Posted by Ian on November 23, 2011 under Uncategorized | 
EU discards politic 2008 —
Fisheries Management and Research – the birthplace of an unsustainable and unethical malpractice.
There is consensus across the EU (and world) that discarding of fish is a waste of much-needed natural resources and needs reducing. According to the EU, the main reason for the huge amount of discarding is excessive catching effort, and that capacity need reducing even further. The number of fishing vessels in Denmark and Scotland are all ready greatly reduced since the launch of the decommissioning program a few years ago. Discarding has increased year by year in certain fisheries. The amount of cod discarded in the Scottish whitefish fishery in the North Sea was greater in 2008 than in 2007, despite various measures of mitigation. Discards could at times be as much as, 80% by number and 40% by weight of each catch. Discards of cod were mainly of fish over the legal landing size 35cm.
The term “discards” is rather vague, since the term covers everything that is caught and subsequently thrown back into the sea. That use of active fishing gear accounts for by far the largest amounts of discards. Discarding can be caused by:
• Discards of fish below the minimum landing size, due to poor size selection properties of net meshes.
• Catch of non-target species.
• Hi-grading, retention of only the largest and best-paid fish,. This is most often due to low quota or quota that does not extend to as by catch in other fisheries.
• Can also occur as “invisible” catches of juvenile cod, haddock and whiting in fishing for species in the production of meal and oil.
• Catch of non-commercial species and benthos.
The EU’s plan for re building demersal fish stocks in the North Sea has been strongly influenced by castle in the sky thinking and is shamefully ineffective. The plan has lacked potency, both practical and political. It helps little with fishing capacity and quota reductions, when these reductions do not affect the behaviours of fishermen to the positive for the fish stocks, some thing which in turn will again benefit the fishermen. Fishermen in the North Sea have been entrapped over a long period in a negative spiral of bone scraped fish quotas and the insane mandatory practice of returning under sized and non-target fish back to the sea, fish that in reality are either dead or dying. Minimum landing sizes need to be related towards the protection of fish under spawning age. The best protection for immature fish is by avoidance.
.Fishermen and scientists around the North Sea basin have worked intensely to prove that it is possible to reduce the amount of discards in their respective fisheries… An example of this is the Fisheries Science Partnership in Scotland and England, where the fishermen themselves have taken the initiative to provide real-time-area closures and to use the trawls with a better selection capability. The goal is to achieve “conservation credits” that would justify larger quotas based on less discards. . Fishermen in Denmark have developed the use of video surveillance (CCTV) in order to document both the capture and quantity of discards. The catch of under sized fish has been effectively reduced through the increase of mesh sizes and the use of trawl types that exploit the fish’s natural behaviour:
• Nephrop trawls with low height, and without netting in the square and over belly – reducing the catch of haddock, whiting and at times cod.
• Flounder Trawl with low height, and without netting in the roof – reducing the catch of haddock, whiting and sometimes cod.
• Separatortrawl / seine separate cod / demersal fish from haddock and whiting.
• Eliminatortrawl, separates fish / bottom fish from haddock and whiting.
• Orkneytrawl, reduce catches of cod-especially juveniles
• Square mesh cod ends.
• Four panel extension piece,T 90 meshes in bottom and sides in conjunction with the square mesh top panel.
• Sorting grid.
The use of more selective trawl types and devices are not without consequences. Research shows the loss of certain types of catch / by catch. This loss can lead to weakened economy in the short term, but can be compensated in the long term with larger quotas.
.
. To date, the EU’s “policy makers” have lacked the will to implement the most relevant technical devices most suited to the dynamics of the various fisheries.
Fisheries management is not just about the management of fisheries resources, but also that of human behaviours. Management of fisheries must become less academic and more “hands on”
Fisheries management in EU and Norway need to become better at using the “carrot and the stick” approach, instead of” chemotherapy and amputation” as the “cure”. Take for example, fisheries in the U.S.A, where fishermen are given access to certain areas on the condition that they use a separatortrawl in fishing for haddock. The paradox is that the separator trawl originated from Scotland.
