http://www.thisissouthwales.co.uk/needs-save-Channel-stocks/story-15242161-detail/story.html
Something needs to be done to save Channel stocks
RECREATIONAL sea anglers will be keen to see how long any announcement will take from the Welsh Assembly Government with regard to oversized vessels that have been allowed to fish with historical rights for many years within the six-mile shore limit in the Bristol Channel.
For many years anglers could be accused of apathy, but on this particular subject the angling public, tackle trade and inshore commercial fishermen have turned out in force to convince the powers that be that such fishing rights have destroyed and continue to destroy some of our most important species.
If the consultation proves successful for the RSA, etc, this would be a victory for common sense, and together with the inshore fisheries groups, a real opportunity will exist to manage the fishery.
The Bristol Channel faces many problems over the next ten years and some of the projects under consideration, either singly or collectively, could prove to be a serious problem. Some of the problems that could be faced are:
A Severn Barrage is back on the Government’s agenda.
There are gas power proposals for Swansea Bay.
There are further dredging proposals off Gower whereby a group of firms have revived an application for dredging 10km off Worm’s Head to take 27 million tonnes over the next 15 years. Many are convinced that this will seriously affect habitat if allowed to go ahead.
The huge wind farm mid-channel stretching down to nearly Lundy Island.
Fishing-wise, one serious point has to be taken into account: the Moody Marine survey of the Bristol Channel Bass Trawl Fishery showed that the bass stock levels are not sustainable.
Here are a few of the other points that have been discussed over the last three years to bring stocks of many species back to an acceptable level.
While bass are very important, plaice and turbot are in serious danger, mainly due to larger trawlers who have concentrated their efforts within the six-mile limit.
IFG’s could possibly discuss the use of no towing gear within the area 0-3 miles.
Bag limits — the Welsh Office (as it was called then) confirmed to South Wales Sea Fisheries that they would have no problem in supporting a bag limit of five bass per day per angler.
Some of the trawling, especially around March time, seems to be concentrated on breeding stocks of bass so there may well be a need to discuss a closed season.
Longlining — larger bass are already in short supply, and though this is a method which is not used extensively, it does account for taking larger bass.
No-take zones — these have been discussed for some time, which may well lead to commercial fishermen and RSA being exempt from certain areas, which in turn would mean no discards.
Nursery areas – do they need to be extended?
Fish minimum sizes.
This all seems quite frightening, but the time has come for the fishery to be managed properly.
lyndon lammas
Anglers’ group resumes push for ban on commercial bass fishing
By Kaimi Rose Lum
Provincetown Banner
Posted Feb 17, 2012 @ 07:33 AM
It’s round two for a recreational anglers’ group seeking to ban commercial bass fishing in Massachusetts. The Maine-based organization “Stripers Forever,” which pushed unsuccessfully for the prohibition in 2010, is redoubling its efforts, proposing three bills that will air in the state Legislature on Feb. 28.
The first bill aims to outlaw the commercial harvest and sale of striped bass and designate it a gamefish. It also proposes changes to the recreational rules by reducing the recreational catch from two fish per-person per-day to one fish and creating a slot limit that wouldallow the taking of bass between 20 and 26 inches long, to protect vulnerable year classes, or above 40 inches, to protect the biggest fish. Current restrictions limit the taking of bass to those 28 inches or longer.
The second bill calls for funding to study contaminants in the fish. The third would require that any changes to the laws on commercial bass fishing take into account the economic effects on the recreational fishing industry.
The hearing before the Joint Committee on the Environment, Natural Resources and Agriculture is scheduled for 11 a.m. on Feb. 28 at the State House in Boston. The bills are sponsored by Rep. Thomas Stanley of Waltham.
Craig Caldwell, a Harwich resident and board member of Stripers Forever, said the move to ban commercial bass fishing is primarily about revenue. Recreational fishing rakes in more dough than commercial fishing, he said, because it attracts people who spend money on hotels, clothing, gear and so on.
“In so many communities, from Texas around the panhandle all the way up the East Coast, gamefish for so many species is the backbone of the economy,” Caldwell said. Blaming commercial fishermen in part for the decline in bass numbers over recent years, Caldwell said he almost cries when he thinks what the Cape could be with a recreational-only bass fishery.
“Bar none, we could be the world’s top destination for striped bass fishing, period,” he said. “If we can get the bass to where they were, we will bring in so much money.”
Caldwell cites statistics from NOAA that show a drop in the recreational bass catch from 8.1 million pounds in 2006 to 1.3 million pounds in 2011. “I used to catch 200 or 300 fish per year just in the estuaries. I caught just 12 last year,” he said — a change he attributes to commercial fishing, although he acknowledges there may be environmental causes as well.
“If they are a market-based commodity they will essentially go extinct,” he said.
Skeptical of statements that commercial bass fishing, too, provides economic opportunity, Caldwell said most of the commercial bass fishermen around here are just “electricians and plumbers” who chase stripers to make a little extra cash.
“For every pound of fish that commercial fishermen catch, we’re putting 50 bucks in their pocket, but we’re taking $450 out of the local economy,” he said.
Truro resident Tim Silva begs to differ. A commercial bass fisherman for 44 years, he’s built his house with the money he earned on the water. He also makes jigs, which he sells to commercial fishermen.
A ban on commercial bass fishing would create a hardship for him and his family, he said.
“Half of my income comes from that. It would be devastating for me,” Silva said. He added that there are plenty of fishermen who make their living by catching various species throughout the year — a necessity in these days of closures and “catch shares” — and who would take a hit from a commercial ban on bass.
Silva disputes the claim that commercial fishing does little for the local economy.
“I spend a lot of money in the tackle shops, I spend a lot of money at the boat yard,” Silva said. “When I go buy eels [for bait], I’ll buy 25 pounds, which is about 200 eels. A recreational guy will go in and buy two or three.”
Silva said that if Stripers Forever is concerned about preserving the striper population then it should address issues like environmental degradation and habitat loss rather than focus solely on depriving commercial fishermen of the right to harvest bass.
