The market won't look like this until the 6th June - next Wednesday - as it will be closed for the extended Bank Holiday period this weekend - get your fish orders in early!
Wednesday 30 May 2012
Jubileeation? Fish market shuts for long weekend
The market won't look like this until the 6th June - next Wednesday - as it will be closed for the extended Bank Holiday period this weekend - get your fish orders in early!
Cheeky monks
Mourning Saturday morning memorable Mission moments.
 |
| No more cheerful Saturday morning cha and chat with the girls.... |
Here's the disastrous news from the Mission skipper in Newlyn......
 |
| No more grumpy old gits... |
 |
| No more quiet games of Euchre... |
We will no longer have the canteen open on Saturday mornings.  |
| No more refuge for yellow wellies...... |
All of the Missions around the country, that have canteens, are working to this model as well. |
| No more skipper hauled out of bed to cover for poorly Friday night, Saturday morning staff... |
Keith at the Mission control.
PS The Mission will be open of course as usual from Mondays to Fridays serving fine tea, good food and bon hommie!
Tuesday 29 May 2012
Who's got their hands on all our fish?
Baldrick's cunning plan:
In a gradual process bordering on privatisation by stealth, the resource of the many has fallen into the hands of a few.
The Greenpeace campaign calls for a reform of European fishing policy so that it supports low impact, sustainable fishermen.
Greenpeace has spent a lot of time lately on wharves, docks, piers and beaches. The story we're hearing is the same the coast long; the UK's low-impact, small-scale fishing industry is on its last legs. These fishermen, most of whom are part of the inshore under-10-metre fleet, tend to land high quality fish, using methods that do little or no damage to the local environment. But they aren't rewarded. Quite the contrary: despite comprising 77% of the active UK fleet, they have access to only 4% of the country's quota.
So who's got their hands on all our fish? (It's worth remembering they are our indeed our fish; they're a public asset, a common resource). No one really knows who holds UK quota, but what we do know is that the answer mostly involves those with the most economic clout and ability to throw their weight around. In a gradual process bordering on privatisation by stealth, the resource of the many has fallen into the hands of a few.
As the long-time Hastings fisherman John Griffin puts it: "It's definitely the 'greener' side of the industry that's suffering. We're as morally correct as we can be, we don't hide anything and we try to be as green as possible; we're doing our best but we're the ones being pushed out."
Which brings us to an unprecedented alliance between UK fishermen and Greenpeace. Today we're launching a campaign called Be a Fisherman's Friend, to save the UK's struggling inshore fleet, and thereby protect our fish. It's a common myth that Greenpeace is anti- fishing; we just want fishing rights to be given to those who fish in the right way. Most people are aware the system's broken. In fact railing against the EU's Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) is a British political ritual, conducted in language as familiar as the Lord's Prayer or the football results.
So well-worn is this tale that it's rare for anyone to even question its basic veracity, or to ask why, if it's so broken, successive fishing ministers have done so little to fix it? Yet if we cannot find an answer to this question, we will continue to be hamstrung by a policy that's trashing our oceans and failing our fishermen.
A reform of the CFP, currently underway in Brussels, provides a once-in-a decade opportunity to alter things so that the system rewards those fishing sustainably.
But let's go back. How did we get to the point where EU fisheries policy allows a tiny number of high-impact operators to dominate how we manage our oceans and fish stocks, despite their fishing methods being so destructive?
"Efficiencies" in fishing have been progressing at the rate of around 3% a year for decades. Ever-more powerful boats go further and faster, with ruthless and indiscriminate fishing methods, hunting down fish in hundreds of miles of ocean using sophisticated sonar systems.
The inevitable result is that fish stocks decline: 72 % of European fish stocks are now depleted. If we continue to fish as we are, 91% of European fish stocks will be at unsustainable levels within the next decade.
