Fisheries Bill - 2nd reading.

Fisheries Bill [HL] - Second Reading

Part of the debate – in the House of Lords at 6:40 pm on 11th February 2020.

You can see this section from the reading of the Bill in context here:

My Lords, (Lord Mountevans Crossbench 6:40 pm, 11th February 2020) I note my maritime interests recorded in the register, particularly as a council member of Maritime UK, which brings together the UK’s major maritime trade associations, and as a trustee of Seafarers UK, the leading national maritime charity. Both organisations are concerned for the economic and social welfare of the UK’s coastal communities, not least fishing communities.

I shall not rehearse again the numerous positive features of the Bill, which your Lordships have heard about already, other than to say that I support it. It is an enabling Bill, and I am sure that many in the House will look forward to working with the Minister to achieve its desirable goals and others that have been suggested.

The Bill and what will follow offer a unique opportunity to address the severe challenges facing the under 10 metre fleet. This once-vibrant sector of our fleet used to supply fresh fish, employment—often in areas where few, if any, alternatives were present—and a sense of worth. There is a historical disparity in allocation of quota, in the form of fixed-quota allocations, which has seriously disadvantaged the smaller sector, which, despite making up 80% of the UK fleet by number, has access to less than 2% of our national allocation. I welcome the aims of Clause 25, which seeks to utilise social, economic and environmental criteria when allocating quota rather than continue to rely only on the highly controversial historical rights as a basis for allocation. I agree with the Fisheries Minister, George Eustice, who made clear in evidence to a parliamentary committee recently:

“As we depart from relative stability and have new fishing opportunities coming in, I do not think it makes any sense at all to compound the injustice of the FQA system.”

If I might make one suggestion to the Minister, an easy win for the under 10 metre sector would be for him to intercede to ensure that delays in granting the Coastal Producer Organisation the same rights and privileges as other producer organisations in the country are dealt with by the Marine Management Organisation. The under 10 metre fleet could then benefit from tailored quota management in the same way as the over 10 metre fleet currently enjoys. This could be profoundly beneficial to the fortunes of the small-boat sector.

Staying with quotas, it is clear that, in real terms, its effective privatisation has led to increased consolidation to the detriment of the small-scale fleet, which simply does not have the resources to compete with far better-resourced corporate bodies. There are some alarming figures out there: a recent investigation found that the five largest quota-holders control more than a third of UK fishing quota. Around half of England’s quota is ultimately owned by Dutch, Icelandic or Spanish interests. I have found, as I am sure have others, that the deeper one goes into this, the more complex the whole subject is.

On the basis of the above, I am concerned to see that Clause 27 promotes an annual auction of fishing rights. If the Government are looking at this approach as a method of generating revenue, surely a more equitable method would be simply to increase the levy currently attributed to the Sea Fish Industry Authority rather than effectively sell off a chunk of quota annually to the detriment of the great majority of the fleet, not least those who do not have the financial reserves to enter into an auction race and those new entrants where it has been recognised that a major impediment to their ability to enter the catching sector is the cost of quota. Such an auction would without doubt serve only to benefit already wealthy operators at the expense of other fishermen. and would ostensibly be open to resale or lease under the proposed rules, further underpinning the current imbalance in allocations.

In addition, Clause 27(3)(n) states that the regulations may include provision for

“the payment of compensation to a person who holds but does not use rights sold in accordance with the regulations.”

In much the same way as UK fishermen are regularly disenfranchised by the quota held by slipper skippers—those who have been awarded quota but lease it out rather than fish themselves—and quota traders, anyone other than genuinely working fishermen holding quota should arguably do so only on a “use it or lose it” basis.

On access to our waters by EU fishing vessels from January 2021, it is of paramount importance to the fishing community that, whatever arrangements the Government finally come to with the EU, the absolute red line for the UK’s inshore fleet is that the 12-mile fisheries limit is made sacrosanct. This move, together with the increasingly urgent need to develop, in the words of Michael Gove, Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, world-leading fisheries management linked to a fairer and more equitable allocation of quota, would do much to begin to rejuvenate many of our coastal communities and the small-scale fishermen and women who support them.

The Bill and the welcome accompanying debate around the UK fishing industry afford a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for government and society to address some of the challenges that I and other noble Lords have noted. The noble Earl, Lord Caithness, noted the dangers of this calling. In the past 10 years, 94 fishermen have died off the UK, 529 have suffered serious injury and 210 fishing vessels have been lost.