“If you want to take care of the fish, let’s do it together,” said Silva, who is concerned about the loss of eelgrass beds that provide shelter for species like bass and young cod. But overtures made along those lines have gone nowhere, he said.
“All they care about is the elimination of commercial fishing,” said Silva of Stripers Forever. “I keep saying the fish are for everybody, not for one special group.”
Dean Clark, co-chair of Stripers Forever’s Massachusetts division, said the bill is not a resource grab by recreational fishermen.
“It’s a conservation bill trying to save striped bass. If this were not a conservation bill and if it were a resource grab, then the recreational people would not voluntarily have their harvest quota reduced by 50 percent,” Clark said, referring to the proposed adjustment to the recreational take.
Clark said opposition to the ban is coming from “a bunch of individuals lobbying for their own selfish self-interest. … As long as there is a commercial need to harvest fish or the commercial ability to harvest fish there will be pressure on the regulators to do just that. That’s why I want to get the commercial interest out of the regulatory meeting room.”
Even some recreational fishermen, however, are ambivalent about the legislation. Provincetown charter boat captain Rich Wood said that although commercial fishermen “can take a lot of fish” — they’re allowed 30 per day three days a week and five on Sundays until the quota is filled, a roughly three-month season — he is against a complete ban.
“On Cape Cod there’re some commercial fishermen that truly use that money to supplement their income,” he said. “For those people for whom it truly is a part of their life and support system, I’m leaning toward continuing that.”
What he doesn’t like, he said, are the “75 percent of people who go and get a commercial bass permit … and use it to supplement their hobby, pay for their equipment, pay for their boats, whatever.”
Wood said perhaps there is a way to change the striper season so that “you don’t take as many fish and stretch the season out longer.”
He is in favor of the proposed changes to the recreational side that would limit the take to one bass per-day per-person, saying it will help avoid the waste of fish. Why not tweak the commercial rules, too, he suggested.
“There’s a lot of pros and cons on the commercial side, but I think if you’re going to look at the recreation side and charter boat side, and reduce those, then maybe there’s a way to reduce the commercial side,” Wood said.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/nov/15/uk-marine-protection-delay?CMP=twt_fd
We must suffer short-term economic pain to make our seas sustainable
Easing the pressure from fishing and shipping will hurt – but collapse of our oceans will hurt a great deal more
- Paul Gompertz
- guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 15 November 2011 10.12 GMT
Our marine environment is facing a defining moment. We are an island nation set in the midst of what were once some of the most productive seas on the planet. But a report earlier this year from the Independent Panel on the State of our Oceans (IPSO) warns us that the decline in the vitality of our oceans is in fact worse than our direst predictions. The pressing question is – what are we going to do about it?
Fishing used to be a battle against the elements in which every success was hard won and most fish escaped. While it can still be a battle against the elements, improved catch techniques and equipment mean that most fish don’t escape. We may be getting better and better at catching, but it is taking more and more effort – about 17 times more than at the end of the 19th century, when the downward trend in fish stocks began in earnest.
But hugely reducing the fish stocks isn’t the only thing we have done over the past 100 years. We have also disturbed vast areas of sea bed and destroyed rich habitats which has further reduced the productivity of the seas. We have poured effluents and pesticides and mining residues into the sea via our estuaries. We have removed gravel and oil and sand and gas. We have caused the temperature of our seas to rise, disrupting marine systems. In short, we have exploited the sea mercilessly and everywhere. This once huge larder, climate regulator, heat exchanger and absorber of carbon is stressed beyond endurance.
There is only one sensible answer for a human race intent on surviving as long as possible. We must nurse it back to health and productivity – we must manage it sustainably.
One vital step in that management is to create marine sanctuaries, places where damaging human activity is not allowed. Who would argue against the idea that 25% of the sea should largely be left to its own devices, with human beings “only” allowing themselves exploitation of the remaining 75%? We have one last chance to get this right; can’t we, in the interests of future generations and the health of our planet, confine ourselves to three-quarters?
It would seem not. The proposal before the UK government to establish a network of marine protected areas covering 22% of our inshore waters is being undermined from every direction, largely on the grounds that short-term human self-interest is more important than long term sustainability.
There are two broad threads to this argument. One says that we don’t have enough evidence to define protected areas accurately, so until we can we should carry on as before. Damage until you can manage. However, the reverse now needs to be true. If we don’t know enough about an area to exploit it without damage, we should keep out. If you can’t manage, don’t damage. At least one-quarter needs to be protected urgently, to avoid disaster. So let’s protect the quarter currently being proposed, and then seek to refine the network of protected areas as more evidence becomes available.
The other argument – one which is being advanced by some MPs in the south-west – says that some of the sites selected require too much human sacrifice – mainly economic sacrifice – to be realistic. This is perpetuating the very thinking which brought us to our current state of imminent collapse. There must be change, we must exploit less, we must ease the pressure on our seas. This means that some activities will be reduced. Less pressure from fishing, less pressure from shipping, less pressure from extractive industries. There are bound to be places where this will hurt. But it is manageable hurt. Collapse of our oceans is not manageable and will hurt a great deal for a great many people. We must choose the lesser of two evils now, while we still have the chance.
On 15 November 2011 16:55, Leon Roskilly <leonrosk@gmail.com> wrote:
http://www.northseawildlife.org.uk/news-and-events/major-set-back-for-our-seas/
Major set back for our seas
Media release
15 November 2011
A major setback for our seas
Our seas are suffering serious damage and need protection now, according to The Wildlife Trusts, in response to today’s ministerial statement on Marine Conservation Zones.
The statement announces the Government’s intention to gather further evidence on the 127 Marine Conservation Zones recommended by stakeholder groups. The recommendations are the result of consultation with more than one million stakeholders including fishermen, conservationists and businesses. The process has cost around £8.8million to date.
