White fish fleet could be wiped out by new EC demands

[Ian Burrett]

see

 

http://news.scotsman.com/scotland.cfm?id=1808112006

[big_cod]

see

 

http://news.scotsman.com/scotland.cfm?id=1808112006

 

They dont need to cut the days at all can be saved if anglers get bag limits there must be some mistake.

[wurzel]

They dont need to cut the days at all can be saved if anglers get bag limits there must be some mistake.

 

 

No all could be saved if they impliment zero catch, that would include you.

[Ken Davison South Wales]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6213042.stm

 

It looks like a 25% catch cut in some stocks, not only cod, plaice and sole just to mention two on the list.

Edited December 7, 2006 by Ken Davison South Wales

[Leon Roskilly]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6213042.stm

 

It looks like a 25% catch cut in some stocks, not only cod, plaice and sole just to mention two on the list.

 

 

Just a proposal at present.

 

There are days of hard bargaining and ramped rhetoric ahead.

 

 

Looking into my crystal ball I predict:

 

- At the end of it the 'greens' will condemn the ignoring of scientific advice and say it is a recipe for disaster.

 

- The catching sector will condemn the science as flawed, the measures as unnecessarily harsh.

 

- The politicians will boast of the deal that they have won for their respective fishing sectors, saying that the needs of the scientific advice has been balanced by the needs of the fishing communities, and that the deal struck will ensure a sustainable future whilst protecting livelihoods.

 

- Nature will not enter into any talks or negotiations and will take her own time to demonstrate who was right in the end.

[Guest challenge]

So who is telling the truth then? The scientists who are giving the people who pay them the figures they want to here? Or the commercial who is suggesting otherwise?

http://www.eefpo.co.uk/home

[big_cod]

No all could be saved if they impliment zero catch, that would include you.

[seaside]

Just a proposal at present.

 

There are days of hard bargaining and ramped rhetoric ahead.

Looking into my crystal ball I predict:

 

- At the end of it the 'greens' will condemn the ignoring of scientific advice and say it is a recipe for disaster.

 

- The catching sector will condemn the science as flawed, the measures as unnecessarily harsh.

 

- The politicians will boast of the deal that they have won for their respective fishing sectors, saying that the needs of the scientific advice has been balanced by the needs of the fishing communities, and that the deal struck will ensure a sustainable future whilst protecting livelihoods.

 

- Nature will not enter into any talks or negotiations and will take her own time to demonstrate who was right in the end.

 

Pretty accurate I'd say Leon.

 

I'd perhaps add - There'll be no discussion on making fisheries more sustainable through the introduction of separating technologies or stock preservation initiatives.

 

As for he who pays the scientist calls the tune, for those that may have missed it, I'd like to recommend the following FRS report - Climate change and Scottish Fisheries - which was conducted for the Scottish Fishermen’s Federation (SFF) http://www.frs-scotland.gov.uk/FRS.Web/Upl...20Fisheries.pdf

 

Background to the SFF - it formed in 1973 to preserve and promote the collective interests of Commercial Fishermen's Associations. The Federation also plays an important role in helping to inform: fisheries science; marine environment management; inshore fisheries management; marine safety regulations; and industry training/recruitment programmes.

 

The topic of the impact of climate change on fish stocks, and hence commercial fisheries, is a complex one; this review attempts a simple summary of some of the key findings to date, and places them into context for the Scottish fishing industry.

 

Written for fishermen, it is an easy, worthwhile read which clearly identifies many of the issues affecting fish stocks in the North Sea and West of Scotland waters.

[glennk]

Just out of interest who funds ICES ?

[seaside]

Just out of interest who funds ICES ?

The governments of :

 

Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Russia, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America.

 

Each of the member countries elects two delegates who represent their country on the ICES Council. The ICES Council is the principal policy and decision-making body of ICES.

 

There are also a number countries that have affiliate status with ICES. The Affiliate Countries are: Australia, Chile, Greece, New Zealand, Peru, and South Africa.