Fish stocks in terminal decline?

[j4bberw0ck]

The recent report saying that fish stocks may be wiped out by the middle of the century has received a lot of attention in the media.

If overfishing is to blame, would it be practical to establish "no fishing" zones based on satellite surveillance (ah, cameras again :lol:) and GPS navigation? Positional beacons mounted on trawlers? In New Zealand they've very successfully established no-fish zones (admittedly round the coast rather than in mid-ocean) where a bay or inlet will be designated "no fishing"; marker poles define the boundary. If you fish there, you lose your fishing tackle - be it a rod, a dinghy, a boat, a trawler - and suffer a heavy fine. Those bays are stuffed with fish.... and no one fishes.

Why is it not possible to establish no-fish zones in the Atlantic, or the North Sea? A series of blocks, say 50 miles by 50 miles, in the North Sea and bigger blocks of say 100 by 100 miles in the Atlantic? With rigid enforcement and "lose your boat" penalties for fishing? No excuses (at all) for getting it wrong, and the heaviest penalties of all for turning off a beacon and fishing.

Would such an approach work? Is it to do with where fish breed? Presumably bigger fish like cod breed where they are rather than wandering into shallow coastal water....

Anyone have any thoughts?

[Naefearjustbeer]

A good start would be getting rid of Jonny Foreigner from our waters. Then imposing strict no fishing areas. These areas could then be monitored closley with a lose your boat type punishment as you have mentioned. I personally think a big part of the problem is not overfishing of cod and haddock. But the overfishing of other fish that these fis feed on. Puffins are dying because they are not getting enough sand eeel s to eat to survive. How many other species rely on sand eels for survival. Not point in protecting one fish when there is noting being done to make sure it has something to eat.

[willowbankbear]

The recent report saying that fish stocks may be wiped out by the middle of the century has received a lot of attention in the media.

If overfishing is to blame, would it be practical to establish "no fishing" zones based on satellite surveillance (ah, cameras again :lol:) and GPS navigation? Positional beacons mounted on trawlers? In New Zealand they've very successfully established no-fish zones (admittedly round the coast rather than in mid-ocean) where a bay or inlet will be designated "no fishing"; marker poles define the boundary. If you fish there, you lose your fishing tackle - be it a rod, a dinghy, a boat, a trawler - and suffer a heavy fine. Those bays are stuffed with fish.... and no one fishes.

Why is it not possible to establish no-fish zones in the Atlantic, or the North Sea? A series of blocks, say 50 miles by 50 miles, in the North Sea and bigger blocks of say 100 by 100 miles in the Atlantic? With rigid enforcement and "lose your boat" penalties for fishing? No excuses (at all) for getting it wrong, and the heaviest penalties of all for turning off a beacon and fishing.

Would such an approach work? Is it to do with where fish breed? Presumably bigger fish like cod breed where they are rather than wandering into shallow coastal water....

Anyone have any thoughts?

Overfishing for many years & a very weak government are big contributing factors to the current state of the fish stocks.

Im led to believe that all fishing vessels above 50ft have tracking systems in them so that they cannot go poaching in restricted areas, ie Sinclair Bay is an exclusion zone.

Exclusion zones would maybe work, but the fish dont stay in the same place all the time like humans do, they migrate in shoals all around the uk coast, but I see where yer coming from on that.

What about the Bad weather aspect of days at sea rules, tie ups didnt work the first time they were introduced, will they now?

Another thing is if the guys are not at sea, they are not getting paid, the bank manager isnt either, so off to sea they must go.

[golach]

A good start would be getting rid of Jonny Foreigner from our waters. Then imposing strict no fishing areas. These areas could then be monitored closley with a lose your boat type punishment as you have mentioned. I personally think a big part of the problem is not overfishing of cod and haddock. But the overfishing of other fish that these fis feed on. Puffins are dying because they are not getting enough sand eeel s to eat to survive. How many other species rely on sand eels for survival. Not point in protecting one fish when there is noting being done to make sure it has something to eat.
Jonny Foreigner? is that not what the Icelanders called us in 1960? I was onboard RFA Wave Ruler in the first Cod war when HMG sent Destroyers & Frigates into Icelandic waters to protect the plundering Hull & Grimsby fleets of trawlers, and what from? Two peedie wee boaties, the Thor and the Odin, and guess what, the Icelanders won, twice

