One mile ban for commercial coastal fishing

[roncoe]

Read the Government’s response
The Government does not believe that a blanket ban on commercial fishing activity within one nautical mile of the shore is justified. The inshore zone is important to a number of small scale commercial fishing operators and displacement of their activities could have a number of consequences. Where circumstances require restrictions to be placed on commercial fishing activities, however, the Government and Sea Fisheries Committees (who have responsibilities for inshore fisheries management) can use the range of powers available to them to legislate both for fisheries conservation purposes and for the protection of the marine environment from fishing activities. These powers have been used to restrict commercial fishing through, for example, national legislation implementing 37 inshore restricted areas for the protection of bass and Sea Fisheries Committee byelaws restricting the length of vessels allowed to fish within 6 nautical miles around the coast of England and Wales.

The Government also acknowledges the significance of the inshore area to recreational sea anglers and has published a draft recreational sea angling strategy which considers within it the pros and cons of restrictions on commercial fishing activity within one mile of the shore. A summary of the responses to this consultation will be published shortly followed by a revised version of the strategy. In the meantime, the Government has launched a number of projects concerning sea angling, primarily in the inshore area namely:

· a review of the effectiveness of 37 protected areas in place for the protection of bass (a species of key interest to anglers). This may result in new protected areas or extensions to current areas around the coast;

· research into the use of restricted areas to benefit recreational sea anglers; and

· a 3 year research study to produce firmer data on the benefits to the sea angling sector from changes in fisheries management

[tonynufc]

am i reading this right , to me that looks like they are finally listening to us.

[PaulGH]

you're reading it wrong tony,
A petition was started in the vein hope of convincing the government to impose a 1 mile commercial fishing ban around the coast to allow unmolested spawning and safe havens for fish which would also vastly improve the fishing for shore anglers.
The government in effect have given 2 fingers to that notion (not that the government had any say in the matter anyway seing as our coastal fisheries were handed over to the EU via the Common Fisheries Policy back in the 70s anyway), but Bad EU news isn't allowed so instead they fob us off with excuses.

[tonynufc]

· a review of the effectiveness of 37 protected areas in place for the protection of bass (a species of key interest to anglers). This may result in new protected areas or extensions to current areas around the coast;

· research into the use of restricted areas to benefit recreational sea anglers; and

· a 3 year research study to produce firmer data on the benefits to the sea angling sector from changes in fisheries management

sorry it was this bit i was talking about, i know the first bit means they're sticking 2 fingers up at us again.

[The Great Wallsendo]

sorry it was this bit i was talking about, i know the first bit means they're sticking 2 fingers up at us again.

It's a half and half answer...saying no to the Golden Mile idea but saying they're considering increasing "no-go" or restricted zones around our coast...prob is it'll prob all be the "important" Bass fisheries in the South

[bazw]

3 year study of bla bla bla





translation


bog off we dont care !!

in 3 years we hope you will forget




"The Government also acknowledges the significance of the inshore area to recreational sea anglers and has published a draft recreational sea angling strategy which considers within it the pros and cons of restrictions on commercial fishing activity within one mile of the shore."


!!! a government has strategy's ? i thought all govs just bumbled along till they had to react !!

[dizzydaz]

another big V up at us lads stood on a beech for hours on end not getting a knock while every trawler is in the uk waters killing off our stocks......at the end of the day the goverment wont react until there is no cod,bass,pollock,whiting left and are extinct im starting to wounder what the point is in debating over something we always get ignored over....just like the sea liscence proposal...another hidden tax?a money spinner for the goverment?really how would that work and how on gods green earth could they ever police it???

[Cod,cod,cod!]

Just say If they did get licenses and did police it, People will simply stop going sea fishing cos it won't be worth it to many people esp people who are just starting out. That would mean less tax revenue (£ Goverment) from local tackle shops and them finally going out of business. Simply not worth it! I simply don't see more than two people in my local tackle shop every time i go in as it is and thats on a weekend!

