View Full Version : Enemy Within.
concerned resident
12-Jun-05, 16:02
Part of a section from the P&J.
A report by the European Commission showed the average fine applied to EU Fisherman who broke the rules was £3,130. But, in the UK average penalties were £52,000. This compares to an average of just £189 for Finnish fishermen. Who is the Fisherman’s friend or enemy?
And when the fishermen have overfished and there's no more fish in the sea to fish, what will it matter who the friends or enemies of fishermen might be? There'll be no fishermen left, after all.
concerned resident
12-Jun-05, 16:50
Drutt
You have missed your calling, you should have become a politician, or are you?
concerned resident
You didn't respond to my point. Do you think it's okay for fishermen to drive fish into extinction?
I don't think it's right that the sea should be over fished, but that wasn't what concerned resident was saying, was it?
I don't think it's right that the sea should be over fished, but that wasn't what concerned resident was saying, was it?
Large fines exist to deter overfishing, so my point is entirely relevant. 1+1=2, innit?
How're you doing katarina? We're doing a fair amount of thread jumping this weekend. :D
Margaret M.
12-Jun-05, 18:01
The penalties in all countries should be much more meaningful. Unless aggressive fishing practices are curtailed it is estimated that our oceans will be emptied of life by the year 2050. Countries with paltry fines are enemies to the fish and to the human race since they refuse to protect our largest and most diverse ecosystem, the ocean.
Yeah and they've locked the Stroma one! I don't think that's fair. We'd better start being nice to one another or we may find other threads blocked or deleted!
oops so's the new women's group one. Is it us, Drutt? I thought we were providing a little bit of entertainment on a cold windy Scottish summer.
I did a bit of googling out of sheer curiosity.
The inclusion of the average fine for Finnish fishermen seems disingenous (but there's a lot of that going about, it seems).
Let me explain why there's no point muttering over a £189 average fine for Finnish fishermen. Their fishing industry is small, largely because their low-salt water around their coast isn't the best environment for a thriving fishing industry. There are around 3,600 Finnish fishermen, landing around 120,000 tonnes annually. Only one third (i.e. 40,000 tonnes) of that is for human consumption. The rest is largely small herring (banned in most of Europe due to high levels of PCBs) which is fed to animals. I'd argue that the Finnish fishing industry would appear to be having a negligible effect on the sea's ecosystem.
In comparison, the UK's fishing industry employs around 22,000 people, and around 738,000 tonnes of fish are landed. Most of that is for human consumption. People in the UK have a taste for cod and it's being driven to extinction. A high fine to deter overfishing seems appropriate.
As far as I am concerned, the fines levied to UK fishermen should not be reduced. It is through these that the UK is acknowledging its responsibilities towards the sea's ecosystem.
If you feel that French, Spanish and Portuguese fishermen are getting advantageous conditions compared with UK, write to your MEP to express your concerns. I see a new European Fisheries Control Agency (http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2005/03/14164557) is due to be established next year. Why not ask your MEP what the Agency will be doing to level the playing field for European fishermen?
oops so's the new women's group one. Is it us, Drutt? I thought we were providing a little bit of entertainment on a cold windy Scottish summer.
I'm not sure how we can take a thread about fishing and whip it up into a frenzy. I don't think there are any sexed-up Downing Street dossiers on the fishing industry, so I'm not sure what we can argue passionately about. Any ideas?
Anyway, unlucky. The weather's been cracking down this way.
not on this thread. we seem to agree. Wow! Guess there's a first time for everything.
Oh no! guess now you're going to ask me to explain the word 'wow'
not on this thread. we seem to agree. Wow! Guess there's a first time for everything.
Oh no! guess now you're going to ask me to explain the word 'wow'
You're all right there, katarina, thanks for the offer but I already know the meaning of the word 'wow'. Truly I do. It means...
Slow variation in the pitch of a sound reproduction resulting from variations in the speed of the recording or reproducing equipment.*
*And I'm not kidding (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=wow). :p
I don't think it's right that the sea should be over fished, but that wasn't what concerned resident was saying, was it?