In response to the problem of "over-capacity" [read: too many factory-style boats catching too many fish], boats have had to be forcibly removed from the industry. And because the more "efficient" boats and skippers make the most money, they're often the ones who remain in the game while others are forced to leave. Fishing rights, money and influence have become increasingly concentrated in the hands of a relatively few individuals and businesses, who in turn act as a powerful and entrenched lobby for the kind of industrial scale fishing practices that maximise profit at the expense of local employment and the local environment.
In the UK, this process has been exacerbated by successive governments' chronic mismanagement of the national quota allocation, which is what's left the inshore fleet with access to only 4% of quota. The UK government has also allowed those who control the lion's share of the quota to treat it as a tradable commodity. Unused quota is leased out at exorbitant prices, maximising profits for the quota "owner" at the expense of ordinary fishermen in coastal towns up and down the country. We're on our way to fishing rights being traded like subprime mortgages.
Evidence shows that those who fish selectively and with least environmental impact offer the greatest benefits to the economy. One recent analysis estimated that for every tonne of cod landed, trawlers delivered negative economic value ranging from -£116 for the smallest trawlers to almost -£2,000 for the largest. Gillnets (a lower impact fishing method) in contrast generated a net +£865 of value. Yet between 2006 – 2008, trawlers landed almost 6,000 tonnes of cod, while gillnets landed less than 3% of this – just 163 tonnes.
The CFP reform is an opportunity to sort out the mess. It is now up to the government to pursue reforms at home and in Brussels, which will capture the economic benefits of sustainable fishing. Giving priority access to those who use selective, low-impact methods and provide the highest levels of local employment should become the guiding principle of fisheries management. This won't be easy. Vested interests will continue to claim that "batting for Britain" is simply about grabbing a greater share of the EU pie, rather than securing a truly radical reform of EU and UK fisheries management. For the sake of our fishermen, our fish stocks and the health of our coasts and seas, this government and the fisheries minister, Richard Benyon, must take a different view.
Full story courtesy of the Guardian's environment blog.
In a gradual process bordering on privatisation by stealth, the resource of the many has fallen into the hands of a few.
 |
| Cornish fishermen Ben George flying the 'Be a Fisherman's Friend' campaign flag.Photograph: David Sandison/Greenpeace |
Greenpeace has spent a lot of time lately on wharves, docks, piers and beaches. The story we're hearing is the same the coast long; the UK's low-impact, small-scale fishing industry is on its last legs. These fishermen, most of whom are part of the inshore under-10-metre fleet, tend to land high quality fish, using methods that do little or no damage to the local environment. But they aren't rewarded. Quite the contrary: despite comprising 77% of the active UK fleet, they have access to only 4% of the country's quota.
So who's got their hands on all our fish? (It's worth remembering they are our indeed our fish; they're a public asset, a common resource). No one really knows who holds UK quota, but what we do know is that the answer mostly involves those with the most economic clout and ability to throw their weight around. In a gradual process bordering on privatisation by stealth, the resource of the many has fallen into the hands of a few.
As the long-time Hastings fisherman John Griffin puts it: "It's definitely the 'greener' side of the industry that's suffering. We're as morally correct as we can be, we don't hide anything and we try to be as green as possible; we're doing our best but we're the ones being pushed out."
Which brings us to an unprecedented alliance between UK fishermen and Greenpeace. Today we're launching a campaign called Be a Fisherman's Friend, to save the UK's struggling inshore fleet, and thereby protect our fish. It's a common myth that Greenpeace is anti- fishing; we just want fishing rights to be given to those who fish in the right way. Most people are aware the system's broken. In fact railing against the EU's Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) is a British political ritual, conducted in language as familiar as the Lord's Prayer or the football results.
So well-worn is this tale that it's rare for anyone to even question its basic veracity, or to ask why, if it's so broken, successive fishing ministers have done so little to fix it? Yet if we cannot find an answer to this question, we will continue to be hamstrung by a policy that's trashing our oceans and failing our fishermen.
A reform of the CFP, currently underway in Brussels, provides a once-in-a decade opportunity to alter things so that the system rewards those fishing sustainably.
But let's go back. How did we get to the point where EU fisheries policy allows a tiny number of high-impact operators to dominate how we manage our oceans and fish stocks, despite their fishing methods being so destructive?