The groups made their recommendations based on the ‘best available evidence’ as advised by Defra in 2010. The process of gathering additional evidence is expected to delay designation of Marine Conservation Zones by at least a year.
The Wildlife Trusts believe all 127 sites should be designated. Today’s statement, made by Natural Environment and Fisheries Minister Richard Benyon, promises all 127 sites will be consulted on. However, there is no indication of when, or how many might be designated. The Wildlife Trusts fears the delayed timeframe could put marine species and habitats at considerable risk of further degradation.
Joan Edwards, Head of Living Seas for The Wildlife Trusts, said:
“We welcome the commitment that Defra has announced today to consult on all 127 recommended Marine Conservation Zones (MCZs) in English Waters. However, despite international evidence for the urgent need to protect our seas, the Minister’s statement will result in further unacceptable delay.
“Stakeholders have been discussing Marine Conservation Zone recommendations for more than two years, based on Defra’s 2010 guidance to use ‘best information currently available’. But now Defra appears to be changing the level of evidence required, after stakeholders have made their recommendations. If more data is needed, it could be collected during consultation or even after MCZ designation. We are disappointed that we now face a further delay of at least 12 months when more damage to marine habitats will continue to occur.”
The Wildlife Trusts’ Petition Fish campaign aims to raise public support for Marine Protected Areas at sea. To find out more visit www.wildlifetrusts.org/petitionfish.
Contact information:
Anna Guthrie (Media & PR Manager)
Office: 01636 670075
Mobile: 07887 754659
Email: aguthrie@wildlifetrusts.org
Tanya Perdikou (Media & Campaigns Officer)
Office: 01636 670057
Mobile: 07887 754657
Email: tperdikou@wildlifetrusts.org
Notes for editors:
The Wildlife Trusts (TWT) wildlifetrusts.org
There are 47 individual Wildlife Trusts covering the whole of the UK. All are working for an environment rich in wildlife for everyone. Our vision is to create A Living Landscape and secure Living Seas. We run marine conservation projects around the UK, collecting vital data on the state of our seas and celebrating our amazing marine wildlife. Each Wildlife Trust is working within its local communities to inspire people about the future of their area: their own Living Landscapes and Living Seas.
On 15 November 2011 16:48, Leon Roskilly <leonrosk@gmail.com> wrote:
With increasing panic amongst environmental organisations over signs that the Government is rapidly backing away from establishing a meaningful network of Marine Conservation Zones, significantly reducing the number of proposals going forwards, the following announcement has been made.
http://www.defra.gov.uk/news/2011/11/15/wms-marine-conservation-zones/
Written Ministerial Statement on Marine Conservation Zones
Environment Minister Richard Benyon today made the following Written Ministerial Statement:
As part of the Government’s commitment to implementing in full the provisions of the Marine and Coastal Access Act, we are creating a network of national protected areas in British seas to ensure our underwater wildlife flourishes in years to come. We are clear that looking after the wildlife and habitat in our seas is just as important as looking after those on land.
The Government’s first step to identifying new Marine Conservation Zones (MCZs) in English waters was taken forward through four regional MCZ projects managed by the Statutory Nature Conservation Bodies, who are Natural England and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee. The regional projects provided their recommendations for proposed sites for MCZs on 8 September. These have been reviewed by the independent Science Advisory Panel (SAP) and their advice to the SNCBs and Defra is being published today on Defra’s website.
The Marine and Coastal Access Act requires the establishment of a network of conservation sites in the UK marine area. In English waters the network will comprise European Marine Sites, Sites of Special Scientific Interest, sites designated under the Ramsar Convention and Marine Conservation Zones (MCZs). The Act requires that the network must conserve or improve the UK marine environment and protect a range of representative features.
The regional MCZ projects have done excellent work in bringing stakeholders together and making site recommendations, but it is clear from the SAP’s advice that there are a number of gaps and limitations in the scientific evidence base supporting the MCZ recommendations.
It is important that we get this right. It is vital that we have an adequate evidence base for every site if we are to create successful well-managed MCZs. An adequately robust evidence base will be essential when we come to implement management measures.
Defra will therefore be commissioning significant additional work to support MCZ designation including an in depth review of the evidence base for all the regional projects’ site recommendations and committing additional resources to carrying out seabed and habitat monitoring.
Protecting our marine environment is essential and the Government remains fully committed to establishing MCZs to contribute to an ecologically coherent UK network. However, the need to strengthen the evidence base for the MCZ recommendations means this is going to take longer than the ambitious target first put forward. We are likely to be able to designate some MCZs fairly quickly where the supporting evidence is adequate. However, for others we anticipate that more investigation will be needed before they can progress towards designation.
Natural England and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee will provide the MCZ impact assessment and their formal advice in July 2012. This is six months later than previously planned and this revised timetable will enable them to address the recommendations from the Independent Review of the Evidence Process for Selecting Marine Special Areas of Conservation (published July 2011) and take account of any further evidence obtained from the work that Defra is now commissioning. We will give careful consideration to all the advice received before undertaking formal public consultation on MCZs by the end of 2012. This consultation will include all sites recommended by the Regional Projects with clarity on how and when work on them will be taken forward. It is envisaged that the first MCZ designations will take place in 2013.
Defra and delivery partners will work together ensuring that early management measures are put in place to provide effective levels of protection for designated sites and continuing to build the evidence base for future designations. Defra will also take the opportunity, working with stakeholders and SNCBs, to look at other marine features which may benefit from spatial protection.
This phased approach to designation will also allow more scope to shape the English network taking account of sites being considered by the devolved administrations and neighbouring Member States.
http://ukbass.com/2011/11/06/bass-management-in-northern-ireland/
Bass Management in Northern Ireland
At long last, the Dept. of Agriculture and Rural Development in Northern Ireland (DARDNI) have published their Department’s Review of the 2010 Consultation on proposals to replicate bass management legislation as exists in the Republic of Ireland across Northern Ireland thus harmonising bass management across the island of Ireland. Details can be found at: http://www.dardni.gov.uk
Their conclusions are ambiguous. In some regards we think they have it right and the results are better than might have been the case but total harmonisation it isn’t and both the decision to exempt trawled bass from the legislation and in particular their rationale for so doing, raises serious questions about an apparent change to the whole purpose of their original proposals.