Fisheries in the North Sea are now showing signs of a positive development. The big question now is what will be necessary to keep the development moving in a forward direction? We need to strengthen and intensify cooperation between the fishing fleet, scientists and the Coast Guard to be able to practice “real-time management. Resource management must focus on having an overview and management of fish stocks and not only to maintain control over the fishermen. Effective “polising” of fisheries depends on: attendance, ability / means to uncover non compliance, effective sanctions, and not least a “good working relationship” based on professional knowledge and mutual respect.
. The proposal for a reduction in days at sea is certainly not a good solution. What the fishermen need now is rather an increase in days and the possibility to plan and execute an ecological and economically viable fishery. Fishermen are “practitioners” of the highest calibre and possess of an ocean of knowledge and ability to solve the challenges related to the future of their industry.
Norway has a unique position and chance to influence the EU’s fisheries policy in a positive direction. The fishing industry has the necessary will and tools: the question is whether the government has the courage and resolve to make the use of them!
Posted by Ian on November 17, 2011 under Uncategorized |
Hun håper det nyopprettede fiskeri-og kystpolitiske utvalg vil lykkes med å involvere alle brukere av det marine miljø. «Alle skal med» lyder slagordet til Det Norske Arbeiderpartiet – så hvorfor utestenge så mange da? – og hvorfor skal utvalget kun se på utfordringene geografisk avgrenset til området fra Åna Sira til Svinesund?
Statssekretær Kristine Gramstad refererte i sitt innlegg på Langesundkonferansen til konferansen som Norges Fiskarlag arrangerte ifjor sommer om kystfiskeri i Sør-Norge. Hun nevnte også «handlingsplanen for kystfiske i sør» som NF lanserte i begynnelsen av juni 2011. Handlingsplanen gir ifølge statssekretæren en god oversikt over utfordringene kystfiskerere i sør står ovenfor – utfordringene som må møtes og løses i fellesskap.
Statssekretæren informerte også om at fiskeri-og kystdepartementet har besluttet å opprette en arbeidsgruppe for å ta en grundig gjennomgang av kystfiskeriene i sør i sin fulle bredde. Både kystfiskerkonferansen og styringsgruppen for arbeidet med handlingsplanen for kystfiskeriene i Sør-Norge var godt representert av fiskere fra Hordaland til Svinesund. Hensikten med denne handlingsplanen er først og fremst å fremme konkrete forslag til hvordan kystfisket i sør kan få økt bærekraft og lønnsomhet, og dermed også bidra til økt verdiskaping i kystsamfunnene og ellers. Så hvorfor begrense utvalgets arbeidsområde til kun å omfatte Sør-Østlandet? Kystfiskerere fra Hordaland i vest til Oslofjorden i øst har for det meste et kombinasjonsfiske på mange marginale arter. Selv om arts-sammensetningen kan variere fra vest til øst, er det likevel mange utfordringer som er felles. Arealbruk og arealkonflikter veier tungt på begge sider av Lindesnes – på vestsiden har fiskerne konflikter med oppdrettsnæringen på grunn av arealer som blir beslaglagt til oppdrettslokaliteter. Seismikk-skyting er også et tilbakevendende problem i sommer halvåret.
Fiskerne i øst er stilt ovenfor utfordringer som marineverneområder og trusselen om etablering av vindmølleparker på fiskefeltene. Diverse fiskerireguleringer sliter også på fiskerne i sør, med for eksempel forslag om forbud mot oppsamlingspose i reketrål, vannvittig lav bifangstprosent av torsk i reke- og krepsetrålfiskeriene, problemene knyttet til fangst av pigghå med mer. Effektene av et utstrakt turistfiske og bygging i strandsonen – med påfølgende degradering av gyte/oppvekstområder har ikke fått den oppmerksomhet de fortjener heller. Eks-ministeren håper at utvalget kan involvere og engasjere så mange som mulig om det marine miljø og bærekraft på Sørlandskysten – søringene har lenge vært opptatt av miljø, bærekraft, verdiskapning fra havet og fiskeripolitikk.
Søringene hilser politikerene velkommen!