"Efficiencies" in fishing have been progressing at the rate of around 3% a year for decades. Ever-more powerful boats go further and faster, with ruthless and indiscriminate fishing methods, hunting down fish in hundreds of miles of ocean using sophisticated sonar systems.
The inevitable result is that fish stocks decline: 72 % of European fish stocks are now depleted. If we continue to fish as we are, 91% of European fish stocks will be at unsustainable levels within the next decade.
In response to the problem of "over-capacity" [read: too many factory-style boats catching too many fish], boats have had to be forcibly removed from the industry. And because the more "efficient" boats and skippers make the most money, they're often the ones who remain in the game while others are forced to leave. Fishing rights, money and influence have become increasingly concentrated in the hands of a relatively few individuals and businesses, who in turn act as a powerful and entrenched lobby for the kind of industrial scale fishing practices that maximise profit at the expense of local employment and the local environment.
In the UK, this process has been exacerbated by successive governments' chronic mismanagement of the national quota allocation, which is what's left the inshore fleet with access to only 4% of quota. The UK government has also allowed those who control the lion's share of the quota to treat it as a tradable commodity. Unused quota is leased out at exorbitant prices, maximising profits for the quota "owner" at the expense of ordinary fishermen in coastal towns up and down the country. We're on our way to fishing rights being traded like subprime mortgages.
Evidence shows that those who fish selectively and with least environmental impact offer the greatest benefits to the economy. One recent analysis estimated that for every tonne of cod landed, trawlers delivered negative economic value ranging from -£116 for the smallest trawlers to almost -£2,000 for the largest. Gillnets (a lower impact fishing method) in contrast generated a net +£865 of value. Yet between 2006 – 2008, trawlers landed almost 6,000 tonnes of cod, while gillnets landed less than 3% of this – just 163 tonnes.
The CFP reform is an opportunity to sort out the mess. It is now up to the government to pursue reforms at home and in Brussels, which will capture the economic benefits of sustainable fishing. Giving priority access to those who use selective, low-impact methods and provide the highest levels of local employment should become the guiding principle of fisheries management. This won't be easy. Vested interests will continue to claim that "batting for Britain" is simply about grabbing a greater share of the EU pie, rather than securing a truly radical reform of EU and UK fisheries management. For the sake of our fishermen, our fish stocks and the health of our coasts and seas, this government and the fisheries minister, Richard Benyon, must take a different view.
Full story courtesy of the Guardian's environment blog.
Motherships in the abyss
Though this does not directly affect the UK, it does reveal how important the provenance of the catch is with regard to the extent to which the catching and subsequent handling of fish are not transparent. Using tags on fish like Cornish line caught bass and pollock and QR codes like Ajax hake help the food chain maintain standards of transparency.
For Americans, the calculation is worrisome. Thailand is the United States’ second-largest supplier of foreign seafood. Of America's total seafood imports, one out of every six pounds comes from the Southeast Asian nation. The accounts of ex-slaves, Thai fishing syndicates, officials, exporters and anti-trafficking case workers, gathered by GlobalPost in a three-month investigation, illuminate an opaque offshore supply chain enmeshed in slavery.
See the full story here courtesy of the Global Post:
Monday 28 May 2012
Gwyner via Sennen to Lands End and back.
CFP reform wobble
European governments are backsliding on commitments to make fishing sustainable, campaigners are warning.
Talks on Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) reform are seeing important changes in moves to eliminate discards, reduce fishing fleets and rebuild fish stocks.
The original aim of repopulating stocks by 2015 is facing a five-year delay.
About three-quarters of European stocks are overfished, and studies show fishermen would have a more prosperous future by curbing catches now.
The main battle line pits more conservation-minded northern countries such as Germany and Sweden against southern states keener to protect fishermen's' short-term interests, including Spain, Portugal and France. "The question is very basic - do EU fisheries ministers have the courage to end overfishing or not?" said Markus Knigge, advisor to the Pew Environment Group.