BASS have submitted a written response – see below — and hope that as many as possible from the Recreational Sea Angling community will also make representation.
Although this issue may at first seem to only be about bass in Northern Ireland, it is in fact an opportunity to begin altering the culture within the entire UK Management of marine fishery resources. If bass effectively become a RSA species in Northern Ireland, it will be the first instance in the United Kingdom for such designation. Such designation will contribute to altering the mindset of decision makers and politicians from one where commercial fishing is perceived as the ‘all important’ sector whilst RSA is all too often perceived as a fool with a rod trying to drown worms. Establishing the validity of RSA as a socially and economically valuable use of marine fishery resources, is a prerequisite to achieving a better deal for RSA in terms of both fisheries management and maintaining access to our coastline.
You may think BASS is exaggerating the potential that the DARDNI deliberations may have for improving the lot of RSA in general. However, please consider this:
Total commercial fish/shell fish landings in Northern Ireland in 2010 were £35.25 million. Bass accounted for just £1591 which is just 0.004% of total first sale value. On the evidence you wouldn’t think commercial interests would be bothered if bass in NI became a total RSA species but commercial fishing leaders understand the long term repercussions should bass be designated 100% recreational. This is why it is clear from the DARDNI Review, that despite commercial bass landings being so insignificant, the commercial voices are strenuously endeavouring to maintain their own access to the species. They understand the potential strategic significance of this issue and are almost certainly responsible for having persuaded Review staff to move the goalposts (see ‘Overarching Objective’ below).
The key issues to raise with DARDNI are:
Discards.
No one wants to see any fish discarded but in the case of accidental trawl bass catches, the quantities are so small that in context with the whole discard issue, the discard of bass is insignificant. If accidental catches of bass are allowed to be landed and therefore enter the supply chain, it will make enforcement of the proposed legislation very difficult if not impossible. Any wild bass found in the supply chain will simply be passed off as having originated from a trawler. Whereas, if NO bass are allowed to be sold the loop hole doesn’t exist. The proposed exemption for trawlers creates a loop hole that will almost certainly result in increased bass mortality as illegally caught bass (from whatever source) will be easier to sell and in terms of protecting the bass resource, mortality levels are more important than discards.
Stock assessment.
The Review confirms that trawl catches of bass are “small and infrequent” and are taken from “offshore waters whereas bass tend to be located in the inshore zone”. The notion of using such haphazard catches for stock assessment purposes borders on the bizarre.
Overarching objective of proposals.
The Consultation Paper was headed: Proposals for the introduction of Regulations for Protection & Conservation of Sea bass. Consultation documents stated: “Sea Bass is important to our angling community and is considered a prize fishery by this group and sea angling for Sea Bass could provide an additional opportunity for the development of angling within some parts of our waters and could enhance income to our coastal communities through chartered fishing trips for both local and European fishers and an increase in angling tourism.” and: “It has been proposed that the species should be reserved for recreational angling by adopting measures similar to those already existing in the Republic of Ireland”.
The Regulatory Impact Assessment included that Recreational Sea Angling in NI is already valued at £7.4 million. The original intention of the proposals was to harmonise bass legislation with that in Southern Ireland where the species is managed as a tourism driver.
However, the Review at paragraph 30, now introduces the entirely new idea that the proposals are about conserving bass stocks until such times as they improve, when restrictions on commercial exploitation could be reviewed. So, should these proposals eventually contribute to bass becoming more abundant, the notion of developing a sustainable valuable recreational sea angling sector as a tourism driver is now replaced with the idea of developing a commercial bass fishery.
The goal posts have been moved during the Consultation process.
BASS hopes that the RSA community, whether BASS members or not, will make written representation. BASS believes individual letters, no matter how short, are far more influential than petitions. Letters can focus on as many or as few issues as you wish, but the three most crucial messages are:
1. That no exemptions for trawled bass should be made because such exemptions will undermine the purpose of the proposals
2. That the original objective – development of a sustainable recreational bass fishery as a tourism driver – should be adhered to since this provides the best societal value from the public sea bass resource
3. That harmonisation of sea bass legislation across the island of Ireland is highly desirable.
The following is a template for your letter, and can be amended to include your own words, which will, as said before, achieve greater impact.
Dear Minister or Committee Clerk
I write regarding the DARDNI 2010 Consultation on the proposals to replicate bass management legislation, as exists in the Republic of Ireland, across Northern Ireland. I am encouraged by the conclusions but feel there has been an apparent change to the whole purpose of the original proposal.
It was my understanding that the original intention of the proposal was to harmonise bass legislation with that in Southern Ireland thereby having the ability to further develop a sustainable, valuable recreational sea angling sector as a tourism driver.
This proposal will be undermined if any exemptions are made regarding commercial fishing and the idea of developing a commercial bass fishery, as and when stocks improve.
Why have you included this in your proposal? No mention was made of this in the original consultation process. I feel that as a recreation sea angler I deserve an answer to this question. Your own document included the wording ‘Prohibition of fishing for bass by any means other than rod and line’ and ‘Prohibition on the retention on board of bass by any UK sea fishing vessel within the Northern Ireland zone.’
The inclusion of the words ‘could be reviewed’ in paragraph 30 of the Review completely undermines the spirit of the original proposal. Justify this to me.
Yours Sincerely
Letters should be sent to both the Minister and the Committee.
Contact details are:
Minister Michelle O’Neil.
Dept. of Agriculture and Rural Development,
Dundonald House,
Upper Newtownards Rd.,
Ballymiscaw,
Belfast,
BT4 3SB.