Posted by Ian on under Uncategorized |
Til Fiskeri- og Kystministeren
Lisbeth Berg-Hansen
Fiskeri- og Kystdepartementet
Turistfiske, en pest og plage for noen – og en velsignelse for andre.
Turistfiske er ikke nødt til å være en plage for noen hvis vi er innstilt på å se mulighetene istedenfor som enkelte ser det – bare problemer. Forkjærligheten til sjøfiske bringer mange «fisketurister» til Norge hvert år, og antallet er økende. Så hva er det som tiltrekker «fisketuristene» til Norge både sommer og vinterstid? Svaret er ganske enkelt – store fiskebestander, lett tilgjengelighet, liberale regelverk for utøvelsen av turistfisket og ikke minst storslagen natur. Turistfiske må betraktes som et rekreasjonsfiske, derfor er det viktig å få på plass et regelverk som skal gjelde for all utøvelse av rekreasjonsfiske i havet, uansett om det blir drevet av nordmenn eller turister.
Effektene fra et utstrakt turistfiske varierer fra sted til sted. Ta for eksempel et turistfiske i Vest- Finnmark, selv om det blir fisket forholdsvis mye nordøst-arktisk torsk vinter/vår kan det likevel være langt mer bærekraftig enn et fiske i sør Norge, hvor det fiskes relativt beskjedne mengder med kysttorsk.
Det er viktig for alle brukere av det marine miljø å forstå at veldig mye fisk de fanger kan tilhøre små lokale bestander og ikke er en del av større innsigsbestander. Derfor er det viktig å få ned beskatningen ved blant annet ta vare på hvert individ som er under minstemålet og returnere det til havet igjen uskadd. Målet bør være å oppnå en bevissthets-heving blant alle brukere av det marine miljø, og at hver og en har et ansvar for å medvirke til at det skjer en ”bærekraftig utvikling”. Til dette arbeidet er det viktig med god fakta informasjon, som er både interessant og pedagogisk riktig presentert.
Brosjyren til fiskeridirektoratet «Kysten er din» oppfyller krav til god faktainformasjon, men innholdet kunne vært gjort mer interessant og pedagogisk om det hadde vært presentert som informasjonsfilm med langt større underholdningsverdi. En filmatisering av «Kysten er din» kunne også synliggjort bedre målsetningene med et turistnæringsfiske, – vi må få fokus vekk fra rekreasjonsfisket i «bulk» og over til rekreasjonsfisket med høy opplevelsesfaktor. Med dette kan vi inkludere kystkulturen i en bevarings- og kulinarisk sammenheng. Veien til bærekraft er gjennom å skape en «eierskapsfølelse» på ressurser som er til låns. Godt bakgrunnsmateriale på film kan også brukes til forskjellige formål som for eksempel: naturfag i skolen, markedsføring av opplevelsesdestinasjoner i turistnæringen osv.
En informasjonsfilm rettet mot turistnæringsfiske bør synliggjøre viktigheten av å bevare et godt miljø langs kysten. Den bør også forkklare de biologiske aspekter knyttet til et uttak av kysttorsk. Tips om skånsom behandling av fisk som skal sleppes ut igjen (catch and release). Fisk er mat og kulturmessig sett «sløser» vi ikke med maten. Her har vi mulighet til å fremme mattradisjoner hvor hele fisken er tatt i bruk. Sikker ferdsel på sjøen – en veiledning. Råd om fiskeutsyr osv.
Undertegnede har diskutert konseptet med representanter for: Norges Fiskarlag, NHO Reiseliv, Innovasjon Norge Reiseliv, Norges jeger og fiskeforbund, MRI i Bergen og fisketurist bedrift i Finnmark m/ flere. Responsen har vært definitivt positivt. Konseptet har vært drøftet med et filmselskap som samarbeider med NRK,s «Ut i naturen». Undertegnende håper konseptet kan være av interesse for FKD og det arbeidet som er igang med målsetningene og rammeverket rundt turistnæringsfisket, og vil gjerne høre Deres synspunkter.
Det hadde vært fint å kunne si til turistene:
”Slik gjør vi det her i Norge” – Velkommen og velkommen tilbake!
