Seal Cull

[Chris Chapman]

One idea to support both the seals and the UK fishermen would be to stop non UK fishing vessels working the seas around the British Isles. (including EU boats).

I seem the remember that the right to fish UK waters was allowed when we joined the EEC (Common market) as the polititians missed the small print and didn't want to make an issue out of it. Leading to the arrival of the Spanish and French boats. (Does anyone know if the recent enlargement of the EU ((which we have never been given a vote on)) has given any of the newest member nations rights to take fish from our waters?)

Just a thought!

(Stepping down from soap box now)

Chris (I thought I'd put in a smile, but on looking, saw that even the sign for money was a Euro!)

[chrisch]

Originally Posted by Chris Chapman

I seem the remember that the right to fish UK waters was allowed when we joined the EEC (Common market) as the polititians missed the small print and didn't want to make an issue out of it. Leading to the arrival of the Spanish and French boats.

When we joined the Common Market (as it was then) there were two zones. Inshore waters and common waters. Somewhere like the Farnes would be "inshore". At the time it was IIRC 12 miles from the coast.

The area now considered EU waters is controlled by the common fisheries policy (CFP). However, as some of this is considered "international" by other countries its a bit of a dog's breakfast.

Other coutries, notably Russia, have had their "share" from these areas as well. Norway's refusal to join makes some of the North Sea part of the disputed bits.

The "inshore" thing got overuled/ignored as the fish began to run out. So to your post - this actually happened after joining the common market not upon joining.

End effect is the same.

Many UK fishermen sold their quota to the Spanish boats, so while the Spaniards are the "bête noire" the UK fisherman have played their part too..

Getting back national waters would be like unscrambling an egg.

The solution to overfishing is a moritorium on commercial fishing and the designation of no-take zones to allow stocks to recover. Again, a bit like the environment, no-one cares until it is too late. Root and branch reform of the CFP is a big and difficult project. Much better to occupy one's self at EU meetings with the introduction of daft valves for nitrox tanks

As to new entrant states, yes they will be given fishing rights but in return we gain rights to their waters. The provision of fishery quotas to land-locked states is another of those things to remind you that politicians are best not trusted to actually run anything....

Chris

[JasonP]

Originally Posted by chrisch

Many UK fishermen sold their quota to the Spanish boats, so while the Spaniards are the "bête noire" the UK fisherman have played their part too..

It wasn't really that many. Although the Spanish boats get a lot of the blame, and deservedly so in other parts of the world particularly Africa, their catch in UK waters isn't that high. In an article I read on the BBC website a while ago, it stated that over 90% of the UK catch is by UK fishermen. And of course UK tuna fishing boats operate in Spanish waters. It's not all one way.

Jason

[chrisch]

I think the Spanish get a lot of flak as they land undersize fish and were caught with false holds and the like. But you make a good point Jason.

The pillage of African fisheries by EU boats (owned by large companies and multi-nationals that are part of most folks pension investments..) is utterly disgusting.

All subsidised by you and I....

Chris

[Colin Marriott]

I was having a quick look around the internet to see what impact previous seal culls had had on fish stocks . . . . but didn't come up with anything . . . . if someone else can comment of this?



ColinM

[chrisch]

Originally Posted by Colin Marriott

I was having a quick look around the internet to see what impact previous seal culls had had on fish stocks . . . . but didn't come up with anything . . . . if someone else can comment of this?

I think the disconnect between the seal population and fish stocks is too great for a clear conclusion. Cod for example are most a migratory species with a five year maturity. So you would need to shoot the seals then wait five years.. plus to be sure you need a control..

Shooting the animals will stop them eating the fish, but that may simply result in more fish being caught by homo sapiens and so fish stock impact is neutral.

Of course the fisherman simply want to catch the fish the seals eat - not preserve the stocks.

When I was in my late teens there were several culls in the Wash and around N Norfolk. Apart from providing a bit of pocket money to the shooting community I don't think they achieved anything for the fish but they did reduce the seal population drastically. Seals are instrumental in spreading many fish parasites and I'm sure the fish benefited from this, but it probably didn't make much odds in terms of the fish breeding.