Email: private.office@dardni.gov.uk
Committee Clerk,
Committee for Agriculture and Rural Development,
Room 412,
Parliament Building,
Ballymiscaw,
Stormont,
Belfast
BT4 3XX
Email: committee.agriculture@niassembly.gov.uk
If possible copies should also be sent to:
Northern Ireland Tourist Board,
59 North Street,
Belfast.
BT1 1NB
Loughs Agency,
22 Victoria Road,
Londonderry,
BT47 2AB
BASS response.
Dear Minister,
Re: The Consultation on proposals to implement legislation for capture/retention of bass in NI so as to harmonise with existing legislation in Southern Ireland.
It has been bought to my attention that the long awaited decision (Consultation period ended August last year) is available at:
and it is the outcome of these deliberations that I write about.
We are of course very pleased that the Dept. has concluded that the 2 bass bag limit per day should go ahead and that the closed season 15th May to 15th June be adopted.
We are also pleased that the Dept. supports the proposal for a general prohibition on sale of bass, a prohibition of fishing for bass with any other metier than rod & line (incl. handline) and a prohibition on retention on board of bass by any licensed vessel.
As one of the lead organisations for recreational sea anglers who are interested in bass, we will be pleased to broadcast these results across Europe and have no doubt that Northern Ireland will be added to those destinations that are already regarded as worthwhile to visit for bass angling. There are hundreds of thousands of sea anglers in Europe who regard bass as their favourite species to target.
We are however perplexed that in respect of the last three measures, it is proposed to exempt trawlers.
The rationale appears to be a concern about discards and the idea that commercial landings are the only available option for stock assessments.
The document draws attention to the very low numbers of bass being landed commercially in NI – 17 kilos in 2009. The very low quantities of bass being caught commercially in NI are also detailed in the RIA that accompanied the original announcement of the Consultation in early 2010.
Given the thousands of tonnes of fish that are annually discarded in UK waters, the Department’s concerns about as little as 17 kilos of bass being discarded annually seems a little exaggerated. It is not at all certain that the current debate in respect of discards and the 2012 Common Fisheries Policy reform will result in a total ban on discards. One key issue is the possibility that a proportion of discards, under some circumstances, do survive. Bass are a hardy species, unlike some pelagic species, and a proportion of the very low numbers of bass that are captured by NI trawlers, may survive if returned.
The departments conclusions make the entirely valid points that commercial trawl bass catches are “small and infrequent” and are taken ‘offshore waters whereas sea bass tend to be located in the inshore zone.�� Yet despite the foregoing, the department holds these catches out as the only means available for stock assessment purposes.
With respect, we suggest that such a profile of haphazard commercial landings is most definitely not suitable for stock assessment purposes. If the NI authorities wish to monitor bass stocks, a simple logbook system for recreational anglers who fish the inshore zone, is a far superior method. We would be pleased to provide you with information on how such a scheme might operate.
Reports of wild bass in the supply chain (fishmongers, restaurant etc) that might initiate enquiries into the illegal capture and marketing of bass (where no import documentation is provided), facilitates enquiries in the Republic which is why, when commercial interests in the Republic recently tried to have their existing legislation modified so as to allow trawl catches to be legally landed, Inland Fisheries Ireland http://www.fisheriesireland.ie/ opposed any relaxation that would allow commercial landings of bass because of the difficulties such action would create for enforcement. In NI, any wild bass on sale will simply be passed off as originating from trawlers. This ‘loop hole’ will make enforcement all the more difficult.
The most worrying aspect of the latest deliberations by the department however is the idea outlined in para 25 that “If the stock were to grow significantly the measures restricting commercial fishing could be reviewed.”
The original purpose of these proposals included:
“Sea Bass is important to our angling community and is considered a prize fishery by this group and sea angling for Sea Bass could provide an additional opportunity for the development of angling within some parts of our waters and could enhance income to our coastal communities through chartered fishing trips for both local and European fishers and an increase in angling tourism.”
The RIA included information that Recreational Sea Angling in NI is already valued at £7.4 million and if sport fishing for bass (Europe’s most treasured sea angling species) in NI can be developed, and it most certainly would if stocks of bass improve, the best possible return from the public sea bass fishery resource is without question using it as a tourism driver. In other parts of the globe where stocks of marine species have flourished, levels of recreational sea angling for those species have increased directionally proportional to the improvement in stocks and in the case of striped bass on the east coast of the USA, their coastal economy had benefited from a seven fold increase in both stocks and economic impacts between 1985 and 1996. Even a very modest increase to the existing £7.4 million recreational sea angling spend would absolutely dwarf any economic impacts from using any improvement to NI bass stocks for commercial fishing.
Before we broadcast the results of the DARDNI sea bass Consultation, could you please respond to the two key issues that we know will be of major concern to the recreational sea angling community – 1) how enforcement will be achieved with the presence of legal wild bass in the supply chain and 2) an explanation of why initially these measures appeared to be driven by a desire to achieve greater levels of sea angling tourism but now appear to be directed at improving bass stocks with a view to establishment of a commercial fishery.
