Trawling does affect the seabed and stocks

[seaside]

Extract from todays Aberdeen Press and Journal which shows that when a realistic attitude is taken, groups can work together to try to protect stocks and the seabed from unsustainable methods. Whether or not the politicians will support them is of course another question.

 

Commercial fishermen and wildlife campaigners yesterday joined forces to call for a ban on fishing in an area of the Atlantic to protect coral and fish species.

 

The Scottish Fishermen's Federation (SFF) and WWF conservation group urged the European Commission and European Union (EU) member states to close part of Rockall Bank, west of North Uist, to all fishing. They said the fragile deepwater corals on the bank were in desperate need of protection from damaging fishing practices. The area is also a nursery ground for important commercial fish, including haddock.

 

Fishing gear such as trawl nets is potentially damaging to cold water coral formations, said the SFF and WWF. Damage to the coral would affect fish species, including juvenile haddock, which thrive in the deepwater environment. SFF spokesman Ian Gatt said: "Protecting the corals of Rockall Bank is good for haddock stocks as they are essential, safe feeding grounds for the young fish. .... "If the fish have nowhere to feed and mature they won't reach reproductive size and stocks won't be sustainable.

 

"SFF is urging the EU to take prompt action to help conserve our fish stocks by closing all fishing in this area."

 

WWF senior marine policy officer Helen McLachlan said: "The deepwater corals around Scotland's coast are as rare, beautiful and fragile as any found in tropical climes and support an astonishing diversity of marine life. "However they are virtually unprotected, with large areas being subjected to irreversible damage from fishing gear, particularly bottom trawling.

[Ian Burrett]

It's great news that the Scottish fishermen are thinking of the future and have accepted that trawling is destructive. It's a pity Eu politicians can't see the same

 

http://www.sharkalliance.org/content.asp?did=23522

[seaside]

It's great news that the Scottish fishermen are thinking of the future and have accepted that trawling is destructive. It's a pity Eu politicians can't see the same

 

http://www.sharkalliance.org/content.asp?did=23522

 

Couldn't agree more Ian and it would be nice if some of the others who are always in total denial were to follow the lead of the Scottish commercial guys.

 

BTW - it also got a mention in Parliament -

 

Mr. Alistair Carmichael (Orkney and Shetland) (LD): On the question of unregulated fishing in international waters—in particular, cold water coral reefs, which we almost discussed at Question Time earlier—will the Minister join me in welcoming the recent accord between and proposals made by the Scottish Fishermen’s Federation and the World Wide Fund for Nature, especially on the Rockall bank and the Queen Elizabeth bank? That is precisely the sort of approach that should be encouraged. Will the Minister meet both organisations to see how their proposals can be taken forward?

 

Mr. Bradshaw: I certainly warmly welcome the fishing industry working together with environmental organisations, as in the initiative that he mentions. When I began to do this job, one of its most frustrating aspects was not only that fishermen and scientific advisers found it difficult to work together or even begin to accept each other’s points, but that the gap between the environmental organisations and the fishing industry was even wider. When sensible and responsible environmental organisations, like WWF, get together with the industry, we see remarkable results. I meet both organisations regularly and I look forward to discussing that initiative the next time I do so.

[Guest challenge]

Do you think that this might just coincide, with a campaign that Scottish fishermen have been running for years to close this fishery (especially to the Russian fleet) down?

This is nothing new, the north east Atlantic fishery commission decided to impose a closed area in the Rockall fishery back in 2001. Following a plea by Scottish fishermen.

still if it protects (what has certainly been proven time and time again that this area does hold a very juvenile fishery) what has been exploited for years by the Russians and has been apposed vigorously by the Scottish commercial fishermen, then if they can help to protect a fishery and protect coral at the same time, then good luck to them.

Regards.http://www.savethehighseas.org/display.cfm?ID=84

Edited December 16, 2006 by challenge

[Trubshaw]

If its good for Scotland surely the same applies to England.

[barry luxton]

If its good for Scotland surely the same applies to England.

Henry they are talking about one particular fishery, area up in scotland, what has this to do with the uk.

[Jaffa]

It's great news that the Scottish fishermen are thinking of the future and have accepted that trawling is destructive. It's a pity Eu politicians can't see the same

Couldn't agree more Ian and it would be nice if some of the others who are always in total denial were to follow the lead of the Scottish commercial guys.

 

You guys usually make more sense than most (to me at least), but why make that spin from the fact that the Scottish fishermen recognise a specific problem, to your comments that its a recognition that "all trawling is destructive" . The two are miles apart in meaning and implication surely?

 

It would be great, and long overdue, news if the trawling of the deepsea corals was stopped; even better than the WWF and fishermen managed to work togeather.

 

Why trash it already guys?!