[buggyracer]

Jonny Foreigner? is that not what the Icelanders called us in 1960? I was onboard RFA Wave Ruler in the first Cod war when HMG sent Destroyers & Frigates into Icelandic waters to protect the plundering Hull & Grimsby fleets of trawlers, and what from? Two peedie wee boaties, the Thor and the Odin, and guess what, the Icelanders won, twice


yes and who has all the fish now? iceland! through well managed closed fish stocks, each vessel must report as soon as they cacth immature stocks and that area is immeadiately closed, heavilly monitored with regular boardings at sea, failure to do so, vessels which land small fish are impounded in the harbour for 14-22 days and fined heavily, all facts, our problem is we have a government who doesent know what they are talking about and doesent want to know either!

We have some of the best fishermen in the world, and its a shame the government use them as a pawn!

[lassieinfife]

My brother was on one of them frigates..... they got rammed and ship was badly damaged.. he stills says it was the biggest waste of time and money,and that we were the intruders "johnny foreigner" .... funny it only apply 's to others

[willowbankbear]

The Cod Wars; did the uk government not back off because of NATO? Iceland was a stopoff for the U.S subs, or the NATO patrols were using Icelands waters for spying on the Russians.
Under pressure from Uncle Sam , the UK backed off & 20,000 fishermen lost their jobs. Iceland got to keep their 200mile limit preserve their stocks & now flood the Uk markets with their Cod.

[JAWS]

Golach, I remember it well. Weren't the Icelandic Fisheries Protection Vessels a couple of converted Fishing Boats?

The Thor was in collision with the bow of one of our top of the range, armed to the teeth, mighty Warships?
The Thor got a couple of scratches whilst our Warship, I can't remember it's name to save embarrassment, limped all the way home to have it's badly smashed nose fixed!

I still hang my head in shame at the thought. The pride of Her Majesty's Navy beaten up by a clapped out Trawler.
Don't Iceland still have their healthy Cod Stocks? I rather think they do since they stopped both us and others devastating their fishing grounds!

[j4bberw0ck]

The Icelanders kept their 200 mile zone because they aren't in the EU and they do have cojones. Also, they care about their fish stocks, are prepared to do things to protect them, and it's a small country of only 250,000 inhabitants with exclusive fishing rights to (3.14 x (200^2) square miles of some of the richest waters in the world. That's 125,600 square miles. No wonder the Icelanders are amongst the wealthiest people on the planet.

Membership of the EU (pop. 350 million) entitles lucky countries to share their coastal waters with other EU members..... hence the new and heavily subsidised Spanish supertrawlers, the sand eel dredgers and the rest.

<edit> on reflection, that figures assumes measurement from the middle of Iceland and doesn't take Iceland's area out of it. It doesn't work that way because the 200 miles starts at the coast. So if we assume Iceland is circular, radius 200 miles, and the 200 miles runs from the coast, the real figure would be for a doughnut shape - 376,800 square miles. Got to keep it right for when DrSzin visits...... :lol::lol: <edit> (hope it's right now - phew)

[willowbankbear]

The Icelanders kept their 200 mile zone because they aren't in the EU and they do have cojones;) . Also, they care about their fish stocks, are prepared to do things to protect them, and it's a small country of only 250,000 inhabitants with exclusive fishing rights to (3.14 x (200^2) square miles of some of the richest waters in the world. That's 125,600 square miles. No wonder the Icelanders are amongst the wealthiest people on the planet.

Membership of the EU (pop. 350 million) entitles lucky countries to share their coastal waters with other EU members..... hence the new and heavily subsidised Spanish supertrawlers, the sand eel dredgers and the rest.