Yours sincerely,
I Misselbrook
Chairman
cc. Northern Ireland Tourist Board, 59 North Street, Belfast. BT1 1NB
Loughs Agency, 22 Victoria Road, Londonderry, BT47 2AB
|
http://sussexanglingmedia.blogspot.com/ Thursday, 10 November 2011New angling festival is launchedLocal groups, including Sussex Angling, are launching a new angling initiative in Bexhill – the Rother Angling Festival. There are is a lot of work to be done (and money to be raised) before it becomes a relaity but this, as the text from the press release below states, could be a really exciting new development for anglers. More on this in due course. Sea angling poised to become big business in Sussex tourismSea angling could become an even bigger tourism draw on a 15-mile stretch of the Sussex coast after local anglers and the district council announced a new fishing festival and a voluntary code of conduct for angling. Earlier in the year Rother District Council talked to local anglers and businesses and decided on the code instead of amendments to byelaws to ensure all beach users could enjoy the sea all-year round. This spirit of cooperation has now also led to the two organisations creating the first Bexhill Sea Fishing Festival in September next year. The code of conduct for anglers was agreed by Rother’s cabinet on Monday (7 November). Councillor Martin Kenward said it would be one of the first produced jointly by a council and local anglers and clearly underlined how anglers and the Council had been working together. “Rother and its sea angling community will be seen to be leading the way in good practice,” he added. The fishing festival is a direct outgrowth of the agreement with the anglers. “It will send the message that Rother is angling-friendly,” said Councillor Kenward who is the lead councillor for culture, sport and tourism. The nine-day festival (September 15 – 23) will include five open competitions for beach and boat anglers including one with one for angling kayakers, one of the fastest growing water sports in England. There will be an open boat competition, a five-day competition for beach anglers to catch specific fish species, a one-day beach competition and a hunt for the best bass caught from the beach. Stalls on Bexhill seafront’s newly built park and exhibition space will give fish preparation and cooking demonstrations and sell fish dishes. Individuals and families will be encouraged to try sea angling through coaching clinics. The sea angling code of conduct which will be posted on beaches throughout Rother next year will ask anglers to: *Respect all other beach users’ space and safety*Fish elsewhere if the beach is crowded or people are swimming *Use a shock leader, check all around before casting and keep rigs out of reach *Take all rubbish away including unwanted tackle and bait*Only take fish to be eaten and carefully place other fish back in the sea *If anglers clean their catches please take the waste off the beach *Be considerate to local residents when parking or leaving late at night For details please contact Steve Hanks at Hook, Line and Sinker, telephone 01424 733 211 e-mail stevehanks100@msn. |
 Thursday 10th November 2011For immediate release. |
 |
To view this email in your web browser click HERE. will be leading the call to raise the minimum landing size of bass to 48cmThe meeting, on Thursday November 17th, is open to all members of the public and will be held at Bournemouth Town Hall. The TAC will then report to the full Southern IFCA committee at their next public meeting at 2.00pm on Thursday 15th December in the Council Chamber, Poole Civic Centre. The full committee have the power to make a byelaw to change the bass MLS in its area. Again, this meeting is open to all members of the public as observers. The Bass Anglers’ Sportfishing Society, with support from the Angling Trust, will be leading the call for the committee to raise the minimum landing size to 48cm – the size needed to ensure that a bass taken at any time of year should have spawned at least once. If you can, make sure you attend these meetings and show the local authority the level of support there is for these proposals from anglers. For more information visit www.ukbass.com and www.southern-ifca.gov.uk To contact the Angling Trust please email admin@anglingtrust.net or call 0844 77 00 616 (Option 1) Help support Angling’s representative body and our work fighting for anglers, fish and fishing by clicking HERE to forward this email to a friend or colleague.
To view this email in your web browser click HERE. Picture Credit: Bass picture © Cefas. |
Trials show fishermen can drastically reduce discards
Published: 07 November, 2011
The dreadful waste of thousands of tonnes of dead fish being thrown back into the sea every day could be stopped if fishermen are required to count all the fish they catch as part of their quota, pioneering UK trials have shown.
Published today, the report shows that fishermen taking part in the UK’s Catch Quota trials have stopped throwing away fish.
Its findings add weight to the UK Government’s calls for drastic reform of Europe’s broken and wasteful Common Fisheries Policy.
Fisheries Minister Richard Benyon said: “At the moment European policy allows fishermen to catch an unlimited about of fish, provided they don’t bring more than their quota back to port. This gives them no choice but to throw thousands of tonnes of perfectly edible fish back into the sea every day.
This is a disgrace, it’s no good for the future of our fish stocks and no good for fishermen trying to make a living.
“The UK Government is clear that the Common Fisheries policy is broken and needs drastic reform.
We came forward with a practical solution of counting what they catch not what they land, and now we’ve shown that it works.
“This evidence will be invaluable as we continue to fight for radical reform of this outdated and wasteful European policy.
The UK is leading the way and the rest of Europe needs to step up and follow our example.”
Under current European Commission rules fishing boats are given quotas for landing different types of fish in a specific area.
If they go over their allowance they can continue to fish as long as they don’t land any more of that quota fish – leading to perfectly edible fish being thrown overboard.
Catch Quota trials began in the UK in 2010 and were expanded in early 2011 to include English fishermen catching West Channel sole as well as cod in the North Sea.
Boats taking part have to land all of the fish of these species that they catch so they all count against their quota.
Once the quota is used up they have to stop fishing completely.
Onboard monitoring, including CCTV cameras, checks whether they are following the rules.
Trial manager Julian Roberts, from the Marine Management Organisation who manage the trial on behalf of Defra, said: “Fishermen in the trial are demonstrating that they can avoid catching small, low value fish which might otherwise be discarded.
“They tend to be more selective in choosing their fishing grounds and introducing better gear that targets only larger fish.
This can only be good news for the fishing industry’s sustainable future.”
The report, published today by the Marine Management Organisation, shows that fishermen involved in the trials are discarding less than one per cent of the cod and sole they catch.
This is far less than the 21 per cent average across the EU for North Sea cod and the estimated nine per cent of sole discarded by all English and Welsh vessels in the Western Channel.
Catches of undersized fish in the trial are also low, suggesting that boats are fishing more selectively.
The UK will work to secure additional quota in this year’s negotiations on total allowable catches and quotas so that trials can be expanded to enable more vessels to participate and to test the system in other fisheries.
This evidence will be used as the UK pushes to improve proposals to reform the Common Fisheries Policy put forward by the European Commission earlier this year.
The UK is fighting for a more transparent and decentralised approach where fishermen themselves help solve problems such as discards, rather than one-size-fits-all regulation.
The full report is available at http://www.marinemanagement.org.uk/fisheries/monitoring/documents/cqt_interim.pdf
http://www.fishingworld.com.au/news/blog-my-last-hurrah-fishing-wa
My last hurrah – fishing WA!