As noted by the noble Lords, Lord Grantchester and Lord Lansley, we must not overlook the importance and value of our distant-waters fishermen who fish the north Atlantic waters of the Barents Sea, Greenland and the Faroe Islands. In the context of the negotiations with the EU, it is vital that the UK retains access to these waters. At the same time, these countries will want continued access to the UK market for their fish exports. But as far as I can see, their interests are not addressed in the Bill. This may be appropriate, as the Bill seeks to address the opportunities of an independent state. Can the Minister say that their interests—essentially, continued access to the waters of Arctic Norway, Greenland and the Faroe Islands—will be assured? Their major concerns can be summarised as follows: a statutory requirement to consult industry, including the distant fishing fleet, in agreeing fisheries statements or in respect of bilateral or multilateral fisheries agreements; including in the Bill reference to the objectives and processes for UK participation in the future management of fisheries in the so-called northern external waters, and ensuring that the competent authority secures continued UK access to fisheries in respect of those non-EU coastal states with which the UK enters bilateral trade agreements.

I draw the attention of the Minister and the House to a forthcoming report from Liverpool John Moores University to be published by Seafarers UK. This follows the study, Fishing for a Future, which Seafarers published in 2018. That wide-ranging study covered multiple aspects of the industry and helped raise awareness of the safety, welfare and social issues affecting many of the UK’s small-scale coastal fishers and their communities among government and other policymakers. I commend the report, the final draft of which I hope I have seen.

Since I have the attention of a well-informed and very engaged Minister, I want to conclude with mention of some of the study’s recommendations. On the need for access to affordable credit, a proposal is made for a national credit union offer. A second proposal is for financial education for those employed in the “share fish” community; here, as with those employed in the gig economy, government clearly has a key role. Regarding PAYE, tax and national insurance, we recommend that charities, third-sector organisations and government departments initiate interventions to support fishermen where support and guidance with form-filling, assessments et cetera is required. To modernise share fishing, it is recommended that the larger-scale fleet more widely introduce employment status in its sector and that, within the smaller-scale fleet, a debate is had on the value of moving from a share fishing model to one based on co-operative principles. Finally, a national plan for the development and sustainability of small-scale fishing is proposed. This would need specific action to support the financial resilience and business success of small-scale coastal fishers.

Blueprint for the future of fishing from the NFFO.

The tectonic plates of European and internal UK politics are shifting. One consequence of this is that fishing has been thrust into a political prominence not seen since the cod wars with Iceland in the 1970s. Fishing rights have become one of the most emblematic issues associated with the UK’s departure from the EU. The NFFO examines where this shift will take the UK fishing industry.

Back to Bite

Some clever manoeuvring in 1973 by the existing EC member states, on the entry terms for UK’s entry to the EEC, gave them a huge advantage over 40 years. This has come back to haunt the present in a powerful way.

The principle of equal access, insisted upon as a precondition for UK entry, denied the UK’s prospects for a future as an independent coastal state. This would have given the UK control over its fisheries out to 200 miles (or the median line) in line with the emerging international norm at the time. Instead, the UK has been tied into an asymmetric, essentially exploitative, relationship with the other EU fishing members of the EU for over forty years. That relationship was called the Common Fisheries Policy. The British Government of the time knew what it was doing but considered fishing expendable to achieve other national objectives.

The statistics arising from that decision are now familiar. The UK is allowed to catch about 40% of the fisheries resources within its own waters, whilst other countries catch 60%. The EU fleet fishes around six times as much in UK waters as the UK fishes in EU waters. Fishing by UK vessels within the 12-mile limits of the EU member states is negligible. Fishing by EU vessels within the UK 12-mile limit is extensive.

There has been nothing balanced, fair, or reciprocal about these arrangements, especially when compared to the arrangements in other coastal states outside the CFP.

When quotas were introduced in 1983, the UK’s quota shares reflected those distorted access arrangements. The most notorious of these are becoming well known:

• Channel cod: UK share 9%, France’s share 84%
• Celtic Sea haddock: UK share 10%, France’s share 66%

A good negotiated agreement is one in which both parties emerge more or less equally happy, or unhappy. Although in the intervening years British fishermen have made common cause with European fishermen to resist the more damaging aspects of the CFP’s over-centralised form of regulation, the underlying grievance arising from the UK’s entry terms never went away.