Quite right
The fishermen should just be allowed to get on with it. In a very short time it will be uneconomical to go to sea. That will allow the stocks to recover. By which time - the fishermen will have reaped what they have sowed (or not sowed, as it were) and the boats will be out of commission.
This is exactly what happened in the whaling industry - it wasn't that we suddenly developed a concience.
While I'm here - has anyone seen any fishing boat crewmembers departing the vessel with binbags of rubbish when the boat ties up?
Ever wondered what happened to all the rubbish they generate while at see?????
ironic_clans
13-Jun-05, 12:32
i think the point here is not that fines are disproportionate.... its the fact that the fines are being issued !! surely you cant defend a fisherman who has broken the law... if he didn't break it in the first place , he wouldn't be fined!
concerned resident
13-Jun-05, 15:53
What I was trying to point out, was the unequal playing field when it comes to enforcement, everybody is breaking the rules in Europe and paying small fines, which is little deterrent, while the British fisherman is hammered from Europe and Westminster,
This is peoples livelihoods, and what reply do I get, is that there will be no fish left, and its their own fault. No wonder Scotland hasn’t the guts to stand up for its self when Westminster expands England’s fishing grounds into Scottish waters, the Scottish people have been ruled from Westminster for so long, they are frightened to let go of the apron strings and stand up for themselves, and forum members are more interested in fish, than a man earning a living, to feed his family.
What I was trying to point out, was the unequal playing field when it comes to enforcement, everybody is breaking the rules in Europe and paying small fines, which is little deterrent, while the British fisherman is hammered from Europe and Westminster
I understood your point about the unequal playing field. I was suggesting that the playing field should be equalled appropriately, with consideration given to the fish being caught (e.g. Finnish fishermen shouldn't be fined as heavily for overfishing small herring as British fishermen for overfishing cod). I was being genuine when I suggested contacting your MEP with your concerns.
This is peoples livelihoods, and what reply do I get, is that there will be no fish left
Your point - this is people's livelihoods.
My point - this is the sea's ecosystem.
Both are valid points. I acknowledge our need to protect jobs, but we must look to the long-term prospects of the fishing industry, which won't exist if we drive fish into extinction. Do you acknowledge our responsibilities toward protecting fish stocks?
No wonder Scotland hasn’t the guts to stand up for its self when Westminster expands England’s fishing grounds into Scottish waters, the Scottish people have been ruled from Westminster for so long, they are frightened to let go of the apron strings and stand up for themselves
Oh, so we're not talking 'British fishermen' anymore? I hate to break it to you... there are no Scottish waters. Scotland is part of the UK... we don't get to blockade the seas with longboats and tell those 'foreigners' not to take our fish.
If you're going to dwell on the idea of the Scottish people being subjugated by Westminster, then I fear we'll make no progress on this issue. If you truly wanted this issue to be addressed, you'd acknowledge that the EU holds all the power when it comes to fishing.
Dwell on the English/Scottish water idea, and you'll fail to notice the Spanish fleet making away with all the fish. ;)
forum members are more interested in fish, than a man earning a living, to feed his family.
We've covered this. If our only concern is that fishermen get to earn a living to feed their families, and we fail to acknowledge the wider issues, then there will simply be no fishing industry in the long term.
we don't get to blockade the seas with longboats and tell those 'foreigners' not to take our fish.
Although I would pay good money to see it... perhaps it could be introduced as an annual event? :D
luskentyre
14-Jun-05, 01:28
This is peoples livelihoods, and what reply do I get, is that there will be no fish left, and its their own fault. No wonder Scotland hasn’t the guts to stand up for its self when Westminster expands England’s fishing grounds into Scottish waters, the Scottish people have been ruled from Westminster for so long, they are frightened to let go of the apron strings and stand up for themselves, and forum members are more interested in fish, than a man earning a living, to feed his family.