The original CFP reform proposal put forward by European Fisheries Commissioner Maria Damanaki last year contained three key elements: restore all fish stocks to maximum sustainable yield (MSY) by 2015 reduce and regulate the size of the EU's fishing fleet through an internal trading mechanism eliminate the wasteful practice of discarding fish that are outside a boat's quota.
Governments have been negotiating on Ms Damanaki's proposal ever since, with the aim of finalising a package by next year. Trading schemes Continue reading the main story “ Start Quote We need a firm and effective discard ban as part of the basic rules” Maria Damanaki EU Fisheries Commissioner The trading mechanism, known as Individual Transferable Quotas, saw considerable opposition and will almost certainly not happen. Instead, each member state will take responsibility for managing the size of its own fleet. The final agreement is likely to include a mechanism for sanctioning countries that do not make adequate arrangements. This is raising alarm bells with some environment groups, who point out that many EU nations have proven unwilling to manage their fleets in the past.
Agreeing decentralised, regional management was a priority for the UK, which has successfully reduced capacity in its own fleets. Campaigners were alarmed by rumours of a backroom deal under which France would support the UK on decentralisation if the UK backed French moves to water down the discard ban. But Richard Benyon, the UK Fisheries Minister, said that was not the case. "We have asked France to join with us in our proposal on regionalisation - it's been adopted by Scandinavian and other northern European states and we want France to be part of it too," he told BBC News.
Industrial fishing has taken its toll - but technology is unlikely to be centrally regulated across the EU "They did canvas opinion about a proposal that would have watered down the discards policy, and we said we wouldn't be part of that." However, Mr Benyon said there were complexities with achieving a complete discard ban that were not always appreciated by campaigners. This is especially true in areas such as the North Sea, where a number of fish species live together and boats cannot altogether avoid catching ones they are not targeting. "There are certain pelagic stocks where we can have a discard ban tomorrow, and there are mixed fisheries where more detailed work is needed," he said. This "detailed work" is a combination of selective fishing equipment, smart regulations on issues such as fishing areas and times at sea, and a financial package that allows caught fish to be utilised without giving skippers an incentive to catch outside their quota. But Mr Benyon said a complete discard ban would be achieved in UK waters in "a very short period of time". He also said the UK supported the inclusion of an aim to ban discards in the CFP's basic rules. Some countries have been arguing that discard regulations should be delegated to long-term "recovery plans" covering individual species or locations.
Environment groups argue this would entail a major watering down of the headline commitment. Taking stock The issue arousing most concern is slippage in the commitment to rebuild stocks to maximum sustainable yield (MSY) by 2015. Maximum sustainable yield is a target for the size of a stock. It is the level that gives fishermen the biggest annual catch they can have without depleting the stock. Under the latest draft negotiating text, governments would "aim to ensure that exploitation of living marine biological resources" rebuilds stocks to MSY "by 2015, for all stocks where possible, and by 2020 at the latest". In 2002, all governments of the world pledged to restore stocks to MSY "with the aim of achieving these goals for depleted stocks on an urgent basis and where possible not later than 2015".
European ministers are arguing that the words "where possible" mean they are entitled to water down the 2015 commitment. However, environment groups argue that the words were included only to allow poorer developing nations time to gather the data needed to set an MSY target. In addition, some EU governments are arguing that they should target a different measure, known as FMSY. This is the amount of catch that could be taken sustainably if stocks were at MSY levels. But some ministers argue their fishermen should be allowed to catch at FMSY rates even on stocks that have not been replenished, and that this constitutes sustainable management.
Next month the Danish government hosts a key session of environment ministers at which it plans to secure a show-of-hands agreement on major elements of the package. The European Commission says ministers must preserve pillars of the original proposal if they want to bring meaningful change. "We need firm dates for MSY, and we need a firm and effective discard ban as part of the basic rules," said Ms Damanaki.
Story courtesy of BBC Science-Environment
The main battle line pits more conservation-minded northern countries such as Germany and Sweden against southern states keener to protect fishermen's' short-term interests, including Spain, Portugal and France. "The question is very basic - do EU fisheries ministers have the courage to end overfishing or not?" said Markus Knigge, advisor to the Pew Environment Group.
