living can be made by the survivors, concentrating particularly on the super under 10s, and to get the under 10 sector back to looking more like the traditional fleet of day boats, making a sustainable living whilst not hammering the resource.

 

So, it's not a question of de-commissioning, and giving quota to the bigger boats, but rather decommissioning the more powerful boats within the under 10s, and sharing that quota amongst the remaining more traditional boats in the sector.

 

Well that's how I understand it.

 

Importantly these moves are just the first steps, with a working group of stakeholders now being set up to look at further measures to secure a sustainable future both for the inshore boats and the inshore stocks upon which they depend, including a number of non-quota species of importance to angling which are beginning to suffer as boats who quickly exhaust quota for quota stocks, move onto non-quota species to maitain their profitability.

 

So, watch this space, there is more to come.

[glennk]

Hi Elton, Ask Wurzel. He will tell you the only rationale behind this is to do with a need to manage. Hes right.

 

 

At one time no one really knew what the under 10s were landing.

 

Nor cared about very much.

 

Compared with the larger boats capacity to remove fish, they were regarded as mostly harmles, but an important part of small coastal communities fishing traditions.

 

Not required to declare landings, there was little point in fighting for notional quota for the sector, at the expense of the larger boats to whom quota was everything.

 

And any concerns they might have had were dismissed with 'nobody's counting what you are taking so don't worry about it' (with a nod and a wink from officialdom.

 

So with increasing regulation and control of the larger boats, for some the under 10 started to become attractive, and ways were found to pack more punch into an under 10m, changing the chararcteristics of the fishery and the sector (boats were physically shortened, and power packed into under 10s, which became known as 'rule-beaters' or 'super under 10s').

 

The big change came with the EU insisting on a crackdown on enforcement at the same time as buyers and sellers came in.

 

Boats that were landing uncounted fish in excess of unimportant quota, found that the fish were being counted, and quota had become important.

 

And the quota allocation for a 'mostly harmless' under 10 sector, could not now support the new look under 10s contining boats that might be under 10 in physical length, but with far greater fishing capacity than the under more traditional under 10 fleet.

 

And the bigger boats were unprepared to sacrifice any of their quota share back to that sector.

 

So the decision is to cut back the size of the under 10 fleet so that a reasonable living can be made by the survivors, concentrating particularly on the super under 10s, and to get the under 10 sector back to looking more like the traditional fleet of day boats, making a sustainable living whilst not hammering the resource.

 

So, it's not a question of de-commissioning, and giving quota to the bigger boats, but rather decommissioning the more powerful boats within the under 10s, and sharing that quota amongst the remaining more traditional boats in the sector.

 

Well that's how I understand it.

 

Importantly these moves are just the first steps, with a working group of stakeholders now being set up to look at further measures to secure a sustainable future both for the inshore boats and the inshore stocks upon which they depend, including a number of non-quota species of importance to angling which are beginning to suffer as boats who quickly exhaust quota for quota stocks, move onto non-quota species to maitain their profitability.

 

So, watch this space, there is more to come.

 

 

Working on your philosophy then Leon, and looking to the future. When sea anglers become part of the quota syatem, do you think the

"bigger boats" unprepared to sacrifice any of their quota

will be calling for a decomissioning of the Recreational sea angler. What sort of a compensation package for loss of hobbey are we likely to see ? Edited December 11, 2008 by glennk

[barry luxton]

Working on your philosophy then Leon, and looking to the future. When sea anglers become part of the quota syatem, do you think the will be calling for a decomissioning of the Recreational sea angler. What sort of a compensation package for loss of hobbey are we likely to see ?

 

 

very good.