Excuse me for stating the obvious, but it might be a tad difficult to earn a living if there aren't any fish! Apart from that, there are more important things than earning a living you know. Please try and think about broader issues.
concerned resident
14-Jun-05, 12:19
Luskentyre
there are more important things than earning a living you know. Please try and think about broader issues.
You have to earn a living, to support a family and your self, unless you are rich, or wish to live off the state. Then you could afford to look at the broader issues, you need to get things in the right order. Sadly there are many people with your ideology, probably
why the country's, in the mess its in.
Concernedresident
this is what the good and hard done by Scottish fishermen have done to themselves!!!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4486347.stm
buggyracer
14-Jun-05, 12:58
IF scottish waters were kept for scottish fisherman, there would be a sustainable fishery for them and the greed culture of "i must catch all i can regardless" would be diminished as the threat of bigger newer more efficiant foreign boats would also be diminished. We have good fishing here if managed, why else would all the foreign boats want to come here if this wasnt the case??
They have ruined there own grounds now they are targetting ours!
Golach, when our troops were getting blasted to bits on the beaches of france and the great brittish government had no way of rescueing them, yes it was many of our hard done by fishermen who sailed the channel in there own boats to come to there rescue and often they never returned as didnt there craft and livelehood.
We can all point out examples of bad people in all walks of life but to tar all fisherman as cheats and crooks?? Thats like me saying just beacause i dont agree with your points on this board, then everyone who posts on here must be the same?? it doesent work does it??
The fact of the matter is our fishing industry used to be of importance to our govt. but today it means nothing, it was sold down the river around 25years ago!
What is good for one must be for another and if we are part of the EU then the people and work ethics from these member states MUST share the same benifits and drawbacks together, otherwise it is a farse??
What is good for one must be for another and if we are part of the EU then the people and work ethics from these member states MUST share the same benifits and drawbacks together, otherwise it is a farse??
Your post leaves me a little confused, buggyracer. You acknowledge that we're in the EU, and suggest that member states must share the same benefits, but then you talk of 'Scottish waters'? There are no 'Scottish waters'.
Even the SNP would wish Scotland to be independent but within the EU, subject to EU rules, and there would be no 'Scottish waters'. Even if we remained in the UK, and the UK withdrew from the EU, there would be no 'Scottish waters'. It doesn't exist.
The sea's ecosystem knows no nationalism. Fish are being driven to the extinction due to the failure of EU fishermen to recognise the importance of sustainability. No one nationality of fishermen is guilty of that. They're all guilty. Fishing activity has had to be curtained to sustain fish stocks and that's what quotas are for. Get over it.
Shouting from the rooftops about 'Scottish waters' won't make a blind bit of difference.
buggyracer
14-Jun-05, 14:18
Yes i acknowledge we are part of the EU but i think you are the one who is confused? acknowledging and agreeing, are two entirely different concepts??
I understand we have no "scottish waters" but again you fail to see my point, our fishing industry is in a far better state or has the abillity to be far more viable than others simply due to the fact that given the rights to control and fish our own waters (as the faroese and icelandic have always done) we could have a manageable and sustainable fishing industry!
If you had an ounce of an idea about the topic you wouldnt brand the word "quota" around as some kind of ray of hope and and conservationialist measure, when the current quota system stops the dumping of hundereds of tonnes of dead yet perfectly consumable produce onto the sea bed then i may understand the "quota" sytstem we have in place!
Dont blame the fisherman blame the rule makers!!
Yes i acknowledge we are part of the EU but i think you are the one who is confused? acknowledging and agreeing, are two entirely different concepts??
No confusion on my part. I'm just not sure why you're getting your knickers in a twist when we're in the EU anyway, and need to abide by EU regulations.
I understand we have no "scottish waters" but again you fail to see my point, our fishing industry is in a far better state or has the abillity to be far more viable than others simply due to the fact that given the rights to control and fish our own waters (as the faroese and icelandic have always done) we could have a manageable and sustainable fishing industry!
What's that you say? Our own waters? What would they be? Scottish waters? :roll:
This may come as a shock to you... neither the Faroe Isles or Iceland are in the EU. They don't need to abide by EU rules. What's their situation got to do with ours?
