Defra propose a non targeted fishery for the Porbeagle at December's Eu talks

[Ian Burrett]

Good news from Defra but I suspect this will receive much opposition from the French and the the Spanish

 

Defra state in a letter to SOS

 

Our clear preference is for no targeted porbeagle fishery, but for a small by-catch quota to cover porbeagle that are caught incidentally but are already dead. We would support measures to encourage or require the release of live by-catch wherever it is possible to do so.

 

We are also concerned about the state of other large bodied shark stocks such as the blue shark and will urge the Commission to consider management measures for them also.

 

With the proposals for a 5% bycatch on Spurdog and hopefully a good conclusion to the tope consultation which is expected within the next few weeks, things really have moved on in the last few years for shark management.

[steve good]

Good news from Defra but I suspect this will receive much opposition from the French and the the Spanish

 

Defra state in a letter to SOS

 

Our clear preference is for no targeted porbeagle fishery, but for a small by-catch quota to cover porbeagle that are caught incidentally but are already dead. We would support measures to encourage or require the release of live by-catch wherever it is possible to do so.

 

We are also concerned about the state of other large bodied shark stocks such as the blue shark and will urge the Commission to consider management measures for them also.

 

With the proposals for a 5% bycatch on Spurdog and hopefully a good conclusion to the tope consultation which is expected within the next few weeks, things really have moved on in the last few years for shark management.

 

Hi Ian

 

So shark being the top predator (just a small point) if protected by DEFRA, who will cull them when their numbers explode and they start eating all the other fish stocks such as bass, cod, mackeral ect,ect,ect

 

Is it not the case the dumb leading the dumber or vote seekers pandering to the voters????????????? regardless of the outcome

 

steve

Edited September 30, 2007 by steve good

[H.A.]

Is it not the case the dumb leading the dumber or vote seekers pandering to the voters????????????? regardless of the outcome

 

Well, they won't need culling in my and your lifetimes, Steve, eh?

 

Porbeagle Shark (Lamna nasus) - Vulnerable

 

Low reproductive capacity and high commercial value (in target and incidental fisheries) of mature and immature age classes makes this species highly vulnerable to over-exploitation and population depletion. This depletion, despite variations in availability of data and degree of depletion between the northern and southern hemispheres, is considered to meet Vulnerable criteria globally. The eastern and western North Atlantic populations have both been seriously over-exploited by directed longline fisheries. Collapse of the Northeast Atlantic population led to intensive target fishing in the well-documented Northwest Atlantic fishery in the 1960s, with most of the virgin biomass removed in just six years. Renewed target fishing in the 1990s led to a further population decline to ~11 to 17% of virgin biomass within the three generation period for this species. Recently improved management in the Northwest Atlantic should now help stocks to recover, however the Northeast Atlantic population has been subject to unrestricted fishing pressure ever since its earlier crash.

- source IUCN

 

I don't see you campaigning for a bass cull (don't get ideas!), following a boom in bass biomass in The Solent after various conservation measures have been in place for some years.

Your commercial fishing for bass has actually benefited.

 

Top predators even in a closed system like trout lakes are an integral part of the natural food chain. Many commercial fisheries encourage natural pike stocks.

 

Longliners are not part of those natural food chains.

 

[Ian Burrett]

Hi Ian

 

 

Is it not the case the dumb leading the dumber or vote seekers pandering to the voters????????????? regardless of the outcome

 

steve

 

The uneducated probably said the same thing about the Dodo

[Leon Roskilly]

Hi Ian

 

So shark being the top predator (just a small point) if protected by DEFRA, who will cull them when their numbers explode and they start eating all the other fish stocks such as bass, cod, mackeral ect,ect,ect

 

Is it not the case the dumb leading the dumber or vote seekers pandering to the voters????????????? regardless of the outcome

 

steve

 

 

The job of Apex predators in the ecology is to take out the weak, diseased, and slow, keeping the overall prey stock healthy and in balance with food supply etc.

 

Nature has it's own mechanisms to ensure that the prey/predator balance itself is kept in check.

 

(A species that harms it's larder won't be around too long).

 

We replace natural selective predation with non-selective predation (ie we don't take our the weak sick and slow as a preference, anything with a price tag will do), but we do try to eliminate natural competing predators.

 

The end result is what we all should know well.

[H.A.]

Leon

 

surely you're not suggesting we cull longliners?

[barry luxton]

The only explosion of any fish stock iv'e heard about is pipefish. Could that have been the result of the lack of sandeel? I'm quite sure that defra and the commercial sector would take care of any stock explosion.

[Cranfield]

The problem is that you can take any set of "facts" and interpret it as you wish.

 

Leon states that no apex predators eats all its prey fish, or it could result in its numbers reducing.

I thought porbeagle numbers were reducing.

Oh, I forgot, thats not because they are eating all the fish stocks, its because they are being caught by longliners.

 

When I spoke to a charter skipper on the west coast of Ireland this year, they were talking of how shark numbers are increasing dramatically, especially porbeagles.

If any "researchers" have access to the tag returns, this fact must have slanted their findings.

I would add that all sharks caught on their boat are tagged and released.

 

Its also fair to say that since the creation of bass nurseries (and other reasons ?) there has been a massive explosion in the number of bass in the water, evidenced by their very frequent capture.

When targetting mackerel this year, I was once agaian surprised at the number of schoolies I was hooking into.

[ColinW]

Its also fair to say that since the creation of bass nurseries (and other reasons ?) there has been a massive explosion in the number of bass in the water, evidenced by their very frequent capture.

When targetting mackerel this year, I was once agaian surprised at the number of schoolies I was hooking into.

 

A conservation measure which was opposed at every turn by commercial interests who even now will say the increased number of small bass has nothing to do with nursery areas, it's due to climate change, or seals developing sore mouths and not liking to eat spiky fish or some other such tosh.

[Jaffa]

A conservation measure which was opposed at every turn by commercial interests who even now will say the increased number of small bass has nothing to do with nursery areas, it's due to climate change, or seals developing sore mouths and not liking to eat spiky fish or some other such tosh.

 

Who are these commercial interests that opposed the nursery areas and now, you suggest, say that its everything but the nurseries that have caused the increase in bass numbers?

 

Are you saying that changing climatic conditions do not effect the oceans? , that seal numbers around the UK have not risen dramatically? , and that eating something spiky when your not designed for it, is not a problem ! Try asking the guys who have spent years trying to work out just which zooplankton a larval cod needs - too big; starvation, too little;starvation, too few per litre; starvation, too "spiky ( a well known defence in the zooplankton) and guess what......

 

But of course you KNOW the answers?! Wish i did.

 

Chris