That grievance has now proved politically toxic, feeding powerfully into the respective narratives in the referendum in 2016. It will not now go away until the terms of the relationship on fisheries between the UK and the EU are reset.

That is why comparisons between respective contributions to the GDP made by financial services and the fishing industry are irrelevant to the political arguments – a comparison between apples and oranges.

The visibility of the fishing issue is key to understanding that the UK government cannot afford, politically, to emerge from the negotiations ahead with a deal on fishing rights that does not reflect the UK’s changed status as an independent coastal state. This was true of the previous government. It is even more true of this administration. The general election results are heavily freighted with expectations that left behind communities will be a central focus of government attention. Many coastal communities are significant amongst those left behind. A reset of fishing rights is one way in which their prospects can be improved.

This explains the huge groundswell of support for a new deal on fishing across the parliamentary spectrum, large parts of the media, and the country.

A sell-out on fishing would irreparably damage the Government’s credibility. Given this background, all the signals from the Prime Minister downward, are that the UK will stand its ground on fishing.

Destination

There is nothing uncertain or opaque about the UK’s destination as an independent coastal state. The EU’s current relationship with third countries like Norway provides the standard model of how independent coastal states relate to each other in the management of shared stocks . For more than 40 years annual bilateral fisheries negotiations have successfully delivered effective management of shares stocks through:

• Total allowable catches set on the basis of scientific advice

• Quota shares that reflect the resources located within the respective zones (zonal attachment). In practice these tend to be quite stable over time.

• Agreed access arrangements

• Exchanges of fishing opportunities, where these are of mutual benefit

• This is a relationship that is reciprocal and balanced, with that balance carefully calibrated through cod-equivalents.

This is a very different relationship to that which pertains to the UK’s current fisheries relationship with the UK and which the EU wishes to retain.

The Commission’s assertion that there are too many stocks to be handled by bilateral negotiations suggests a degree of desperation. It is not as though the December Council of EU Fisheries Ministers, with its history of generating unintended consequences and perverse outcomes, such as large-scale discards, could be considered the epitome rational fisheries management.

Polarised Positions

On fisheries, the UK government could not be clearer about the future.

The Prime Minister, and senior ministers, have been explicit that:

• The UK will act as an independent coastal state, in line with rights and responsibilities defined in international law (UNCLOS)

• The UK will have regulatory autonomy within the UK’s EEZ

• There will be no automatic access rights for non-UK vessels: access will be subject to negotiation

• The UK is open to annual bilateral fisheries agreements with the EU and other countries

• Legislation passing through Parliament will provide UK ministers with the powers to manage UK fisheries outside the CFP

• Although in the immediate future EU retained law will apply, the Fisheries Bill contains provisions which will allow those CFP rules to be rapidly adapted to meet UK requirements

• By contrast, the EU has indicated that any free trade deal between the UK and the EU will be contingent on free access to UK waters and maintenance of the current quota shares. Not unexpectedly, the EU member states which have benefited disproportionately from the CFP over 40 years, wish to retain the current arrangements.

The Commission, in its proposed mandate, has subsequently tried to open some negotiating space for itself by referring to reciprocal access and stable quotas. This careful use of words is a fig leaf for retreat and has brought a swift response from those member states who stand to lose under this formula.

Reciprocity means mutual benefit and not disproportionate benefit for one party. And stable suggests a new equilibrium, not the status quo. This first wobble on the EU side suggests that the negotiating realities on fisheries are understood in Brussels, if not yet accepted in the capitals of some member states.

The logic of the UK’s status as an independent coastal state, is that if there is no agreement in July or December, there is no automatic access to each other’s waters – exactly the same outcome if the EU and Norway currently fail to agree in their annual fisheries negotiations.

Forcing the UK to trade on WTO terms, unless it again sacrifices its fishing sector, would hurt the UK, but it would also carry serious collateral damage for several EU member states, who might be expected to withhold their consent. This looks like an opening negotiating gesture rather than a realistic outcome.

What we have at this stage are the polarised positions that might be expected at the beginning of any tough negotiations. On fisheries, the differential dependence of UK and EU fleets on access gives the UK an unusually strong hand.

