SFSA Scottish Election 1

[wurzel]

Cod - no-one talks about catching other than juvenile cod on the majority of the west coast. There's not even a great deal of them around on the east coast either.

 

Bertie Armstrong in the lead up to the TACS / quota negotiations this year was really annoyed, he thought all the talk of cod was diluting their efforts as no-one in the Scottish inshore fleet deliberately fishes for cod anymore - they just aren't there.

 

The Clyde and many other areas on the west coast used to support a superb commercial and recreational fishery - cod, haddock, whiting, skate, rays, halibut, mackerel, plaice, dogfish, spurdog, herring, salmon, sea-trout .......... just about any fish that swam.

 

You think the total lack of most of these is a temporary blip - get real - the current leader of the Clyde Fishermens Assoc on the radio just the other day called the total lack of meaningful fish stocks a disgusting situation -- it didn't come about because of the charter vessels, it came about because the area was commercially overfished, not my words, but those of a previous leader of the Clyde Fishermens Assoc.

 

But the Clyde prawn trawlers continue to shovel 10+ million juvenile fish back overboard every year; vessels working all Scottish waters shovel back 100s of millions of fish -- 1000s of charter boats would be hard put to do that.

 

That said, my issue is not with the commercial fishermen, it's with the Governments - they should stop fit-farting around and introduce the necessary legislative framework to address fish stock issues, some of which may be long term, others more immediate.

 

An immediate win would be to enforce methods which would minimise discard levels in fisheries, quite simple in some, more difficult in others and very difficult in a select few. They should also outlaw all fisheries targeting gravid fish or those which take place on breeding/spawning grounds.

 

These would not significantly impact revenue and would put millions of fish back into circulation.

 

Hello Seaside

 

Challenge (John) has recently been to sea on a prawn boat, he reports very little by catch, are you saying he is mistaken.

 

You have quoted the leader of the Clyde fishermen before, a lot of commercial fishermen are the same as anglers, they have always got to blame someone, visiting boats, bigger boats working offshore, foreign beam trawlers, seals, the list is endless, very rarely does any of it apply.

[seaside]

Hello Seaside

 

Challenge (John) has recently been to sea on a prawn boat, he reports very little by catch, are you saying he is mistaken.

 

You have quoted the leader of the Clyde fishermen before, a lot of commercial fishermen are the same as anglers, they have always got to blame someone, visiting boats, bigger boats working offshore, foreign beam trawlers, seals, the list is endless, very rarely does any of it apply.

I can't speak for what Challenge has seen or not seen, and I would never call anyone a liar unless I could absolutely prove it.

 

What I would say is that from those photos that were featured earlier on, he has certainly seen more double figure cod on one trip than has been seen by shore fishermen in the Clyde for probably a decade or more. Mr Locker may not have been too chuffed, but the remarks up here would get me immediately banned for life from this site.

 

As for your statement regarding the veracity of commercial fishermen, I don't think I could have expected to put that on this forum, and walk away unscathed

 

The data I use is not my own opinion but that which is gathered by a Scottish observer programme where landings and discard data are collected by scientific observers on board commercial fishing vessels. These operate in the Clyde, North Sea and West Coast fisheries.

 

The Scottish Fishermans Federation CEO has said "...... dramatic reductions in the last five years has seen the fleet match the sustainable catch opportunity, which has enabled us to achieve the sustainable harvesting of this fine natural resource."

 

This is good for stocks and recognises the issues of the past, though it does create many 'fat cat' issues you alluded to.

 

But the healthy state of these fisheries masks the parlous state of inshore fisheries, and who is at fault for these diminished stocks is pretty much immaterial to me. What is far more important is getting stocks to recover and improving the fisheries for the benefit of both inshore commercial and recreational fishermen.

 

That will require legislation and is therefore the biggest weakness in the whole situation, if politicians were marine life - they'd be jellyfish.

[wurzel]

Quote

That will require legislation and is therefore the biggest weakness in the whole situation, if politicians were marine life - they'd be jellyfish.

 

 

Well there's something we can agree on.

[barry luxton]

But the healthy state of these fisheries masks the parlous state of inshore fisheries, and who is at fault for these diminished stocks is pretty much immaterial to me. What is far more important is getting stocks to recover and improving the fisheries for the benefit of both inshore commercial and recreational fishermen.

 

That will require legislation and is therefore the biggest weakness in the whole situation, if politicians were marine life - they'd be jellyfish.

 

Totally agree, ben would be the top of the list. Just look what he hasn't done for the bass.44cm. (Even Wurzel agrees) cheers.

[Guest challenge]

I can't speak for what Challenge has seen or not seen, and I would never call anyone a liar unless I could absolutely prove it.

 

What I would say is that from those photos that were featured earlier on, he has certainly seen more double figure cod on one trip than has been seen by shore fishermen in the Clyde for probably a decade or more. Mr Locker may not have been too chuffed, but the remarks up here would get me immediately banned for life from this site.

 

As for your statement regarding the veracity of commercial fishermen, I don't think I could have expected to put that on this forum, and walk away unscathed

 

The data I use is not my own opinion but that which is gathered by a Scottish observer programme where landings and discard data are collected by scientific observers on board commercial fishing vessels. These operate in the Clyde, North Sea and West Coast fisheries.

 

The Scottish Fishermans Federation CEO has said "...... dramatic reductions in the last five years has seen the fleet match the sustainable catch opportunity, which has enabled us to achieve the sustainable harvesting of this fine natural resource."

 

This is good for stocks and recognises the issues of the past, though it does create many 'fat cat' issues you alluded to.

