What's behind the Green Agenda on Fishing? Quentin Knights writes in a special report for Fishing news International this month. With Defra and the MMO coming out and showing strong support for a stand against a pan- European ban on drift netting this article would seem to be a perfectly timed piece of investigative journalism!
Friday 13 June 2014
Martin Pastors leaves the GAP2 project - for all the right reasons it seems!
A PROMINENT fisheries scientist, Martin Pastoors, is leaving his role in the GAP2 project to join the fishing industry, as he feels this is more effective way of ensuring fish conservation.
Having worked with GAP2 – a project that aims to demonstrate the role and value of stakeholder driven science within the context of fisheries' governance – for the past three years, Pastoors has resigned as leader of Work Package 3 and is taking up a new role as the first Chief Science Officer at the Pelagic Freezer-trawler Association (PFA).
One of the main reasons for leaving GAP2, he explains, is the problems that are likely to be caused by the implementation of the EU's discard ban. "The main challenge that I see at the moment is to keep the fishing industry onboard when the policy is looking for drastic changes but without very good explanations or means. I am really concerned that the new discard ban could do a lot of harm to the positive developments that we have seen over the last decade with the decline in fishing mortality, with the RACs as platforms of collaboration and with initiatives like the Scottish conservation credit scheme. The discard ban is a very complex piece of legislation that is very very difficult to explain. There have been many meetings already trying to figure out what the different elements mean. Taking the discard ban as a learning process, then it could develop in something positive. But if it would be rolled out as a control and enforcement approach, I am really concerned that it will do much more harm than good.
"Overall the challenge that I see is to go from a very hierarchical top-down micromanagement style of fisheries management to a management style that is more comparable to other industries: where society gives out a license to produce but the industry needs to demonstrate that it complies with the license. Making the industry responsible to society instead of society telling the industry what to do. That is also why I have taken the strategic decision to be part of the industry and trying to work in that direction."
Having worked with GAP2 – a project that aims to demonstrate the role and value of stakeholder driven science within the context of fisheries' governance – for the past three years, Pastoors has resigned as leader of Work Package 3 and is taking up a new role as the first Chief Science Officer at the Pelagic Freezer-trawler Association (PFA).
One of the main reasons for leaving GAP2, he explains, is the problems that are likely to be caused by the implementation of the EU's discard ban. "The main challenge that I see at the moment is to keep the fishing industry onboard when the policy is looking for drastic changes but without very good explanations or means. I am really concerned that the new discard ban could do a lot of harm to the positive developments that we have seen over the last decade with the decline in fishing mortality, with the RACs as platforms of collaboration and with initiatives like the Scottish conservation credit scheme. The discard ban is a very complex piece of legislation that is very very difficult to explain. There have been many meetings already trying to figure out what the different elements mean. Taking the discard ban as a learning process, then it could develop in something positive. But if it would be rolled out as a control and enforcement approach, I am really concerned that it will do much more harm than good.
"Overall the challenge that I see is to go from a very hierarchical top-down micromanagement style of fisheries management to a management style that is more comparable to other industries: where society gives out a license to produce but the industry needs to demonstrate that it complies with the license. Making the industry responsible to society instead of society telling the industry what to do. That is also why I have taken the strategic decision to be part of the industry and trying to work in that direction."
Accurate fishing data?
Students the world over embarking on a project that involves data collection face the same problem - just where do you go to get the data and how accurate is it?
In the case of fishing, you might head for your local or national MMO or Defra office. Or you might decide to ask of the FAO - the Fisheries Agriculture Organisation - part of the United nations, both are worthy bodies and their data is used to help determine catch quotas for the EU fleets in the North east Atlantic.
If you were looking for albacore tuna catch data in the new millennium these two bodies would seem to be a good choice. Here are their figures:
What's a student to do?
Can anyone help or explain the significant difference in the data between 2008 and 2012?
If so, please email Gareth John gdj501@york.ac.uk at York University who is studying a degree in Marine Environmental Management.
This is how the data was presented:
This is how the data was presented:
| Year | FAO Albacore | MMO Albacore |
| 2000 | 15 | NA |
| 2001 | 2 | NA |
| 2002 | 0 | NA |
| 2003 | 0 | NA |
| 2004 | 0 | NA |
| 2005 | 6 | NA |
| 2006 | 18 | NA |
| 2007 | 30 | NA |
| 2008 | 50 | 50 |
| 2009 | 66 | 50 |
| 2010 | 118 | 20 |
| 2011 | 57 | 5 |
| 2012 | NA | NA |
Black and white #FishyFriday
Combination sweeps ready for the harvest Reaper...
one of the new blowers for the ice works, the ice will be so dry that it is blown down a tube to the boat...
just some of the turbot landed by the Govenek of Ladram...
buying power in action...