Markets

The UK government has been explicit that leaving the EU means leaving the single market and the customs union (leaving aside the complexity of the Northern Ireland backstop.) Trading with the EU will therefore change. Frictionless trade will end. That is a political choice made by the UK by a government endorsed by the outcome of a general election.

The precise shape of the UK’s future trading relationship with the EU will be the subject of parallel negotiations, which will take place over the rest of this year, unless they are truncated mid-year.

The new Government is explicit that the new trading and customs terms will require businesses to adjust, including those trading in fish and shellfish across the UK/EU border. There will be significant challenges.

There will be more bureaucracy at borders to adapt to. Live shellfish and fresh fish are especially vulnerable to any form of delay. What is clear amidst the uncertainty is that fish and shellfish will continue to be caught, landed, sold, transported, processed and consumed. There are businesses in the supply chain on both sides of the Channel which need this trade to work smoothly.

New Equilibrium

No one knows what the future will bring. It is possible to speculate, however, on the general outline of a future fisheries landscape.

First and foremost, the Government’s positioning and the political dynamics within the UK, suggest that the UK will not back down on fishing in the forthcoming negotiations with the EU.

The big change, however, requires no negotiation and happens by default. There will be a new legal architecture. When the UK leaves the EU and after the transition arrangements expire, the UK will be an independent coastal state under international law. The Withdrawal Agreement recognises as much and accepts that access to fish in each other’s waters will no longer be automatic – but will be a matter of annual negotiation. The UK will negotiate fisheries agreements as an independent party and as a coastal state independent of the EU.

Within this context, the Government has signalled that it is open to a fisheries agreement in which access to UK waters by EU vessels can be presumed, subject to agreement on:

• Total allowable catch
• Rebalancing of fishing opportunities

There will be a new equilibrium. This is the shape of a future deal on fisheries.

In international fisheries negotiations, without the UK the EU will be a much-diminished force. In the North Sea, for example, it will control only around 20% of the sea area, with the balance held by the UK and Norway. In Western Waters, the UK and EU will be roughly equal partners in any future fisheries agreement. That is very different from the CFP when the UK was a single voice amongst 15 or 28.

Many fishing communities in the UK have something to look forward to. Significantly increased fishing opportunities will be available, although the changes will vary by fleet and area.

Coastal States Fisheries Agreements

The UK will emerge as a significant independent player in coastal state negotiations. Norway, Faroes, Iceland and Greenland are all closely watching political developments between the EU and the UK. All have important commercial interests at stake in the new emerging relationships in which the UK is a major independent fishing country – but also major market for fisheries products.

The number of coastal states operating in the North Atlantic will increase from six to seven. It can be expected that the UK will not behave in any way different from the existing coastal states. It will prioritise, equally:

• Sustainable fisheries management
• Its own interests
• Domestic Fisheries Policy

The content of the Fisheries Bill currently passing through Parliament provides, in outline, the future shape of domestic fisheries policy.

Initially, EU retained law, adjusted where necessary to make it operable, will be the basis for fisheries management. There will be no dramatic overnight change
Responsibility for managing fisheries will continue to be be devolved, with international negotiations retained as a reserved power and coordination maintained through a memorandum of understanding and Joint Fisheries Statements agreed between the Secretary of State and the devolved administrations

Management plans will provide the vehicle for sustainable fisheries management, and achieving the different objectives laid down in the primary legislation; these will be applied at the level and scale of the fishery to be managed. This structure provides significant scope for co-management, building on the forms of collaboration between fishers, fisheries managers and fisheries science already in operation

All the signs are that the shortcomings of the CFP have been well understood and the Fisheries Bill framed to avoid the pitfalls. In particular, the CFP’s rigidity and cumbersome decision-making will be avoided. UK fisheries policy can be expected to be much more agile and adaptive. For this to be tractable, significant powers are delegated to avoid being hamstrung by over-centralisation. Over time, these powers will be used to replace EU retained law
Economic Link

In 1995 Tony Blair and the then President of the European Commission, Jacques Delors, exchanged letters on measures that a member state might lawfully take to ensure that national quotas bring proportionate economic benefits to the country that they are allocated to, irrespective of who holds those quotas or where the fish is landed. The resultant economic link licensing conditions have been in place ever since.