Chris

[principia]

Originally Posted by chrisch

I think the Spanish get a lot of flak as they land undersize fish and were caught with false holds and the like. But you make a good point Jason.

The pillage of African fisheries by EU boats (owned by large companies and multi-nationals that are part of most folks pension investments..) is utterly disgusting.

All subsidised by you and I....

Chris

Its not just the Spanish landing black catches Whitby fleet fined pounds 122,800 for defying North Sea quotas Independent, The (London) - Find Articles

J.

[chrisch]

Indeed. Sad though that the fines were so small.

The entire fishing industry is contemptuous of the regulations so it ignores them where it thinks it can get away with it. Sadly, the regulations are laughable so this is somewhat understandable.

The end result is the current free-for-all.

Chris

[Richard Mason]

Originally Posted by chrisch

Indeed. Sad though that the fines were so small.

The entire fishing industry is contemptuous of the regulations so it ignores them where it thinks it can get away with it. Sadly, the regulations are laughable so this is somewhat understandable.

The end result is the current free-for-all.

Chris

I'm not in the UK to have any direct knowledge of these issues, but I understand that wrt quotas in particular, this has resulted in ridiculous situations, where netted fish are returned dead to the sea because they fall outside a boat's individual quota, meaning that the imposition of quotas may acyually have resulted in an increase in fish mortality as a whole, as the fishermen are throwing back 50%, 60%, 70% (pick a number) of what they catch but can't land, in pursuit of small numbers of the target species.

Quotas have been successful in my part of the world with crayfish but these are trapped live rather than netted and the little fellas and non target spec ies can easily be returned live to the water. In this case, the imposition of quotas actually mean't more money for less effort, as the fishermen can concentrate ther fishing efforts at times when the wharf price for crayfish were highest (eg Xmas, Summer hols and Easter), thus taking less crays (which benefits the fishery) whilst getting the same or sometimes, more money, for less time & diesel.....but I digress, this isn't really applicable, unless you were talking crab/lobster fishers.

It seems to me that the only way to really conserve stocks, including "by-catch", much of which is perfectly edible and economically as well as ecologically important, is to reduce actual fishing effort either by reducing the number of boats, or the hours each one spends at sea. It does seem ridiculous that dead bycatch can't be landed but beyond that, how you fix it without making some really hard decisions, I don't know.

As for culling seals, I certainly don't agree with this idea and I'll recount a simple story; here in Tasmania, until the 19th Century, we had massive Australian Fur Seal colonies up on the Bass Strait Islands, probably over 100,000 individuals, they co-existed with very rich fishing grounds, huge whale populations etc. These seals were decimated by sealers 150 yrs ago and came close to being wiped out.

Now, the population is back upto maybe 20,000 but there aren't anything like as many fish in the seas, human fishing pressure being the main cause of this.

From the viewpoint of a fisherman though, particularly in the longline or seine netting fishery, (ie non-trawl), seals present a particular problem in as much as they attack a significant precaution of the catch whilst it is in the net or on the hook. It isn't unknown for 30% of the fish boated here to have a huge bite taken out of it. You can't blame the seals for this, they are intelligent animals and like us, also opportunists; if they can catch a meal with little effort, then they will do so. This doesn't make the fisherman feel any better though and, I can understand why most fishermen would support culling of individual animals which have learned this behaviour in these circumstances.

Whilst any suggestions for seal culls need to be resisted at the highest level, (and I'm sure they will be), I think we need to at least understand some of the rationale of those would do this.

Richard M.

[Scrumbag]

Originally Posted by Timbo

Perhaps we could have a Chav cull?
Think of the problems it would solve,,,
Fish n chip sales would halve,,
None of them would breed,, giving rise to even less fish n chip consumption,,,
Gone would be the half eatens left strewn down our street !!!!

Sounds like a good, environmently sound, peice of social engineering!!

What a great idea! Has anyone noticed that the stupid are breeding much faster than the intelligent these days! The trend needs to be reversed!

But seriously, seal culls can be justified in certain areas as they can be particularly harmful to certain fish species, especially coastal migratories. Moderation is required and judgement.

Mike