Cornish cod iced and ready to go...
boxes by bulk...
the Millennia got sole...
the Trevessa IV got red mullet...
the Britannia V got hake...
and ling...
and cod...
just some of the net fish on sale...
"me, and my shadow"...
security high life...
fly past...
inshore trawler power...
major transformation still in progress on what will be the next ring netter for Newlyn...
get a slice of medical mayhem at the Swordfish tonight...
plenty of airborne traffic over Mount's bay this morning.
Labour scorns delay to funding for flood-hit farmers and fishermen in Devon, Cornwall and Somerset
Just a fraction of much-trumpeted Government funding for flood-hit farmers and fishermen has been handed out six months after storms battered the country.
MPs today heard how a Government grant scheme to replace storm-damaged equipment including lobster nets and crab pots had handed out just £2,320. And a separate £10 million pot to restore agricultural land has only paid out £530,000.
Labour claimed the figures, which were revealed in Parliament, show that David Cameron's "money is no object" pledge at the height of the winter floods rings hollow. Somerset, Devon and Cornwall were the worst hit areas earlier this year, with many of the region's farmers and fishermen facing ruin.
Environment Minister Dan Rogerson argued "many applications are currently being processed", suggesting significantly more money would be paid in the coming months.
But Labour countered this misses the point – arguing thousands of pounds remain tied up in Government bureaucracy.
Maria Eagle, Labour's Shadow Environment Secretary, said: "The Tory-led Government's response to the floods was slow and chaotic. Despite David Cameron's declaration that 'money is no object' the Government failed to respond effectively to the floods.
ADVERTISEMENT "It is inexcusable that it took so long to get the pumps, boats and sandbags to our communities and only a fraction of the funding the Government allege is available has actually been paid out.
"These latest figures show that this much-needed government support is not actually getting into the hands of the people who need it."
During Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) Questions, Labour MP Barry Gardiner said: "In February, the Prime Minister promised that 'money is no object' in the Government's response to the winter floods.
"Four months on, only £530,000 has been paid to farmers out of the supposed £10 million available in the farming recovery fund, and only £2,320 has been paid to fishermen out of the supposed £74,000 approved under the support for fishermen fund. Why is that much-needed support not getting to the people it is supposed to be helping?"
In response, Mr Rogerson, also Liberal Democrat MP for North Cornwall, said: "There is nothing 'supposed' about those totals, and the money is there for people to bid for – the key question is encouraging people to do so.
"People should apply for that money, and we have simplified the system.
"Many applications are currently being processed, and I encourage all people eligible for those funds – whether farming, fishing or the other funds I have set out – to apply and make use of that money."
A written parliamentary answer published this week shows the fisherman's fund has received 110 applications totalling £349,218.
Of these, 33 projects have been approved worth £74,047.
A Defra spokesman said the £10 million scheme has been made more simple for farmers, including cutting back the amount of evidence need to prove claims and scrapping the need to have three quotes to justify a hand-out.
A Defra spokesman said: “Farmers can apply for up to £35,000 of funding until the 27 June to get their land back into production. They then have until January 2015 to undertake the work.
"We’ve simplified how farmers can apply, among the improvements we’ve removed the need for three quotes by introducing standard costs for commonly requested items such as fencing and grass seed.
"If anyone needs help with the process or has any questions can call our dedicated Farming Recovery Fund helpline on 0300 060 2700.”
She added: “Storm damage claims are a top priority for Marine Management Organisation in order to get this much needed support out to fisherman as quickly as possible. Some 113 applications worth £365,000 have been received so far and we will send out money to these fisherman once they have purchased new pots. We expect the volume of applications to continue to increase in the coming weeks.”
Read more: http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/Labour-scorns-delay-funding-flood-hit-farmers/story-21227376-detail/story.html#ixzz34Ve7Xby5
 |
| Storm damaged pots on the quay in Newlyn |
MPs today heard how a Government grant scheme to replace storm-damaged equipment including lobster nets and crab pots had handed out just £2,320. And a separate £10 million pot to restore agricultural land has only paid out £530,000.