 

But the healthy state of these fisheries masks the parlous state of inshore fisheries, and who is at fault for these diminished stocks is pretty much immaterial to me. What is far more important is getting stocks to recover and improving the fisheries for the benefit of both inshore commercial and recreational fishermen.

 

That will require legislation and is therefore the biggest weakness in the whole situation, if politicians were marine life - they'd be jellyfish.

I spent a couple of days on boat fishing for prawns last week of the tees. Traditional prawning grounds. We had very little discards. I asked the skipper if he felt that by working a square mesh panel in the stocking of his net he had eliminated the problem of discards.

He said that he certainly thought that it had made a difference.

I asked him if the using of square mesh panels in the trunk of the net had been introduced as a compulsory adaptation to there fishing methods. he said” it was not.” He said “it was the commercial fishermen who had come up with the idea and had started to use them voluntary.”

I don’t know anything of the prawn fishery on the west coast of Scotland because I have never witnessed it. I will only report as first hand observation something that I have done or witnessed first hand.

Far too many presumptions are made of the fishing industry through assumptions and sponsored information.

Regards.

[stavey]

Strange thing the English language.

How can you say that you don’t blame the commercial fisherman for the shortage of fish,

 

 

Hi challenge

 

I blame the commercial industry, why should i not? having to pay £2000000 mortgages and ever increasing fuel prices before they have even made enough profit for a beer or two is a f**king ridiculous and a stupid way to run any sort of business.................

[Guest challenge]

Hi challenge

 

I blame the commercial industry, why should i not? having to pay £2000000 mortgages and ever increasing fuel prices before they have even made enough profit for a beer or two is a f**king ridiculous and a stupid way to run any sort of business.................

Hello stavey.

Not sure where you’re coming from here? The majority of commercial fishermen have always had to pay for there boats and have had to pay for there running expenses before they made a profit. Is that not how profit works?

I will give you an example of how it worked when I was at the job.

grossing for week £15000, expenses £5000, (this included fuel, food, hire equipment, ice, landing charges, agents fees, etc) £10000, left (from original grossing,) the money left was split down the middle 50% went to the boat owners and 50% went to the crew.

Let’s say there are five crew members, that £1000 each. the boats share (in this case £5000) they would have to take out payments to bank, insurances, wear and tare to fishing gear, new fishing gear, maintenance of boat etc. at the end of the year what was left in the boats account (after all had been paid) would be split between owners. Hence profit for boat and profit for owners.

Now days things (I believe have changed) as things like renting of quota and insurance expenses come out of initial expenses. Not all boats and company’s work on the same 50% 50% split. And not all crew members get the same share. (Depending on experience etc) but that is more or less the way we use to work it.

When you put money into a boat to buy it, you did not have to put any of your own cash into the pot, you just borrowed money from the bank and hoped that the boat made the money to pay off the loans that you had put your name too.

If that’s a stupid way of running a business (in your opinion) then so be it.

Regards.

Edited January 19, 2007 by challenge

[stavey]

Hello stavey.

Not sure where you’re coming from here? The majority of commercial fishermen have always had to pay for there boats and have had to pay for there running expenses before they made a profit. Is that not how profit works?

I will give you an example of how it worked when I was at the job.

grossing for week £15000, expenses £5000, (this included fuel, food, hire equipment, ice, landing charges, agents fees, etc) £10000, left (from original grossing,) the money left was split down the middle 50% went to the boat owners and 50% went to the crew.

Let’s say there are five crew members, that £1000 each. the boats share (in this case £5000) they would have to take out payments to bank, insurances, wear and tare to fishing gear, new fishing gear, maintenance of boat etc. at the end of the year what was left in the boats account (after all had been paid) would be split between owners. Hence profit for boat and profit for owners.

Now days things (I believe have changed) as things like renting of quota and insurance expenses come out of initial expenses. Not all boats and company’s work on the same 50% 50% split. And not all crew members get the same share. (Depending on experience etc) but that is more or less the way we use to work it.

When you put money into a boat to buy it, you did not have to put any of your own cash into the pot, you just borrowed money from the bank and hoped that the boat made the money to pay off the loans that you had put your name too.

If that’s a stupid way of running a business (in your opinion) then so be it.

Regards.

 

Hi challenge

 

Just trying to get my head around things as regards what is the actual cost to fish stocks and these fishermen to earn a living thats all, even taking your figures in to account it does look to me that a lot of fish have to be caught to balance books and to make enough money to warrant the practice, trouble is can the fish stocks and the marine life take it? i think there is enough evidence to think not!! as can be seen over the years in the drastic decline to an industry that as almost snuffed itself out.

[Guest challenge]

Hi challenge

 

Just trying to get my head around things as regards what is the actual cost to fish stocks and these fishermen to earn a living thats all, even taking your figures in to account it does look to me that a lot of fish have to be caught to balance books and to make enough money to warrant the practice, trouble is can the fish stocks and the marine life take it? i think there is enough evidence to think not!! as can be seen over the years in the drastic decline to an industry that as almost snuffed itself out.

The difference could be that when I was last commercial fishing back in 89 we got £6 a box for whiting, last week when I went at it we got £60 to £90 a box.

Perhaps you don’t need to catch as much today.

[steve good]

Hi challenge

 

I blame the commercial industry, why should i not? having to pay £2000000 mortgages and ever increasing fuel prices before they have even made enough profit for a beer or two is a f**king ridiculous and a stupid way to run any sort of business.................

 

Hi Stavey

 

I blame all the anglers MILLIONS of them all catching LOADS and LOADS of fish all added together must come to thousands of tons of UNRECORDED fish

 

steve