Leaving the EU means that the EU Treaty provisions on freedom of movement of labour and capital and right of establishment, and oversight by the European Court of Justice, no longer apply. There is an opportunity to do things differently. Some have called for all landings of fish caught by British vessels to be made in the UK. Some would go further and reallocate all quota held by non-UK interests.

A number of factors are salient:

• What will be the UK government’s general policy be towards inward investment? Is Britain “open for business”? Or will a more restrictive approach based on narrower national priorities prevail?

• Would fishing be treated differently because fish is regarded as a national resource?

• What would the practical effect of a requirement to land all UK caught fish into the UK be, if the end user is abroad?

• What is the government’s general position on concentration of ownership of fishing rights?

• What is the legal position on the reallocation of quota? Would compensation have to be paid where the quota holders have a legitimate expectation upheld by the courts?

• Where would quota be reallocated to and on what criteria and what would the consequences be?

These are big and complicated questions that deserve proper attention. All the signs are that they will not be addressed in the first phase of adjustment to the new post-CFP equilibrium. What is more likely is a review and strengthening of the economic link licensing conditions, to ensure the UK benefits properly from its resources. Currently, UK registered fishing vessels may meet their economic link requirements in a number of ways:

• landing over 50% by weight of their catch (which are subject to EU quotas) into UK, Channel Islands and Isle of Man ports.

• demonstrating that at least 50% of the total crew man days at sea were accounted for by crew normally resident in UK coastal areas.

• providing proof that routine expenditure in the UK on goods and services for the vessel was equal to either: i) 50% of the value of quota stocks landed net of crew wages, or ii) 50% of the vessel’s total operating expenditure for the year, net of crew wages.

• donating quota to the English under-10m fleet equivalent to a value representing 10% of the value of catch landed overseas.

• any combination of the above methods agreed by the MMO.

One loophole which will require addressing relates to valuable fisheries that are not currently under quota. Bringing all catches by UK vessels under the economic links requirement would be a relatively straightforward way to deal with this gap.

Summary

The UK’s altered legal status as an independent coastal state, along with the UK Government’s publicly stated political priorities, suggests that although the forthcoming negotiations with the EU will be tough, change will follow.

As a coastal state, working within the framework of the UN Law of the Sea, the UK can be expected to behave like a responsible independent coastal state, which will, nevertheless press for its own interests in fisheries negotiations.

After a period of transition, things will settle down into a new equilibrium.

Full story courtesy of the NFFO.

Plymouth could become the new epicentre of English fishing

Plymouth could become the new epicentre of English fishing, with the Council’s draft Plan for Sustainable Fishing aiming to revitalise the industry in the city.

Fishing has always been a part of the city’s DNA and the Council’s recent research has shown that the industry has been growing steadily over the last 20 years.

In fact it could be said it was the industry that founded the original settlement. Now the Council is launching the first stage of a renaissance in fishing, with the draft Plan for Sustainable Fishing.

Council leader Tudor Evans OBE said: “Fishing matters. There is so much to be proud of: the heritage, the variety of fish caught, the breadth of the fleet. There is nowhere else with our pedigree but we need to be prepared for change and ready to seize any opportunities that arise. As we exit the EU, this industry’s fortunes could dramatically change. As Britain’s Ocean City, we need to do all we can to support an industry that is so pivotal to our story. We want to help fishing take advantage of the new Fishing Bill and negotiations of the fishing policy following the UK’s departure from the European Union.

“We secured funding from the European Marine Fisheries Funding and employed consultants Arcadis, who have been looking ahead and exploring what needs to happen for the industry to capitalise on this change.”

Themes include:

• The right facilities - regenerate the Fish Market and the Fish Quay. This could form a key element of the city’s National Marine Park plans and celebrate our rich maritime and fishing culture 

• Supporting people with a career in fishing - with the average skipper is aged 54 and a crew member 38, the plan puts forward ideas to bring in more women, former military personnel and schools leavers as well as improving training.

• Sustainability - Plymouth could be a test facility for greener buildings, cleaner propulsion systems for the fleet.

• Policy support and lobbying - lobby to ensure the best deal for Plymouth fisheries in the trade negotiations with the EU to ensure our mixed fleet grows and prospers as well as lobby to be administrative capital of fishing in the UK

• The right business support for growth: Raising finance to support growth can be an issue. Help could come in the form of a new legal body or fishing co-op to help with easier access to finance.