[treeboa]

nothing new here is it from them, wont be long before the el shafturstocks will be pludering the inshore stocks having been given the green light by our lily livered mp`s, shame the mps are not paid on performance, they would be gettng sweet f a

here we are in a massive reccession, and the govenment all bend in unison to be shafted further by the e.u

[dizzydaz]

nothing new here is it from them, wont be long before the el shafturstocks will be pludering the inshore stocks having been given the green light by our lily livered mp`s, shame the mps are not paid on performance, they would be gettng sweet f a<------what you mean people like us who graft our feckin nuts off just to pay the wage for the goverment i agree that they should do someting to help us and put some money back into marine reasearch to help fish stocks but that will never work as you get the trawlermen of this country and the rest of the eu hammering our stocks

[Red5]

Am nearly finished the book I mentioned in one of my earlier threads called, 'The Unnatural History of the Sea'.

I now firmly believe that the Golden Mile is not enough. I always felt it should have been more but after reading this book,it would have no impact in terms of cod recovery. Did you know that since 1850 off the Grand Banks, the number of cod that are now left is 1/3 of 1% of what was there 159 years ago!!!!!!
I'm quite sure with the Trawling continuing in the North Sea that our stocks are similar and. This is from the Times Online website

According to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) only 25 to 30 per cent of fish stocks around Britain have been fished sustainably since 2001. "This means that around 70 per cent of UK fish stocks have suffered reduced reproductive capacity and have been harvested unsustainably since 2001," a Defra report stated, accepting that the scientific advice "is that the fishing rate should be reduced substantially in order to permit the stocks to recover".
A drop in the ocean
Fall in species since 1850:
Cod 98%
Haddock 90%
Plaice 90%
Whiting 70%
Halibut 98%
Turbot 95%
Disappearing: common skate no longer viable fishery angel shark last seen in 1980s conger eels very scarce and in steep decline wolf fish very scarce and in steep decline round-nosed grenadier 90% fall since the 1970s

Now if you imagine that every time an area is trawled it removes around 70% of the species there and a specific area can be trawled at least twice a year, is it any wonder we are where we are!

[treeboa]

nothing new here is it from them, wont be long before the el shafturstocks will be pludering the inshore stocks having been given the green light by our lily livered mp`s, shame the mps are not paid on performance, they would be gettng sweet f a<------what you mean people like us who graft our feckin nuts off just to pay the wage for the goverment i agree that they should do someting to help us and put some money back into marine reasearch to help fish stocks but that will never work as you get the trawlermen of this country and the rest of the eu hammering our stocks

dizzy, im retired now,however if the rest of you lads working were allowed the cock ups and pure waste of public money these charlitains seem to have then nothing would be done in this country work wise, 3 bloody years wasting resources on something they now dont think will work, how often have we read similar that a simple look see would have told them, i personally think a min 3 mile limit for home boats and a 12 mile for none uk boats should be in place, i dont give two sh*ts that we are in the e.u, charity begins at home not with some country thats raped its own resources, yes a lot of money should be funneled into marine research, it wont as it channeled into more and more white elephant schemes, you only have to look at the failed millenium dome and similar to see that the lunatics run the asylum in this country

[paulthespark]

37 protected areas around our coast, the goverment is being generous, considering there is 7723 miles of coast line around britain, if every protected area was 20 miles[which they won't be ] long by 1 mile wide the total protected areas would be less than 10 per cent of coastline ,as always from any goverment just total ****e

[Red5]

37 protected areas around our coast, the goverment is being generous, considering there is 7723 miles of coast line around britain, if every protected area was 20 miles[which they won't be ] long by 1 mile wide the total protected areas would be less than 10 per cent of coastline ,as always from any goverment just total ****e

Wouldn't say any government mate.....Look at Iceland and Norway.

[PaulGH]

Wouldn't say any government mate.....Look at Iceland and Norway.

Yup, blaming the government or even the commercial fishermen is ignoring the great big elephant in the corner of the room that is the EU and it's grotesque common fisheries policy.

Britain's fisheries were the envy of Europe pretty much on par with those of Norway in the early 70s before the right to plunder them was handed over to Brussels.