The original CFP reform proposal put forward by European Fisheries Commissioner Maria Damanaki last year contained three key elements: restore all fish stocks to maximum sustainable yield (MSY) by 2015 reduce and regulate the size of the EU's fishing fleet through an internal trading mechanism eliminate the wasteful practice of discarding fish that are outside a boat's quota.
Governments have been negotiating on Ms Damanaki's proposal ever since, with the aim of finalising a package by next year. Trading schemes Continue reading the main story “ Start Quote We need a firm and effective discard ban as part of the basic rules” Maria Damanaki EU Fisheries Commissioner The trading mechanism, known as Individual Transferable Quotas, saw considerable opposition and will almost certainly not happen. Instead, each member state will take responsibility for managing the size of its own fleet. The final agreement is likely to include a mechanism for sanctioning countries that do not make adequate arrangements. This is raising alarm bells with some environment groups, who point out that many EU nations have proven unwilling to manage their fleets in the past.
Agreeing decentralised, regional management was a priority for the UK, which has successfully reduced capacity in its own fleets. Campaigners were alarmed by rumours of a backroom deal under which France would support the UK on decentralisation if the UK backed French moves to water down the discard ban. But Richard Benyon, the UK Fisheries Minister, said that was not the case. "We have asked France to join with us in our proposal on regionalisation - it's been adopted by Scandinavian and other northern European states and we want France to be part of it too," he told BBC News.
Industrial fishing has taken its toll - but technology is unlikely to be centrally regulated across the EU "They did canvas opinion about a proposal that would have watered down the discards policy, and we said we wouldn't be part of that." However, Mr Benyon said there were complexities with achieving a complete discard ban that were not always appreciated by campaigners. This is especially true in areas such as the North Sea, where a number of fish species live together and boats cannot altogether avoid catching ones they are not targeting. "There are certain pelagic stocks where we can have a discard ban tomorrow, and there are mixed fisheries where more detailed work is needed," he said. This "detailed work" is a combination of selective fishing equipment, smart regulations on issues such as fishing areas and times at sea, and a financial package that allows caught fish to be utilised without giving skippers an incentive to catch outside their quota. But Mr Benyon said a complete discard ban would be achieved in UK waters in "a very short period of time". He also said the UK supported the inclusion of an aim to ban discards in the CFP's basic rules. Some countries have been arguing that discard regulations should be delegated to long-term "recovery plans" covering individual species or locations.
Environment groups argue this would entail a major watering down of the headline commitment. Taking stock The issue arousing most concern is slippage in the commitment to rebuild stocks to maximum sustainable yield (MSY) by 2015. Maximum sustainable yield is a target for the size of a stock. It is the level that gives fishermen the biggest annual catch they can have without depleting the stock. Under the latest draft negotiating text, governments would "aim to ensure that exploitation of living marine biological resources" rebuilds stocks to MSY "by 2015, for all stocks where possible, and by 2020 at the latest". In 2002, all governments of the world pledged to restore stocks to MSY "with the aim of achieving these goals for depleted stocks on an urgent basis and where possible not later than 2015".
European ministers are arguing that the words "where possible" mean they are entitled to water down the 2015 commitment. However, environment groups argue that the words were included only to allow poorer developing nations time to gather the data needed to set an MSY target. In addition, some EU governments are arguing that they should target a different measure, known as FMSY. This is the amount of catch that could be taken sustainably if stocks were at MSY levels. But some ministers argue their fishermen should be allowed to catch at FMSY rates even on stocks that have not been replenished, and that this constitutes sustainable management.
Next month the Danish government hosts a key session of environment ministers at which it plans to secure a show-of-hands agreement on major elements of the package. The European Commission says ministers must preserve pillars of the original proposal if they want to bring meaningful change. "We need firm dates for MSY, and we need a firm and effective discard ban as part of the basic rules," said Ms Damanaki.
Story courtesy of BBC Science-Environment
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)