11 Aug 2011
By Martin Salter
IN August last year, once it became known that I was Britain’s former Parliamentary Angling Spokesman, I was asked to give evidence to the New South Wales Parliamentary Inquiry into Recreational Fishing on the controversial issue of angling bans in Marine Parks. Instead of enjoying the relative obscurity of a fishing sabbatical Down Under, I found myself thrust into the limelight once again and agreed to prepare a report on the challenges facing recreational fishing in Australia. My report, Keep Australia Fishing was published in April and received a positive reception from industry leaders in both Australia and New Zealand.
Now I don’t regret plunging back into the confused world of recreational fishing politics for one moment. It was a way by which I could put something back into the sport we all love and say thank you for the great hospitality and friendship I received from Aussie fishos, not to mention some pretty fine fish that were put my way. The bulk of my experiences, both fishing and political, may have been forged on the other side of the world but it is striking how similar are the challenges and the issues.
Given that Australia has three million plus anglers in a population of a little over 20 million, it struck me as surprising that recreational fishing hasn’t been given greater attention by the two main political parties until now. The last minute federal election statement by Julia Gillard playing down the prospects of further extensions to the Marine Parks programme clearly came too late to prevent a voter backlash against a number of sitting Labor members. Australian anglers have viewed with understandable trepidation the onward march of the Greens who have made no secret of their desire to close 30 per cent or more of territorial waters to all forms of fishing. Shedloads of votes are now going to the newly formed Fishing and Lifestyle and Shooters and Fishers parties.
Not that I think that special interest minority parties are the way forward in the long term. As a protest vote, fair enough, but there is a risk of marginalising a sport and a lifestyle whose interests should be front and centre of mainstream politics. The fact that people in New Zealand, Queensland and New South Wales even feel the need to form and vote for specific pro-fishing parties is, in my view, an admission of failure by the political establishment and an expression of frustration and powerlessness by angling community.
This is in marked contrast to the USA and in the UK where all the main political parties readily signed up to a joint Manifesto for Angling produced by the countries’ national peak angling body, The Angling Trust, and where anglers themselves are engaged in the process of designating Marine Conservation Zones and developing policy.
I can’t believe we are still arguing the toss over the principle of a fishing licence. We gave up the idea on the idea of the “inexhaustible sea” free to all (including foreign trawlers) about a hundred years ago when we adopted territorial waters, bag and size limits and quotas. We accept that this a resource that we can screw up or that we can manage, protect an enhance for future generations. This means employing professionals, creating revenue streams and delivering powerful advocacy on behalf of rec fishers. The days of the well meaning amateur are long gone. Welcome to the world of users pays/user benefits and to the political reality that No Pay = No Say.
I like to think I’ve put together a major piece of work on how the recreational fishing sector can get itself “fit for purpose” and better able to punch its weight politically in order to face down the very real threats to our sport. These are not just from extreme greens, dumb politicians or even marine parks. For angling to survive and prosper we need improved water quality and habitat and an end to harmful farming practices and the dumping of pesticides and chemicals in our rivers and estuaries. Unsustainable commercial fishing methods must also be challenged and we need to promote recreational fishing havens and rec only species. We need professional advocacy part funded through a ring fenced licence levy and most importantly of all, we must redouble our efforts to encourage young people to forsake their computer games for a day on the water.
It’s all there in my Keep Australia Fishing report which looks at how these challenges have been successfully met elsewhere and applies them to the Australian context. You’ll find more information on the report and can download it here.
Sadly, I’ve had to return to the riot torn streets of Britain but have agreed to do what I can to help the cause of angling in both countries. Before I left I was pleased to get the opportunity to visit WA to help out with their marine park campaign and to sample some of the great fishing that is to be had over there. My trips out with Al Bevan of Shikari Charters for the mighty samson fish and big snapper of Rottnest and with Bernie Vale on the Mahi Mahi 11 for the Ningaloo Reef sailfish were up there with the best experiences I’ve had in your wonderful country.
I hope to be back soon and in the meantime will be keeping you abreast of some of the important issues from around the world that affect our sport through a regular blog courtesy of Mr Harnwell of this parish.
Stay lucky!
He’s Back! 
: World’s oceans in ‘shocking’ decline
Thanks to the BBC for this item. To see the full article, including pictures, follow the link:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13796479
20 June 2011 Last updated at 13:24
World’s oceans in ‘shocking’ decline
By Richard Black Environment correspondent, BBC News
Coral reefs are subject to “multiple stressors” that could destroy many within a human generation
The oceans are in a worse state than previously suspected, according to an expert panel of scientists.
In a new report, they warn that ocean life is “at high risk of entering a phase of extinction of marine species unprecedented in human history”.
They conclude that issues such as over-fishing, pollution and climate change are acting together in ways that have not previously been recognised.
The impacts, they say, are already affecting humanity.
The panel was convened by the International Programme on the State of the Ocean (IPSO), and brought together experts from different disciplines, including coral reef ecologists, toxicologists, and fisheries scientists.
Its report will be formally released later this week.
“The findings are shocking,” said Alex Rogers, IPSO’s scientific director and professor of conservation biology at Oxford University.
“As we considered the cumulative effect of what humankind does to the oceans, the implications became far worse than we had individually realised.
“We’ve sat in one forum and spoken to each other about what we’re seeing, and we’ve ended up with a picture showing that almost right across the board we’re seeing changes that are happening faster than we’d thought, or in ways that we didn’t expect to see for hundreds of years.”
These “accelerated” changes include melting of Arctic sea ice and the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets, sea level rise, and release of methane trapped in the sea bed.
But more worrying than this, the team noted, are the ways in which different issues act synergistically to increase threats to marine life.
Some pollutants, for example, stick to the surfaces of tiny plastic particles that are now found in the ocean bed.
This increases the amounts of these pollutants that are consumed by bottom-feeding fish.
Plastic particles also assist the transport of algae from place to place, increasing the occurrence of toxic algal blooms – which are also caused by the influx of nutrient-rich pollution from agricultural land.