Plymouth’s fishing industry is currently strong. It is home to the second largest fresh fish market and lands around 13 per cent of England’s total fish catch each year. It directly employs over 480 people and over 1,920 in the wider supply chain. Between 50 and 60 per cent of the fish sold at the market arrives by land from surrounding towns and villages, showing how vital the fish market is to the region.

The Council has put together a draft plan and wants to hear what the trade and its stakeholders think about ideas that could help the city seize opportunities as well as address some of the challenges the industry faces.

Cabinet will meet on 10 March to look at the draft plan and to recommend a consultation gets underway later this month.

Full story courtesy of Plymouth City Council

APPG Event Explores Socioeconomic Solutions for UK Fishing Communities

Last week, Parliamentarians and representatives from across the fisheries sector met in Westminster to discuss the socioeconomic challenges and opportunities facing fishing UK communities. The Social and Economic Sustainability event, arranged by the All Party Parliamentary Group on Fisheries, provided a briefing on the issue for the seven parliamentarians present and discussed how issues can be addressed through policy and collective action. The session was the APPG’s most popular to date.

The fisheries sector can be challenging to work in due to sporadic income, unsociable working hours, and risks to health and safety. These social factors, among others, can impact entire coastal communities. What’s more, reports have highlighted that a substantial number of fishing communities suffer from socioeconomic deprivation.

Panelist Deborah Layde, Grants Director at Seafarers UK, flagged that income insecurity was a top concern. “Insecure, fluctuating incomes create problems in maintaining regular payments for housing, council tax and priority debts. These problems can then lead to housing, mental and physical health issues,” she said. “We need to impress upon policymakers that the sustainability of those that work in fishing and coastal communities is just as important as the sustainability of our fish stocks. It is not all about the fish!”

“Uncertainty is now the main challenge for the industry,” said Arina Motova, Chief Economist at Seafish, who also presented at the meeting. “There is uncertainty in future quota and fisheries management, uncertainty in trade relationships and uncertainty in availability of labour force. It’s very difficult to plan any business or investment in this environment.” Going forwards, Ms Motova believes that attracting young people into the sector is crucial. “The sector needs particular support to compete to attract young people and create possibilities for younger generations. Work is especially required in smaller local fishing communities.”

Griffin Carpenter, Senior Researcher at the New Economics Foundation has a similar outlook on the challenge of uncertainty. “The UK fishing industry and the communities that support and are supported by it have a major challenge in responding to a technological and economic transition,” he said. “If we are to address this, new policies will be required, but first we need vision for the industry. Marine fisheries are, and will continue to be, a public resource owned by society as a whole. Now is the time for new radical visions of what modern fisheries could look like.”

Parliamentarians, industry representatives, environmental NGOs, policymakers and many more gathered within the Palace of Westminster, filling a Commons Committee Room and sharing insights from around the UK on the issues presented.

"The event provided a great opportunity for our APPG members to engage with people from across the fisheries sector,” said Sheryll Murray MP, who chaired the event. “We had a wide-ranging discussion on how we can best support our precious fishing communities, and everybody left with plenty of ideas on addressing the socioeconomic challenges that these communities face." Ms Murray’s family was supported by a small fishing vessel for 24 years, highlighting that fishing can provide a fruitful livelihood under the right conditions.

Proposed solutions to socioeconomic challenges were broad-ranging and acknowledged the complexity of the situation. Including fishers in management and policy decisions, and developing port infrastructure were among the priorities discussed.

The next APPG meeting will be publicised in the coming weeks. All involved in the industry are invited to attend, and all meetings are free of charge. A detailed report, covering meeting outcomes and proposed routes to progress, will be available shortly via the APPG website – www.fisheriesappg.org – and newsletter (sign up at https://www.fisheriesappg.org/contact). Anybody working within the fisheries sector is encouraged to get in touch with the APPG regarding suggestions for future meetings and discussions.


Contact: All Party Parliamentary Group on Fisheries Secretariat

First #FishyFriday in March.