[Trubshaw]

Henry they are talking about one particular fishery, area up in scotland, what has this to do with the uk.

 

 

I am just suggesting given the evidence that we should do more areas. Surely the fact that the Scottish commercials recognise the problem must have some effect elsewhere.

 

PS I LIKE SPROUTS.

 

New petition to be started.

 

Don't be horrible to Brussel Sprouts, please note I did not say Brussels. They taste good, they look good and by god they are good. A sprout a day helps you work, rest and play.

 

Its all right, I put my coat on before I left and have now gone.

[seaside]

You guys usually make more sense than most (to me at least), but why make that spin from the fact that the Scottish fishermen recognise a specific problem, to your comments that its a recognition that "all trawling is destructive" . The two are miles apart in meaning and implication surely?

 

It would be great, and long overdue, news if the trawling of the deepsea corals was stopped; even better than the WWF and fishermen managed to work togeather.

 

Why trash it already guys?!

Jaffa - No you took that one step too far - my point was quite simply that too many are in denial about the impact fishing has on stocks and the seabed environment, be it trawling, scallop dredging or whatever. There are grounds where these methods will have minimal impact on the topology, but in others areas the effect can be critical.

 

The Clyde is a very good example - trawling inside of 3 miles in the Clyde was banned from 1889 until 1984 and it used to have fisheries for herring, mackerel, cod, turbot, plaice, hake, skate, whiting - now there is Langoustine and shellfish.

 

The fish did not disappear due to global warming, global cooling, shift in ocean currents or any of the other excuses usually trotted out, they went due to overfishing, excessive discarding, upgrading, fishing spawning and nursery areas and the destruction of their habitat - which has all been freely admitted to by commercial organisations themselves.

 

So all I'm not looking for the commercial fleet / trawling to be scrapped or whatever, just that fish stocks are exploited in a sustainable manner with minimal impact on their environment and to that end, governments including the EU, should move beyond their immediate parochial and political interests and manage the resources properly.

 

All the relevant ministers will shortly be going back to their countries trying to tell their commercial fishermen what a great deal they've done on their behalf in the quota talks, it's about time they started to do 'great deals' on behalf of the stocks and our future.

[Jaffa]

Jaffa - No you took that one step too far - my point was quite simply that too many are in denial about the impact fishing has on stocks and the seabed environment, be it trawling, scallop dredging or whatever. There are grounds where these methods will have minimal impact on the topology, but in others areas the effect can be critical.

 

The Clyde is a very good example - trawling inside of 3 miles in the Clyde was banned from 1889 until 1984 and it used to have fisheries for herring, mackerel, cod, turbot, plaice, hake, skate, whiting - now there is Langoustine and shellfish.

 

The fish did not disappear due to global warming, global cooling, shift in ocean currents or any of the other excuses usually trotted out, they went due to overfishing, excessive discarding, upgrading, fishing spawning and nursery areas and the destruction of their habitat - which has all been freely admitted to by commercial organisations themselves.

 

So all I'm not looking for the commercial fleet / trawling to be scrapped or whatever, just that fish stocks are exploited in a sustainable manner with minimal impact on their environment and to that end, governments including the EU, should move beyond their immediate parochial and political interests and manage the resources properly.

 

All the relevant ministers will shortly be going back to their countries trying to tell their commercial fishermen what a great deal they've done on their behalf in the quota talks, it's about time they started to do 'great deals' on behalf of the stocks and our future.

 

Thanks for clearing that up It works both ways though; far too many RSA voices keep quiet, or even lend support, when the greens come out with calls to ban all trawling, impose a golden mile or whatever the latest "silver bullet is".

 

I take your points about the Clyde, but also have niggling thoughts that fishing alone, even if the main cause, is not all thats going on there. The fishermen talk of reduced gravel ground; is that due to trawling (could be i guess) or something else? Is it really a good idea to assume its all been due to fishing? Ive seen something in the discard data that bothers me, but can't remmber what ! Got no evidence for any of that though so it amounts to damn all.

 

You may not wish all the commercial fleet to be scrapped and im sure everyone froma Whalsay purser skipper to a Lands end angler would agree with the statement

 

just that fish stocks are exploited in a sustainable manner with minimal impact on their environment

but just what does that mean? At the moment, at least at EU level, it seems to mean that we pick a point in time, say "this is the right point" , then legislate but meantime the world has kept on spinning and things change...

 

and to that end, governments including the EU, should move beyond their immediate parochial and political interests and manage the resources properly.

 

Sounds good but why do those nations who demonstrate a very immediate parochial and political interest end up managing their resources so much better?

 

 

I'd imagine the Faroese, Icelandic and Norwegian ministers, who go back and say they have achieved a good "result" , sleep a lot easier than our minister after saying the same ? ( nah forget that; you need to care before you worry)

 

Chris