Labour claimed the figures, which were revealed in Parliament, show that David Cameron's "money is no object" pledge at the height of the winter floods rings hollow. Somerset, Devon and Cornwall were the worst hit areas earlier this year, with many of the region's farmers and fishermen facing ruin.
Environment Minister Dan Rogerson argued "many applications are currently being processed", suggesting significantly more money would be paid in the coming months.
But Labour countered this misses the point – arguing thousands of pounds remain tied up in Government bureaucracy.
Maria Eagle, Labour's Shadow Environment Secretary, said: "The Tory-led Government's response to the floods was slow and chaotic. Despite David Cameron's declaration that 'money is no object' the Government failed to respond effectively to the floods.
ADVERTISEMENT "It is inexcusable that it took so long to get the pumps, boats and sandbags to our communities and only a fraction of the funding the Government allege is available has actually been paid out.
"These latest figures show that this much-needed government support is not actually getting into the hands of the people who need it."
During Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) Questions, Labour MP Barry Gardiner said: "In February, the Prime Minister promised that 'money is no object' in the Government's response to the winter floods.
"Four months on, only £530,000 has been paid to farmers out of the supposed £10 million available in the farming recovery fund, and only £2,320 has been paid to fishermen out of the supposed £74,000 approved under the support for fishermen fund. Why is that much-needed support not getting to the people it is supposed to be helping?"
In response, Mr Rogerson, also Liberal Democrat MP for North Cornwall, said: "There is nothing 'supposed' about those totals, and the money is there for people to bid for – the key question is encouraging people to do so.
"People should apply for that money, and we have simplified the system.
"Many applications are currently being processed, and I encourage all people eligible for those funds – whether farming, fishing or the other funds I have set out – to apply and make use of that money."
A written parliamentary answer published this week shows the fisherman's fund has received 110 applications totalling £349,218.
Of these, 33 projects have been approved worth £74,047.
A Defra spokesman said the £10 million scheme has been made more simple for farmers, including cutting back the amount of evidence need to prove claims and scrapping the need to have three quotes to justify a hand-out.
A Defra spokesman said: “Farmers can apply for up to £35,000 of funding until the 27 June to get their land back into production. They then have until January 2015 to undertake the work.
"We’ve simplified how farmers can apply, among the improvements we’ve removed the need for three quotes by introducing standard costs for commonly requested items such as fencing and grass seed.
"If anyone needs help with the process or has any questions can call our dedicated Farming Recovery Fund helpline on 0300 060 2700.”
She added: “Storm damage claims are a top priority for Marine Management Organisation in order to get this much needed support out to fisherman as quickly as possible. Some 113 applications worth £365,000 have been received so far and we will send out money to these fisherman once they have purchased new pots. We expect the volume of applications to continue to increase in the coming weeks.”
Read more: http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/Labour-scorns-delay-funding-flood-hit-farmers/story-21227376-detail/story.html#ixzz34Ve7Xby5
Thursday 12 June 2014
Scallops - sustainable and profitable fishing
Fishing News International's excellent coverage of the Channel Scallops conference held earlier this year organised and chaired by the GAP2 project.
A follow up to yesterday's post on small boat fishermen and the work of NGOs supporting their cause
The article yesterday from Yan Giron gained some robust feedback, in particular from Jerry Percy in Wales. The previous post today relates the moves by Defra to garner comments and ideas from small scale fishermen in the UK with regard to the proposed unilateral driftnet ban planned for 2015 championed by ex-EU Fisheries boss Maria Damanaki, the subject of these recent posts by Yan and others.
The internet, through social media like Twitter and Facebook and blogs such as this is accessible to all - and better than that, provides a dialogue in real time between all those wishing to comment and add their say in fair and open debate - posts like this are made to encourage such comment and further inform readers wherever possible of a wider range of views and experiences.
Here Yan explains the thinking behind his comments in more detail.
The internet, through social media like Twitter and Facebook and blogs such as this is accessible to all - and better than that, provides a dialogue in real time between all those wishing to comment and add their say in fair and open debate - posts like this are made to encourage such comment and further inform readers wherever possible of a wider range of views and experiences.
Here Yan explains the thinking behind his comments in more detail.
"I would like to explain myself about it. First, I spoke about NUTFA, but in fact I refered about all European small scales fishermen groups which benefited from support of Greenpeace and also WWF and behind PEW.
This type of support was identified in our november 2012 Blue Charity Business report as a potential [control & command] strategy of PEW Charitable Trusts to be implemented in Europe.