No better sign of freshness than blood, MSC Certified Cornish hake...

the odd JD...

good to see some the buyers practicing their two-step for the 11th Newlyn annual ballroom dancing competition...

a box of Couch's bream, no doubt they will grace the counter at a certain Chelsea fishmonger's tomorrow, who knows they might even feature in one of young Rex's tweets...

a huge shot of pollack from the netter Stellissa filled the grader hall...

gladly stacked nine high by Fal Fish buyer Edwin...

easy to see from where the spurdog earned its name...

one flew over Rowse's crabber fleet...

which is still in the process of deploying a fleet of pots...

 for the Cesca, the latest vessel to join the fleet

the Belgian beam trawler, Francine...

works 12m beam trawls...

and uses double-purchase blocks to handle such heavy gear...

back working together again...

little Graham...

and Ian Oliver land fish from the good ship Sapphire II...

not one but two of Stevenson's fleet are being decommissioned, the Filadelfia has joined the William Sampson Stevenson...

it won't be too long before another heavy shower deepens those blue hues around and above the harbour.

Happy St Pirans Day - Du ha'n Owr

Du ha'n Owr - Black and Gold

Fishermen can help find out what is happening with Catch APP by completing this survey.

Typical UK Under10m fishing vessel

Seems to be a queue of people and organisations who think that they know how the Catch APP is working for those affected. This new survey looks to get into the detail a bit and will sent to all those who take part and published on line. Please take 5 mins and have your voice heard. Posted on behalf of Jerry Percy - Under10m sector representative:

Please use this link to complete the survey - you can familiarise yourself with the questions below beforehand:


1. What are you contact details?

Home Port
PLN
Email

2. Have you downloaded Catch APP?

Yes, and I have tried to use it.

Yes, but I haven't used it yet.

No, but the MMO have told me I have to.

3. Why are you using Catch App?

Because I think it will provide good fisheries data which will lead to better management

I am afraid of prosecution by the MMO if I don't

Other (please specify)


4. How much time does it take you on average to complete the Catch APP prior to landing.

Less than 15 minutes

15-30 mins

30 mins - 1hr

Over an hour

Other (please specify)

5. Which of the following are problems you have encountered while using catch app? 

Please tick ALL that apply to you.

I have encountered no problems, its fine.

I am not able to accurately (nor within 10% required) guess the weights correctly

It does not list my port

There is no, or little phone signal in my port and so I cannot submit before landing.

Difficult with cold, wet hands in dark to fill in and suspect hit the wrong buttons sometimes.

My harbour has limited landing facilities. Sitting in the landing bay while I am complete the APP gets other fishermen annoyed as they have to wait.

I don't have scales on board, so have to guess weights.

My free deck space is not big enough to lay out all the boxes and guess weights before landing without having to stack unsafely and effect stability of my vessel.

I have dropped my phone while trying to do this.

I have dropped and broken my phone while trying to do this.

My mental health is suffering as a result of the stress felt to comply with something, it is impossible to comply with.


6. Have you been to an MMO drop in event on Catch App, if so did you find it helpful?

Yes. I went to a drop in and all my questions were answered.

Yes. I went to a drop in event and some of my questions were answered.

No. I went to a drop in event and my questions were not answered.

Other (please specify)

7. Have you fed back your concerns and problems with the Catch APP? Please tick ALL boxes that apply to you.

No. I think the APP is fine and the system works well.

Yes, I raised issue at MMO drop in event.

Yes, I raised issues with local MMO officers.

Yes, I raised issues via a call to MMO HQ.

Yes, I have raised issues with my local MP.

Yes, I have raised issues with DEFRA.


8. Who pays you for your catch?

I land all my catch to an auction house.

I land some of my catch to an auction house and some to a merchant / company.

I land all my catch directly to a merchant/company.


9. What type of fishing activity do you conduct? Please tick ALL that apply to you.

Potting

Netting

Trawling

Scallop dredging

Beaming

Rod and line

Scallop diving


10. How many different species do you catch on average?

Less than 5

5-10

10-20

More than 20


11. How many days at sea a year do you fish on average?

Less than 50

50-100

100-150

More than 150


12. Do you think Government should scrap TheApp and work with industry to find a better solution to get accurate fisheries data for the under 10 fleet?


Yes

No


13. Would you like to add any comments of experiences of Catch APP and MMO engagement?


14. Are you a member of any of the following? Please tick ALL that apply to you.

NFFO

Coastal PO

Another producer organisation

NUTFA

A local fishermen's association.