The Norwegians are the class act sand eel catchers J4bberw0ck, also Spain is one of the biggest fish eating/catching nations(if not the biggest)on the planet. If my information serves me correctly, Spain did not have access to the North Sea until the 90`s(I think?) So to blame them for overfishing the North sea is a bit rich.
Ive seen it first hand, the slaughter of immature fish stocks, Pair trawl in the 80`s at Copinsay & the Skerries. 12 full cod ends of wee Haddock, the bulk of 600 box haul, slaughtered to pick out a grand total of 19 boxes for the 2 boats!!!!
This went on for 3 weeks 2 tows a day & we were only one Pair team, there were 3 others at the same bit of ground, add this up & you will soon begin to see why there are no fish left

[jaykay]

The Norwegians are the class act sand eel catchers J4bberw0ck, also Spain is one of the biggest fish eating/catching nations(if not the biggest)on the planet. If my information serves me correctly, Spain did not have access to the North Sea until the 90`s(I think?) So to blame them for overfishing the North sea is a bit rich.
Ive seen it first hand, the slaughter of immature fish stocks, Pair trawl in the 80`s at Copinsay & the Skerries. 12 full cod ends of wee Haddock, the bulk of 600 box haul, slaughtered to pick out a grand total of 19 boxes for the 2 boats!!!!
This went on for 3 weeks 2 tows a day & we were only one Pair team, there were 3 others at the same bit of ground, add this up & you will soon begin to see why there are no fish left

In other words the British fishermen are as much to blame as anyone else. No doubt they will of course blame it all on the seals and demand that we start to cull them to cure the problems with the fishing industry. I think not!

[willowbankbear]

In other words the British fishermen are as much to blame as anyone else. No doubt they will of course blame it all on the seals and demand that we start to cull them to cure the problems with the fishing industry. I think not!

Seals!!!! well they can shift a shoal or 2. When I started going out to sea in the early 80`s , you would be very lucky to see 1 seal in 2months, when I last went seine net fishing in 99 there were 6-7 Seals round the Cod end every time we hauled, inshore I counted 17 seals one haul but 10 was normal, So I do think the Fishermen have a valid point about a cull.

It would be a shame to see the end of Sammy in Wick Harbour though, he was a popular seal, we all used to feed him when we came into land, quite intelligent for a slug/seal

[scrapydoo]

In other words the British fishermen are as much to blame as anyone else. No doubt they will of course blame it all on the seals and demand that we start to cull them to cure the problems with the fishing industry. I think not!


Is their any nationality your not Anti ???????

[j4bberw0ck]

The Norwegians are the class act sand eel catchers J4bberw0ck, also Spain is one of the biggest fish eating/catching nations(if not the biggest)on the planet. If my information serves me correctly, Spain did not have access to the North Sea until the 90`s(I think?) So to blame them for overfishing the North sea is a bit rich

Sorry, WBB, that wasn't what I meant; I was getting at the government-aided expansion of the Spanish fishing fleet when they became able to fish in other countries' waters. The Spanish instituted a huge program of scrapping old boats and grant-aiding the construction of new ones. Whatever the circumstances (and I claim no expertise here - mostly, just what I can read on the Web, which isn't always the best source, and what I've seen reported in the media over the years) the Spanish aren't doing anyone any good. The EU has investigated Spain for illegal fuel subsidies to its fishing fleet, too.


Ive seen it first hand, the slaughter of immature fish stocks, Pair trawl in the 80`s at Copinsay & the Skerries. 12 full cod ends of wee Haddock, the bulk of 600 box haul, slaughtered to pick out a grand total of 19 boxes for the 2 boats!!!!

I've been told similar things here; diamond-mesh nets which catch everything, so 90% plus of a haul is chucked back dead because it's prohibited species / too small / too damaged / not commercially valuable.

And the same with square nets, too. It's the wastage that's outrageous.

[Naefearjustbeer]

My brother was on one of them frigates..... they got rammed and ship was badly damaged.. he stills says it was the biggest waste of time and money,and that we were the intruders "johnny foreigner" .... funny it only apply 's to others

No I would say the term could be aimed both ways if we intruded in other waters. Our goverment doesnt have the balls to stand up for our country and whats best for us. Obviosly Iceland has it sussed out.

[jaykay]

Is their any nationality your not Anti ???????
I am not anti any nationality. I was merely trying to point out that all the blame for the decline of fish stocks cannot be blamed entirely on the Spanish, French, Norweigan, Icelandic fishermen.

