Cod recovery ? Wrong time to assess ?

[seaside]

................

Coming to the point now. IMO those countries did not start policing their waters untill 2 years ago, if at all. SO how can the recovery plan be deemed a failure at this present time ? We are not 6 or more years into the plan - we are at a very early stage due to a prior lack of enforcement. The plan only really kicked off when we started to make sure TAC was adhered to.

 

How can we say its a failure when the thing hasn't really even begun ?

 

In answering this please stick to the main question.

Glen - On your basis of not debating whether or not it was achievable in the first place.

 

The fundamental requirement of any plan is that it has an overall objective which is SPECIFIC and REALISTICALLY attainable (anything else is a 'target' 'wishful thinking' etc. ); from that objective you can develop a series of activities to achieve the required result, which to be successful, must be resourced accordingly.

 

Any changes in the activities which seriously impact that objective require the issue to be revisited as no plan can succeed if the underlying activities or resources are neither undertaken or employed. On that basis I'd say it has been a failure to date because it is predicated on scientific advice which has been consistently ignored, TACs that have been implemented with no basis in reality and no real 'policing' of catch effort, along with other factors.

 

Although cod stocks are a very emotive issue which make for great soundbites, I just don't see any sector with the real will to directly grab the public's' long time attention and support and step up, make the hard decisions, involve ALL concerned AND commit themselves to making it work.

 

Given the lack of such commitment by all sectors, and that the goalposts will continue to move around, I'd say 'the plan' will never ultimately succeed or fail as it is constantly changing.

 

Whether the stocks of cod survive or perish will be down to Mother Nature because no-one else is willing to truly commit, but no doubt in the end, all parties will see it as a victory for themselves somehow or another.

[glennk]

Glen - On your basis of not debating whether or not it was achievable in the first place.

 

I felt that to be essential as these debates have a habbit of heading of to places we have been a thousand times before for no real gain to anyone here.

[The doctor]

I felt that to be essential as these debates have a habbit of heading of to places we have been a thousand times before for no real gain to anyone here.

 

A good question Glenn that sadly many people will refrain from posting on due to the malevolent undertones espoused by some people, especially towards those with a differing view.

 

However, at the risk of upsetting anyone!!!! The whole question on whether its failed, failing or not, depends on which side of the various fences you are sitting.

 

There are those who take the view that because the North Sea hasn't filled up with cod due to the reduction of the fleet, then Cod recovery is not working, it won't work because the species decline and subsequent lack of recovery is directly linked to global warming which is not going to improve, therefore, the recovery plan should be scrapped.

 

There are those who believe that cod recovery is a blight on the fishing industry, and that left to its own natural vitality the cod will bounce back unhindered when conditions are right and if not then we should not worry about it as the preoccupation with cod is costing jobs and money.

 

Then there are the scientists who believe that cod recovery is attainable provided a spawning stock biomass is allowed to reproduce to its highest potential. In order to do this the present SSB will need to increase significantly, and if allowed to do so (with little or no mortality) then the target SSB can be attained very quickly. Upon which, sensible limits to fishing mortality will provide for a sustainable fishery. The scientific view is that this can only be achieved over a short timescale with a zero TAC, the greater the TAC, the longer the period of recovery will take. Either a short sharp shock or a longer drawn out slow strangulation.

 

In the far left there are those who take a more cynical view and see the review of the cod recovery plan as a means of holding off further cuts in the TAC and or DAS, by wrapping the commission up in prolonged discussion as to the effectiveness of cod recovery.

 

Everyone has (and is entitled to) a view; anglers in the main perceive fishing effort to be still too high (depending on where they live) other anglers see an increase in cod and believe that the crisis is over (if it ever existed). The fishing industry is still perceived to be the root cause of the problem and as with other declining industries should not be treat as a special case.

 

So as with many fisheries issues, there is a diverse range of views, all with different agendas, and it is this that may ultimately bring the downfall of the cod; our own inability to act accordingly when needed within the timescales required to achieve success, because all the while cod is a valued commodity it is not going to be surrendered without a fight. The problem is that during the fighting the only loser is the cod.

 

From a personal point of view; I think cod is recoverable, I doubt we'll ever get it to the levels of the gadoid outburst, that almost certainly is unattainable, but I don't think anyone is suggesting it is.

 

Is it the wrong time to assess it so far? Well, I guess a review is due at some time, but as stated above if you do things by halves, then it takes that much longer to achieve your goals. With a zero TAC now for the next 2 years, recovery could be attained by 2010, based on present TACs it 2015 before any sign, on that basis yes it is too early, but if the review polarises minds and the short sharp shock is accepted then maybe the review was worthwhile.

[wurzel]

Hello Doc

 

A good post, I have not got time to answer properly, off to work. I will say, I can't see how a two year stop on cod fishing would make any difference what so ever, especially south of Whitby, do you know just how many boats are fishing for cod off your patch? two or three at the most. Or are you including every boat that might catch a cod while fishing for something else?