EU Fishery Talks......

[Jaffa]

An estimated 800,000 tonnes of dead fish were thrown back into the North Sea last year.

 

Once the extra 11% has been caught (which wont take long) they will be dumping fish back in again and you must also consider that the extra effort that will be applied will lead to more undersized fish being dumped back as well, negating any benefits for anyone,. surely chris you are not that naive, perhaps you are! cheers.........

 

So you reckon 11% is not enough? Where do you get the idea that effort will increase?

[stavey]

So you reckon 11% is not enough? Where do you get the idea that effort will increase?

 

From this load of bo**cks jaffa

 

http://www.fishupdate.com/news/fullstory.p...ion_policy.html

[SSACN]

I can easily see where HA got the increased figures from, one site. But the minus figures are harder to get to unless you look around various web sites and news agencies at present.

You can find the complete PR of the Council at:

 

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedoc...cult/97761.pdf

 

www.ssacn.org will have a breakdown as it affects Scotland once we have had a chance to fully assess the detail and the decisions on sustainable fisheries resolutions.

 

The whole political process is a farce - it does not address fish and fishing issues, conservation or even preservation, its just a bunch of fisheries ministers arguing about who gets what.

 

To put things into perspective - even after all the increases for Haddock, Cod and Megrim - those fisheries will still contribute less than 5% of Scotland's fisheries revenues.

[barry luxton]

From this load of bo**cks jaffa

 

http://www.fishupdate.com/news/fullstory.p...ion_policy.html

 

What i note within this link is two or more weeks ago the fishing ministers where falling over themselves to get to brussels and state that they were concerned with the increase in discard, can we have some more quota to reduce that. Now Lochhead is saying 'scotland has blazed a trail for the whole of europe by adopting sustainable fishing practices'. To me that interprets that they could have adopted those and reduced discard in any event.

 

He also refers to the cfp as 'discredited' to me the reason why the cfp is not working is as the auditors state. Too many people and goverments ignoring the rules with a weak sanction's policy.

[Leon Roskilly]

Some 800,000 tonnes of fish caught by trawlers in the North Sea are being dumped back into the sea.

 

Mr Shaw is right to call this wasteful and immoral.

 

It also destroys the environmental goals of the quotas.

 

But the solution is not to allow fishermen more time at sea or bigger catches.

 

It is to leave the fish alone in the first place.

 

 

http://comment.independent.co.uk/leading_a...icle3266528.ece

[glennk]

I took a few positives from this. Admittedly 11% increase fro cod up here isnt ideal but the fact that quota's are now by and large enforced means we should still see improvements over the situation of a few years back where every skipper in my town was in the doc for fisheries offences.

 

Also the incentives to use selective gear and stay out of areas where small fish live could be useful. I would have liked to have seen more emphasis put on this though with it being mandatory.

 

The situation isnt brilliant but its not as bad as it could have been and once was.

[Jaffa]

http://comment.independent.co.uk/leading_a...icle3266528.ece

 

Interesting that the article, just like it seems every single such one references to the nonsense "all fish gone by 2048" claims put forward by Pew funded Boris Worm and his Pew funded mates. Did i mention Pew there? as if........

 

Shame we never get to hear about the funding of these guys and "journalists" appear unable to actually go and do a bit of digging.

 

This opinion piece might interest a few anglers:

 

 

http://www.joinrfa.org/Press/Hijack20070605.pdf

 

You'll need a PDF reader to read it.

 

Btw is there any Pew money whatsoever involved in what Sacn or SSacn does?

[barry luxton]

I took a few positives from this. Admittedly 11% increase fro cod up here isnt ideal but the fact that quota's are now by and large enforced means we should still see improvements over the situation of a few years back where every skipper in my town was in the doc for fisheries offences.

 

Also the incentives to use selective gear and stay out of areas where small fish live could be useful. I would have liked to have seen more emphasis put on this though with it being mandatory.

 

The situation isnt brilliant but its not as bad as it could have been and once was.

Will have to wait for the results of this voluntary agreement, wonder what reason the quota is to rise next year as they won't be able to use the discard one. More fish hopefully. Will be interesting.

 

Can't open your link Jaffa even with the pdf.

[SSACN]

Interesting that the article, just like it seems every single such one references to the nonsense "all fish gone by 2048" claims put forward by Pew funded Boris Worm and his Pew funded mates. Did i mention Pew there? as if........

 

Shame we never get to hear about the funding of these guys and "journalists" appear unable to actually go and do a bit of digging.

 

This opinion piece might interest a few anglers:

http://www.joinrfa.org/Press/Hijack20070605.pdf

 

You'll need a PDF reader to read it.

 

Btw is there any Pew money whatsoever involved in what Sacn or SSacn does?

I'm sorry you took that approach - all you had to do was ask us - rather than idly speculate.

 

Our organization is open to all - we have a Steering Committee of a dozen diverse Scottish anglers who vote on all major policy issues and a Management Team which is ELECTED by our Members to address day to day issues.

 

As a Scottish registered charity all our monies and help in kind are fully documented. SSACN is ONLY funded by it's Membership, our money raising efforts and those organizations who we list as our sponsors.

 

So to make it absolutely categorically clear - Sponsors have no say in direction, none are on the Steering Committee or Management Team they just believe we have a part to play in helping secure some form of future for Scottish sea anglers and those communities dependent on sea angling for a significant part of their economies.

 

Remarks like yours only help to reaffirm our commitment to working for the benefit of Scottish sea anglers.

 

I must admit that in all our dealings with Scottish commercial fishermen and the Scottish Government, although we may not always see eye to eye on issues, none of them have ever questioned our independence or right to raise the issues we do.

 

 

www.ssacn.org

[SSACN]

 

Btw are you on the commercial fisheries sector's payroll?

 

As for SSACN you can find their sponsors here: www.ssacn.org

 

<LI class="widget widget_text" id=text-1><H2 class=widgettitle>SSACN Sponsors</H2>

• 
  
• Skipper Miller - Jefferson Texas
  
• Web services by Amber
  
• The Sports Shop - Stranraer
  

I am pretty sure SSACN would like a million or two from Pew but I am not so sure Pew would be too happy about how SSACN would spend that money -with the exeption of their efforts to save the sharks maybe. I suppose you are against saving the sharks as well? You must be as this is something supported by some green orgs.

 

F/F - we'd be even happier if more anglers were to recognise that substantial efforts are require to address the potentially terminal decline sea angling (in Scotland at least) is in and joined us in trying to make a difference.

 

The commercials understandably fight for all they can get and are organised accordingly - Bertie Armstrong (SFF) has the following around him : President + 2 Vice Presidenrs + Policy Team, Services Team, Inshore Fisheries Policy Officer, Director of Operations & Business Development, Science & Environment Policy Officer, Operations Manager, Safety & Training Consultant, Industry Advisor, Support Co-ordinator, Logistics Co-ordinator, Administrators(3), Accountant, Accounts Assistant.

 

We can only secure the future of sea angling if the ongoing loss of species is halted and re-building takes place; this can ONLY be achieved if ALL destructive practices are minimised and some form of protection is introduced to encourage regeneration.

 

Politicians crow about 11% increase in a minority stock whilst developing policies which allow Nephrops trawlers with 80 mm mesh to wipe out 15+million fish per year in the Clyde; 10 species to become locally 'extinct' in Scottish waters; 10 more to be severely threatened, for spurdog to fall to 5% of their historical biomass; and still facilitate 'finning' -- the list goes on and on and on.

 

It's anglers with energy, passion and votes we need to fight for the interests of sea anglers with those that have the power to change things and not waste bandwidth on those that don't.

 

www.ssacn.org