[j4bberw0ck]

The other factors affecting fish stocks are pollution and climate change (however it's caused). If cold water species like cod and haddock are forced northwards, then that introduces another problem. Maybe we'll be seeing North Sea tuna on the menu.......

But the Icelanders will be happy :lol:

[peter macdonald]

It was great to see W,Bears post which gives one part of the answer ie overfishing but there a few other factors 1)Global warming ie species such as cod which like "cooler" water will migrate North as the North Sea warms up Same thing happened in the 1960s off Greenland when because of some natural event causing the sea tempreture to heat up by abt 0.75 C the cod fishing collaped ..The cod had moved north under the ice cap 2) Pollution The only cod fishery operating in the Baltic (maybe its stopped by now) was mid water ie the cod were swimming well above the bottom as because of all the rubbish dumped in there the bottom is basically dead and the fish had to live mid way between the surface and the bottom ..Whats this to do with us ?? Well as WBear will tell you there used to be a very good fishery of plaice in the Moray Firth which disappeared almost overnight This conincided with the suspected dumping of waste from a large industrial site in Invergordon which had jut closed Plaice are not built for mid water survival!!! This is /was the theory of more than one Wick seine net skipper
One of the guys who dives of the North Head at Wick has also told me that the very pure waste been pumped in to the sea has made the sea bed around there totally barren (I dont know as I dont dive but Im not disputing his word) 3) Industrial fishing I think its safe to say sand eel fishing has/is been a disaster IMHO it should be totally banned but dont think it was only the Norwegians and Danes who persued this fishing It was also done by Scottish and English boats (The Transcend WK167 was in fact built for Fraserburgh owners as a sandeel boat) 4) Nature Fishing has always been fickle Herring as proved this from the earliest times such as its disappearance off the West Swedish coast in the 1600s Overfishing/pollution I think not
Its just another factor in a very complex problem which will need a lot of policital "cajones" , help from mother nature ,and a heck of a lot of luck to solve

[JAWS]

I'm not certain but didn't the EU change the Rules regarding fishing in the 80s or 90s which allowed any Country in Europe, including landlocked ones, to buy up Fishing Quotas from other Countries.

I'm not well up on Fishing but I seem to recall that our Government was pushing our Fishing Fleet to cut right back which allowed the Spanish to buy a lot of the Quota allocated to us as their own waters were fished out.
I know a deal has been done with Countries on the North Coast of Africa to allow the Spanish to raid their waters for fish.

I seem to remember the Canadians had to act rather quickly to block the Spanish from pulling the same stunt and Fishng their waters out.

[willowbankbear]

I'm not certain but didn't the EU change the Rules regarding fishing in the 80s or 90s which allowed any Country in Europe, including landlocked ones, to buy up Fishing Quotas from other Countries.

I'm not well up on Fishing but I seem to recall that our Government was pushing our Fishing Fleet to cut right back which allowed the Spanish to buy a lot of the Quota allocated to us as their own waters were fished out.
I know a deal has been done with Countries on the North Coast of Africa to allow the Spanish to raid their waters for fish.

I seem to remember the Canadians had to act rather quickly to block the Spanish from pulling the same stunt and Fishng their waters out.

You are correct Jaws, there were "companies" set up in Milford Haven, Truro, Fleetwood all for flag of convenience Trawlers. Ie the ships were registered in the Uk but Spanish owned.
The Trawlers /Longliners had to land in a UK port 4 or 5 times a year to keep the licence I think? So Milford usually had a Spanish Ship in every time we landed in there,All their fish went on a lorry straight over to Spain, I believe it is still the case when the Spanish liners land in Scrabster, straight to Vigo or La Corruna.
Most of their time fishing is on the edge of the shelf way out in the Atlantic & they are usually at sea for 30-40 days at a time:eek:

When I was younger , I was always told that the Russians were far worse than the Spaniards for catching power & totally raping the sea of everything in their big Trawlers. Little wonder they were banned from everywhere

[jambo]

what about technology.that is 1 of the biggest factors of no fish in the north sea.bigger boats bigger engines bigger nets better equipment in the wheelhouses. ps the crabs and lobsters are going the same way.