In USA, PEW and other charitable trusts implemented what they call "Sustainable Fishery Trusts" to gain control on fisheries through the management issue. In USA, they managed to lobby to make compulsory privatised fishing rights to be implemented (they call it "smart management tools" or "catch-shares"). PEW, Walton and Moore gave money to some fishermen groups, like the Cape Cod commercial hook fishermen association, big amount of money to payback fishing rights from other fishermen. Then they pooled the fishing rights into a financial trust (http://capecodfishermen.org/fisheries-trust) which aims to lease this fishing rights to the fishermen, under new rules, apart from the fishing regulations, with strong environmental conditions. The overall privatisation of the fishing rights impacted strongly the US fishing industry in Maine and many fishing boats were destroyed. In the same time, PEW's friends used the regionalisation of the fishing management to lobby to implement a strong conservation-leaded spatial management to maintain remaining fishermen into smaller fishing grounds and under their rules. The main implementer of this strategy in USA was (and still is) EDF. EDF still receives several tens of millions of US$ per year to fund all this strategy of getting power over the fishery management.
In Europe, the strategy is a bit different. First Charitable trusts tried to make compulsory privatisation of fishing rights to everybody. Oak foundation (funding partner of PEW's strategy) made a meeting to remind its money benefitors that they had to lobby for that in the first semester of 2012. Then they gave up because of strong opposition into the European Parliament and from some small NGOs parts of OCEAN2012 PEW's coalition. But in fact they don't need this privatisation tool (even it is already implemented in many European countries, like your FQA). They can get power only by crossing several tools : (1) strong and difficult-to-implement regulations (such as strong application of discards, or driftnet ban), (2) spatial management and pretendous support to small scales fishermen and (3) heavy lobbying about implementation of enforcement of the difficult regulations they lobbied for (see how IUU issues come now in their communication). You must be aware PEW & PEW's friends requested many seats into the several RACs, because European Commission said RAC will be the place to finalize technical measures such as discard ban and very detailed "smart management tools". And if there is not enough SSF organisation who partner with them, they created some on their own. Weren't you surprised to have a new fishermen organisation in UK called Sustainable Inshore Fishery Trusts last year? Why do you think they called it like this? who funded them and recruit their staff? Aren't you surprised to discover this new US NGO coming now in Europe with a ready-to-implement fishing management toolbox ? (EDF) ?
Why these Charitable trusts support small scale fishermen? It is very useful for communication purposes: first, it is an excellent way to say "you can implement very strong regulations against "big boats" with a very low social cost". Second, they can use the sympathy credit and positive image of small scale fishermen into the public opinion. Third, their partnership is based on relationships between "bottom" NGOs nice young boys and girls freshly coming out from University (who are not aware of this global strategy and SScF. Four, it is a good way to promote their idea of what fishing industry must be into city dwellers mind (see the Greenpeace trailer "fisherman's friend" with a new look). Five, they can use the "David against Goliath" communication strategy which works well in the mind of not specialised people. In case some critics come out, the Big NGO won't directly answer to the critics. They will only say they are not opposed to fishermen, and let their partner SScF speak by themselves. These SScF are very sincere, and will be very angry, because they will have the feeling that they are critised directly whereas critics are directed against PEW and PEW's friends. So these SScF will be the best shield ever PEW's partner can find, because SScF are not aware of this overall strategy.
This is for the overall strategy. But there is a question which must not be forgotten, it is why it was possible to implement this control-&-command strategy so easily. Are we really sure all SScF were well associated and their interest well taken into account in our European fishermen organisations? Is our industry enough united, and if not why? What must be done to better balance fishing issues and implement a fair co-management? We also must not refuse improving our fishing where possible, and we must improve and invest time in partnership with scientists and enforcement, otherwise some people will come from outside to do it for you with their rules. The fact is many thing have changed since few years in our fishing industry, and we must build on our own future, in a fair way between all type of fishing activities, otherwise others will use our weaknesses. Our main threat would be to forget why some SScF had to do a eNGO's partnership and we must not demonise them for it. And on the other hand, our SScF colleagues who invest in eNGOs partnership must understand that there is some critics into these eNGO's partnerships, we can critise these partnerships and SscF are not the target of these critics. One good way is to implement co-management structure (between fishermen only) or to have everybody well represented in existing structures (and invest time in it). Of course, what I describe here is too global at the European level to address any local situation."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)