In a wider sense, ocean acidification, warming, local pollution and overfishing are acting together to increase the threat to coral reefs – so much so that three-quarters of the world’s reefs are at risk of severe decline.
Carbon deposits
Life on Earth has gone through five “mass extinction events” caused by events such as asteroid impacts; and it is often said that humanity’s combined impact is causing a sixth such event.
Some marine fish are already fished way beyond their limits – and may also be affected by other threats
The IPSO report concludes that it is too early to say definitively.
But the trends are such that it is likely to happen, they say – and far faster than any of the previous five.
“What we’re seeing at the moment is unprecedented in the fossil record – the environmental changes are much more rapid,” Professor Rogers told BBC News.
“We’ve still got most of the world’s biodiversity, but the actual rate of extinction is much higher [than in past events] – and what we face is certainly a globally significant extinction event.”
The report also notes that previous mass extinction events have been associated with trends being observed now – disturbances of the carbon cycle, and acidification and hypoxia (depletion of oxygen) of seawater.
Levels of CO2 being absorbed by the oceans are already far greater than during the great extinction of marine species 55 million years ago (during the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum), it concludes.
Blue planet
The report’s conclusions will be presented at UN headquarters in New York this week, when government delegates begin discussions on reforming governance of the oceans.
In the long run, greenhouse gas emissions must be cut to conserve ocean life, the report concludes
IPSO’s immediate recommendations include:
- stopping exploitative fishing now, with special emphasis on the high seas where currently there is little effective regulation
- mapping and then reducing the input of pollutants including plastics, agricultural fertilisers and human waste
- making sharp reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.
Carbon dioxide levels are now so high, it says, that ways of pulling the gas out of the atmosphere need to be researched urgently – but not using techniques, such as iron fertilisation, that lead to more CO2 entering the oceans.
“The challenges for the future of the ocean are vast; but unlike previous generations, we know what now needs to happen,” said Dan Laffoley, marine chair of the World Commission on Protected Areas and an adviser to the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN).
“The time to protect the blue heart of our planet is now.”
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/nature/uk-should-be-made-to-restock-fishing-waters-2294936.html
“THANKS TO THE INDEPENDENT”
UK ‘should be made to restock fishing waters’
By Lewis Smith
Thursday, 9 June 2011
The UK and other European countries must be forced by law to restock their seas to give the fishing industry a long-term future, the European Fisheries Commissioner demanded yesterday.
Click HERE to view graphic (131k jpg)
Maria Damanaki told an audience of ministers and environmentalists in London that fish stocks are so depleted there needs to be a legal obligation to improve numbers.
Britain and other nations signed a pledge in Johannesburg in 2002 to restock overfished areas and maintain healthy marine populations by 2015, but many targets look set to be missed.
The deal was non-binding and Ms Damanaki believes that if the targets are to be met, EU countries need to be legally obliged to meet them.
Addressing the Globe World Oceans Day Forum, held at Selfridges department store, she warned that Europe was years behind the US and other major countries in managing its fisheries sustainably.
Rapid and far-reaching reform of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) was needed if the UK and the rest of the EU were to catch up, she added.
The commissioner said: “The US, Australia, New Zealand and Norway are already way ahead of us in adopting modern, sustainable policies that deliver good results for the industry and the oceans.
“Though we import 42 per cent of the global trade in fish, Europe is a big fishing power. We simply cannot afford to be so far behind on sustainability.”
Ms Damanaki wants to see stocks allowed to recover and for fishermen to be allowed to catch only sustainable quantities. Fishing quotas are supposed to ensure stocks remain healthy but ministers routinely override scientific advice and set quota levels higher than they ought to.
The commissioner added: “In the EU, too many stocks are overfished and catches are only a fraction of what they used to be in the 90s and are still dipping year after year.”
Without action, stocks would continue to fall – and declining catches would cause job losses among fishermen, processors, transport companies and retailers, she warned.
In calling for reform of the CFP, Ms Damanaki wants the UK and other EU countries to be given more control over how their fisheries are run instead of being dictated to by Brussels. Europe’s “obese” fishing fleets, she insisted, must be reduced further.
“If we get it right, Europeans will have a more ample choice of fresh fish – wild and farmed fish,” she said.
“More fish available to consumers means higher intakes of essential fatty acids, which are necessary for good brain and heart functioning. Brain and heart-related diseases are blowing up our healthcare budgets and in the long run, fish consumption can contribute to reduce the pressure.”
The reforms may include halting the practice of discarding fish at sea, demanded by the Fish Fight campaign led by celebrity chef Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall. Ms Damanaki said she would put forward more detailed proposals over the summer.
UK Fisheries minister Richard Benyon said halting the “scandalous” practice of discards would be one of the key elements of a reformed CFP.
He said: “Reform… will not be seen as credible unless we deliver a way to eliminate discarded fish and I will be doing all I can to deliver the ambitious reform that the Government and the public want to see.
“Europe has a hugely important role to play in the global governance of fish stocks, so we must make sure that the CFP pursues the same principles of sustainability and fairness outside its waters too.”
Fishing in numbers
72 per cent of Europe’s fish stocks are believed to be overexploited, compared with 32 per cent worldwide.
20 per cent of European fisheries are being plundered so intensively the stock could die out.
3 Some parts of Europe’s fishing fleet are estimated to be three times the size needed to catch the available quota.
17kg The average person’s annual consumption of fish worldwide. In Europe it is 22.2kg.
42 per cent of the world’s fish imports were bought by Europe in 2008 – costing £27.8bn.
30 per cent is the cut in the European bluefin tuna quota since 2006, in response to shortages in the Mediterranean.
IRISH SEA ROUND ONE OFFSHORE WIND FARM ZONE
Details of the demersal fishing surveys to be carried out in the Irish Sea
Wind Power Fishing Survey March 2011
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Begins National Survey of the Economic Contributions of Saltwater Angling
Proposed survey of economic benefits of saltwater angling