Posted by Ian on under Uncategorized |
Most, if not all successful attempts at reform making starts between the ears, that is with a change of mindset. So I ask myself repeatedly how can it be at all possible to make the necessary changes to the CFP, when the rule makers themselves, seem to be lacking the will to change the dynamics of management. Fisheries management is not just about the management of fish resources, but also that of the interactions, of those that manage and harvest them. The CFP and it,s reform has become more and more about the increasing number of high profiled people involved in and around the fishing industry,s nightmare “reality soap “, the CPF. The British fisherman has over many years become marginalised, and played over the sidelines. The recent “Fish fight campaign”, along with other social medias has certainly put the insane mandatory practice of discarding marketable fish, straight into the eye of the public – and it hurts! The campaign has done little to help the plight of the fisherman,- in reality it has made the situation far worse – this being reflected by amongst other things, the ridiculously imbalanced cod and haddock quota proposals for the West of Scotland. The fisherman is portrayed in many medias as a “market driven despot” with little or no concern for the environment. The situation being made no better when a high ranking industry leader is quoted in the medias as to saying” “a state of anarchy” still exists in parts of the fishing industry where everyone was out for what they could get from a diminishing stock “. Non compliance is often given by the Commission as being one of the reasons for the failure of the (flawed) CPF.
Minister Damanaki,s whirlwind tour of Europe aimed at selling the CPF reform package of bio-socio sustainability should be easy to sell – there again the means to achieve it will be far from that. So where is all this going? one might ask – I get the feeling that the industry has embarked down a road it should not have. The move of focus from TAC to total removals of resources MSY ,and the suggestion of a catch credits system in combination with a discard ban – CCTV monitoring and total compliance, will be an ultra thin line for the industry to walk. The fall height is great. The industry has willingly taken a huge “leap of faith”into the mouth of the “monster”, and not knowing that it will take more than just faith to give them the desired deliverance. It will take nothing but a “divine intervention” to sort out this mess – a mess where fishermen more and more often get the feeling of dis empowerment and resignation. A mess, where some of the fishing industry,s “corridor walkers” have not knowingly, become assimilated into the belly of the monster through years of numerous “consultations” with the management and the EU Commission. And to what avail?
Fisheries politics at EU top level, has become more than just the fish resources and the communities that depend on them – it,s become more of a reality soap, where face saving, being seen as to “doing something”, personal prestige and “monument” building is the name of the game. Had a fisherman managed his family – wife, children and pets in the same manner the CFP has managed the European fisheries and there dependants, then surely the social services and child welfare, would have put the family under administration. The European fishing industry needs a divine intervention to change the dynamics of fisheries management – it needs a “NANNY 911”.
Posted by Ian on under Uncategorized |
�
�
The EU’s plan for re building demersal fish stocks in the North Sea has been strongly influenced by castle in the sky thinking and is shamefully ineffective. The plan has lacked potency, both practical and political. It helps little with fishing capacity/ effort and quota reductions, when these reductions do not affect the behaviours of fishermen to the positive for the fish stocks, some thing which in turn will again benefit the fishermen. Fishermen in the North Sea have been entrapped over a long period in a negative spiral of bone scraped fish quotas and the insane mandatory practice of returning under sized and non-target fish back to the sea, fish that in reality are either dead or dying. Minimum landing sizes need to be related towards the protection of fish under spawning age. The best protection for immature fish is by avoidance.
The fisheries in the European sector of the North Sea takes place mainly with bottom trawls. Trawl fisheries are mainly regulated by a “one net” system, where white fish trawls TR1 and nephrops trawls Tr2 are regulated separately, with respectively 120 and 80 mm mesh size. Despite different measures taken over the last years by both management and the fishing industry, the discard and the mortality rate is still too high.�
Much time and effort has been devoted to the cod recovery plan in the North Sea, under the “cod avoidance plan.” The plan has been a mix of spatial management and voluntary attempts and use of various technical devices, including the Eliminator and Orkney trawls, as well as the use of diverse «squareless» nephrop trawls. ” Cod avoidance” by the use of technical devices has provided mixed results. The experiments with “eliminator trawl” has shown good results in certain fisheries, with between 80-90% reduction in cod catches without significant reduction in haddock and whiting catches. Research has also shown that catches of other bottom fish and benthos were dramatically reduced. The loss of valuable demersal species such as lemon, megrims, plaice and monkfish etc, has made a large dent into the economy of these vessels.