If you had an ounce of an idea about the topic you wouldnt brand the word "quota" around as some kind of ray of hope and and conservationialist measure, when the current quota system stops the dumping of hundereds of tonnes of dead yet perfectly consumable produce onto the sea bed then i may understand the "quota" sytstem we have in place!
I'm quite aware that the Common Fisheries Policy has led to an appalling level of dumping of small and over-quota fish. That it doesn't work in its current form is grounds for evaluating and reforming the regulations, not abandoning quotas altogether. Are you suggesting that it's acceptable for fish to be driven to extinction just so fishermen can keep their jobs for a few more years?
Dont blame the fisherman blame the rule makers!!
I blame both. I think ensuring the sustainability of fish stocks is more important that wrangling about who is more to blame.
Former Crew
14-Jun-05, 16:00
DELETED
Oh dear - when will people realise that left to their own devices - fishermen from each and every country will decimate stocks to the extent where it is uneconomical to go to sea. Then they will whinge about loss of livelyhood.
Did you see the TV footage of the boat owner that had decomissioned his boat and had gone to the continent to see the scrapping. He had a tear in his eye as he explained that it was the saddest day in his life seeing this.
It is a pity they don't realise the sadness in having a hold full of fish, heading for port and shooting the trawls one more time. Then, if this last haul is better quality than the hold-full they already have............. they dump the original catch.
I find it hard to have any sympathy for them.
Golach, when our troops were getting blasted to bits on the beaches of france and the great brittish government had no way of rescueing them, yes it was many of our hard done by fishermen who sailed the channel in there own boats to come to there rescue and often they never returned as didnt there craft and livelehood.
Buggyracer,
I was in the first Icelandic Cod War in 1960 (Protecting) our beloved Hull, Aberdeen and Graton fishermen from those terrible Icelanders who dared impose a 12 mile limit to protect their fishermen. What did the British Government do? Sent a fleet of 1 Minelaying Cruiser HMS Apollo, 2 Daring class Destroyers and various Palliser class Frigates and a Fleet auxiluary Tanker. All the Icelanders had were two wee patrol boats the Thor & the Odin.
Tell me where is the Icelandic fishing limit now....Last I heard it was 300 miles. Where are our Fishing fleets from Hull, Grimsby, Hull, Aberdeen & Granton now then.
Most of our Gallant fishermen in 1940 were serving in either the RN or the RNVR or the Coastal Forces. I do'nt think many were rescuing the troops at Dunkirk.
buggyracer
15-Jun-05, 10:02
Drutt, the fact that the faroe ilsands and iceland are not in the EU comes as no shock, that is my point they have a wonderfull fishery, i wonder why??
Mareng, if you think boats actually dump fish just because they get better ones? they dont do this, the keep the highest value fish or thew best size and then dump the less valued ones, why? beacause the quota system says they must not go over there allowed catch so of course they are going to keep the fish of the best value, this is why the quota system is a disgrace!! it should be days at sea yet land what you catch, severly limit the amount of days at sea, if there not fishing there not catching, but when fishing alllow them to land what they catch. Even if this was only done for 6 months at least then we would know what is left in our seas for sure?? instead of a guestimate on what there may be??
frank ward
15-Jun-05, 13:47
Buggyracer is correct, regional fisheries should be regionally managed and controlled, its the safest way of sustaining a fishery in the long term.
But others are correct in pointing out that many fishermen are themselves the cause of their own problems - this is because of the relentless presure to land as many fish as possible. The enforced practice of dumping good fish because of quotas etc is a scandal.
Too often overlooked is the industrial fishing of sandeels. This basic food source for larger fish (and birds) is being hoovered up and turned into cattle feed and fertiliser. The main culprit is Denmark, but if this industry was based in Scotland it would be none the less defensible. Two thirds of all the fish caught in the North Sea end up in this way.
buggyracer
15-Jun-05, 14:38
Correct frank ward, we should all think twice next time we buy our danish bacon, as that is where it ends up!!
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.