The attitude of the environmental group Greenpeace towards the international fishing industry has been well documented in recent years. What began as a respected challenge against illegal fishing, human rights abuses of crews and a general ideology in protecting the world's oceans has become an apparent direct assault on the commercial fishing industry in a bid to halt any and all developments.
In Europe for example, no matter how severe the quota reductions passed every December by the European Union's Council of Ministers, Greenpeace will release statements describing it as a 'cop out' by ministers and that the EU are guilty of continuing to encourage plundering of stocks.
While more forward thinking and progressive conservation groups, such as PEW and WWF, accept that quota reductions and voluntary technical fishing gear changes can eventually lead to a sustainable fishing industry, Greenpeace have repeatedly proven that they are not interested in such a future.
Next Monday (Feb. 4) Greenpeace are to launch the results of a study that they have undertaken into the operations of one of the United Kingdom's biggest and most respected fishing industry groups -- the National Federation of Fishing Organizations (NFFO).
This so called 'big story' is to be released to all of the UK's national news media and apparently reveals that the NFFO membership includes 57 percent foreign investment and also that the NFFO advised the EU Commission that non official inshore fishermen's groups should not have a voice on Europe's Regional Advisory Councils (RACs) -- an ongoing hot topic in the UK in relation to quota share-out between the inshore and larger sector fishing fleets.
Personally, I believe that if a member of the NFFO who is an owner of a large trawler, chooses to sell a portion of his business venture to someone outside of the UK, then that is neither the fault nor the responsibility of the NFFO.
Also, in relation to the RACs and unofficial inshore groups, the NFFO is only echoing the already stated policy of the EU Commission and this is not a 'leaked document' as Greenpeace are trying to dramatically claim. No, there is a much bigger picture here – one that presumably will not be included by Greenpeace in their press release next week. Early last year, Greenpeace made much noise about the fact that they were going to help the UK's inshore fishermen by forming by an alliance with the inshore group NUTFA (New Under Ten Fishermens Association). NUTFA and NFFO have been at odds for quite some time over quota allocations and UK Fisheries Minister Richard Benyon has intervened several times to attempt to calm the debate.
And now, surprise surprise, we see Greenpeace launching a very public attack on the NFFO.
The question arises “just who is using who here?” While NUTFA may, in their innocence, have thought that getting the weight of a major group such as Greenpeace behind them would help their cause, they have merely opened the door and given the world's most recognized anti fishing industry group a foothold inside the UK's industry where they can attempt to dismantle it from within.
NUTFA should be aware that Greenpeace would launch a similar attack on them in the morning if it suited their purpose.
Even if the NFFO is guilty in some way of a misdemeanor, which they aren't as far as this journalist can see, then this is a case for the UK fishing minister and his officials to deal with.
It has nothing to do with overfishing, abuse of quotas, breaking any regulation that the public needs to be urgently made aware of. In short, it is simply none of Greenpeace's business and one can only wonder if this is the first of many attacks planned against the industry for the coming year.
Article courtesy of Cormac Burke, Editor of Intrafish publications Fishing News and Fishing News International.
And here is the said article from GreenPeace:
At a time when we’re all concerned about what goes into our food, the phrase "it's not what it says on the tin,” has never been more appropriate. Our latest investigation into one of the most powerful and influential fishing industry bodies in the UK has exposed a clique of foreign fishing barons, including companies linked to illegal and destructive fishing.
It’s a classic case of smoke and mirrors, and at stake is one of our greatest national assets – fish.
This is likely to be the first time anyone has scrutinised the claims and membership of the National Federation of Fishermen’s Organisations (NFFO) despite its role as one of the government’s main industry advisory bodies on fishing matters. I'm sure the government will be as surprised as I was at what we uncovered.
The NFFO claims to be "the representative body for fishermen in England, Wales and Northern Ireland," looking out for the interests of boats both small and large. An ambitious role we thought, so we decided to investigate how true this was.
Over many long months looking into the secret membership of the NFFO, by analysing complex company accounts and shipping registers, we were all astonished to discover that:
- Over half of the NFFOs fleet is controlled by foreign fishing interests. This means that, whilst these boats sail under the Union Jack, they are ultimately controlled by companies or individuals from other countries. This means they use the UK's fishing quota, and will often fish in UK waters; however, they probably contribute next to nothing to the UK economy. The kicker here is that these boats are some of the largest and most powerful in the fleet.
- The NFFO is inflating its claims as to how many fishermen’s associations it actually represents. We were able to verify that 11 out of 20 listed on the NFFO's website are in fact not members. These include associations that are no longer members, have never been members or don’t even exist anymore.
- The NFFO is working against the interests of small-scale fishermen. In a letter leaked to our investigators, we discovered that the NFFO is trying to deny small-scale fishermen wider representation on key political forums in Europe. This is really significant at a time when the overarching rules governing fishing in Europe are being reformed.
- The NFFO represents vessels involved in illegal fishing on a large scale. For example, the O Genita and its Spanish Vidal family owners – who we exposed in another investigation last year – is an NFFO member and was central to the largest illegal fishing case in British maritime history with penalties of £1.62m.
What does this all mean?
Our investigation reveals that the more sustainable part of our fishing fleet is being shut out of the very system that dictates whether they prosper or go bust. The NFFO is giving the impression that it represents most of the fleet and that it's a friend of small scale boats, but this investigation shows that their membership is dominated by large powerful, often foreign controlled vessels, and they just pay lip service to the interests of the small scale fleet.
In a situation where about two-thirds of Europe’s fish stocks are overfished, it is crucial we defend the interests of those that fish in a more sustainable way and with a lower impact on the environment. Over three-quarters of the fishing boats in the UK fleet are considered small scale. They are vital to our fishing industry as they support more jobs – in England this fleet represents 65% of jobs at sea – and they help to maintain the social cultural and economic fabric of the coastal communities we all love so much.
This sector is desperately trying to forge itself better representation at a political level to try to match the might of the NFFO, so it's simply shocking that the NFFO is trying to prevent this.
Of course, fisheries minister Richard Benyon could reassure everyone that he isn't simply taking his cues from a one-sided lobby group. What he should be looking for from the NFFO is transparency: a public list of members, for instance, or corrections for the false claims it's made about various fishermen's associations it represents.
What’s in the tin really matters, and it seems we really have opened a can of worms with this one.