The research trials with the “orkney trawl” has shown some positive results, with up to about 60% reductions of cod under the MLS 35cm being caught. The effect of the “orkney trawl”diminishes with larger sizes of cod , with reductions being down to 7-8% for cod over 70 cm. The use of the Orkney trawl as with the eliminator trawl” has also resulted in reduced catches of valuable demersal species such as lemon, megrims, plaice and monkfish etc.
�
.�
Precautionary areas have been established in the Norwegian sector, for both the Patch Bank and Viking Bank. Fisheries in these areas are very important for many fishermen from Scotland and Denmark. Large quantities of juvenile fish can pose a problem at times in respect to keeping
catches within the legal allowance for fish under MLS . (Measured in number in the Norwegian sector – not by weight)
Area closures are common, especially in the spring and early summer. Catches of undersized fish have been as high as 40%, despite the use of various voluntary measures to improve selectivity.
Selection capabilities of a cod end and extension piece with diamond mesh in the normal position, has the greatest effect at the catch zone where the meshes are splayed out by fish retained in the cod end. Water speeds may be more favorable in this area, aiding the fish to escape the open meshes. Selection capabilities decrease reasonably fast towards the middle of the extension – the mesh opening can be as low as 20-30%. Mesh size provisions for Tr 1 120mm refer only to the minimum mesh size, maximum number of meshes round the cod end and the total length of the cod end / extension piece. Present gear regulations do little to set specific requirements to functionality regarding the selection capabilities of cod end / extension piece combinations.�
The use of 4 paneled extension piece/ cod end, with the combination of T90 and square mesh over panel, will give more form stability and increase the selection capabilities significantly.�
Selection should be made as far forward in the trawl as possible to reduce the hard physical stresses young fish may be exposed to on the way down to the cod end. . Species selection can be further enhanced by the use of trawls designed to make use of behavioral patterns specific to target species.�
Use of the eliminator and orkneytrawl has provided both fishermen and scientists with invaluable information of the relationship between mesh size in trawl mouth and the fish’s behavior pattern – this is an important tool in the making of trawls that are more target species selective. Research done by Seafish with a trawl divided by 2 vertical panels, and having 3 separate cod ends , has provided useful information on the behavior of different species in the mouth of the trawl. The sum of these research projects, and the knowledge gained, provides a good basis for constructing�
a trawl type that is most suitable for white fish fisheries in the northern part of the North Sea�
After having discussed the need for a new improved white fish trawl/ extension piece and cod end, with gear technologists from Sintef Fisheries and aquaculture, Seafish and others, – the conclusion was unanimous – the industry has an acute need, and the capabilities of designing a trawl/trawls that would better address both the requirements for selection and retention of target species.�
Selection in mixed demersal fisheries will be in varying degrees, subjected to “trade-offs.” – the clue is to make the trade offs that benefit both man and fish.
The CPF reform takes aim at introducing a discard ban over a 3 years period from 2014. To reach this goal in an ethical and credible manner, a discard ban has to be founded on the effective selection and avoidance of juveniles and non target species.�
Time passes quickly, and the ever faster moving «sustainability train» has long since left the station, loaded with consensus from NGO,s for a discard ban, CCTV monitoring, catch credit systems and the like. The fishing industry needs to adopt a «back to scratch» approach to size and species selection – starting at the trawl doors, and down to the cod end. There has never been or will be a better time to make the necessary gear changes than now in relation to knowledge base, gear monitoring equipment, gear component etc. Much of trawl gear research start with model experiments in the flume tank in Hirtshals. The center is a hub for fishing gear research in and around the North Sea, and a natural choice as project manager / partner for joint projects. The industry has loads of «tools» at it,s disposition- it,s now as always a question of putting the right tools in the right«tool box»
