Hugh's Fish Fight

[pasty]

Anyone else watch this? I'll be the first to admit I knew nothing about commerical fishing, or the fish quota laws, but good grief, which fuckwit politician came up with those?

Fisherman are only allowed to "land" a certain amount, as a way of protecting the species, yet the fisherman end up catching more than they are allowed to land so have to throw it back into the sea - dead. So that really helps protect the species doesn't it

One fleet of Scottish fisherman estimated they had to throw back £35,000 worth of fish

 

[Barrel of Fun]

Not a Trawlermen fan then?

In some ways, it is a silly rule as there is no conceivable way of judging how many fish you are going to catch in a haul and try telling a fisherman to stop if he is closing in on the quota, but hasn't reached it yet, has a ship to run and crew to pay.

However, if there were no quotas then boats would run riot and empty the oceans (perhaps not empty). I'd imagine that some of the fish that are caught and tossed back in, end up in the food chain.

 

[16bha]

Agree there should be quotas, but they must be sensible for the fishing grounds. Hearing the guy fromHastings who had a quota to 'fill his boots' with Pollock, but has only caught one in 5 years. Somethings not right with setting these quotas me thinks!

 

[Notters]

Agree there should be quotas, but they must be sensible for the fishing grounds. Hearing the guy fromHastings who had a quota to 'fill his boots' with Pollock, but has only caught one in 5 years. Somethings not right with setting these quotas me thinks!

These things are so mis-reported. The quotas are essential to keeping global marine ecosystems alive and are generally too lenient if anything. They are very complicated to calculate but great care is taken in doing so.

 

[vegster]

the quota system does not work very well but they are struggling to come up with a way of sustainable fishing. The big problem is that the rarer a fish becomes it's price increases and so although fewer in number they are still worth catching.... you can see this with Tuna fishing in The Med. Tuna stocks are about 10% of what they were 20 years ago yet still they are hunted because of the huge price they fetch.

 

[portlock seagull]

I do work in the food industry and there are many such idiocies, most boil down to someone else somewhere, allegedly, getting a sum of monies to justify the policy. And there lays the issue; rich bureaucrats and businessmen prevailing over sense and the common man. Saying that, we haven't heard the arguments against Hugh's revolution, but whatever these are, and to paraphrase one fisherman, they maybe legally right; but morally they're wrong. Unfortunately the British public doesn't care enough. As a nation we like fish that doesn't taste like fish and species with a non fishy texture as such. I'd love to think things will change but once this weeks series is over we'll all go back to 3 battery chickens for a tenner at tesco; especially in these times of heavy food inflation. Believe me the increases suppliers are putting through currently, with no recourse, it's frightening. Worse to come, so pressure to maintain cheap foodstuffs grows daily and I'm afraid laudable attempts such as this to change peoples habits probably couldn't come at worse time in terms of a long lasting impact. Education is no bad thing but price is everything right now.

 

[GT49er]

Simple way is to put a limit on the size of fishing boats - some of 'em are the size of small liners! Of course, the EU would far rather cock it up!

 

[FOOTSKI]

A shocking waste, i cannot see the point...... just like most e.u law making ......no change there then

 

[Firefly]

The obvious answer is not to restrict what they land, but restricted the number of days they can go out and fish.
Not a perfect answer - but better then what we have at the moment

 

[Superphil]

There is no way that forcing fishermen to throw back thousands of dead fish has any benefit to conservation. Fact.

 

[Napper]

There are no cod due to no quotas - Fact

 

[Cosmic Joker]

Agree that restricting the number of days available to go fishing but not what is brought in avaoids the waste of quotas. Another idea, not mentioned on the programme, is that of restricting where can be fished. If certain large areas of the sea are left with zero fishing rights for a few years to allow stocks to build up and then the protected areas are rotated round every few years, much like leaving fields fallow for one year in four, it could help greatly if properly enforced.

One of the main problems with quotas from the programme seemed to be that they were quite quickly used up for some species such as cod and pollock, yet for the fishermen to get their quota for other species like mackerel or sole, this was in mixed fisheries, so there was no way they could avoid getting more and more cod to be thrown back. They couldn't afford to return to port as soon as they filled their quota for the first couple of species and not try for the others that they were allowed to land.

I liked the idea of fish & chip shops selling two fried mackerel in a bun as an alternative to cod and haddock or crappo sausages and burgers

 

[Joey Deacon's Disco Suit]

I woud have thought it was quite clear why that particular law about throwing dead fish back was brought in. It's to act as a disincentive to over-fish. Pure and simple.

If fishermen knew that extra fishing actually brought them nothing but extra work then they will be disinclined to over-fish. The alternative would be what? For them to keep them? In which case you will just get many many cases of fishermen "accidentally" over-fishing.

A similar analogy would be the hunting with hounds law. It's against the law to hunt foxes but if they "accidentally" stumble across a fox then the hounds are allowed to chase it. The packs hunt in the old areas, use the same techniques and not surprisingly quite often just stumble across foxes. This is no deterrent at all and neither would a law allowing fishermen to keep and sell excess fish.

There you have it in a nutshell.

 

[saint_clark]

I was on this programme Running one of the chippies.

 

[brighton bluenose]

Great film and campaign on the subject :

The End of the Line :: Home Page

 

[NMH]

What - no fish puns on this thread

Tsk, NSC in decline, humour is getting fin on the ground

 

[saslowi]

Norway manage their fish stocks without throwing any back but then they are not in the EC.

 

[portlock seagull]

I woud have thought it was quite clear why that particular law about throwing dead fish back was brought in. It's to act as a disincentive to over-fish. Pure and simple.

If fishermen knew that extra fishing actually brought them nothing but extra work then they will be disinclined to over-fish. The alternative would be what? For them to keep them? In which case you will just get many many cases of fishermen "accidentally" over-fishing.

A similar analogy would be the hunting with hounds law. It's against the law to hunt foxes but if they "accidentally" stumble across a fox then the hounds are allowed to chase it. The packs hunt in the old areas, use the same techniques and not surprisingly quite often just stumble across foxes. This is no deterrent at all and neither would a law allowing fishermen to keep and sell excess fish.

There you have it in a nutshell.

You clearly don't get it. They've all counted this argument, which you share and frankly says you've not understood the issue, by stating you keep the quota of total catch; just not the species specific one. Unless you invent a net that discriminates against certain fish species, you cannot eliminate by catch and therefore the insanity of discard, this is therefore the only logical solution. Moreover, it's sustainable. As politicians are slowly coming round to; just decades after the fishermen first alerted them. We need to change. And frankly comments such as yours my friend are delaying such change; wake up and smell the fish! Well done Hugh & Jamie, thank god someone's educating the masses - or at least trying.

By the way, our fish buyer who I work closely with, and I were discussing this today over coffee. He's told me about a forthcoming Dispatches programme will probably shock you especially farmed prawns piece. It's got the industry very concerned re: consumer impact. Sounds interesting, and I think it's this w/e.

 

[Return of the Rev]

Anyone else watch this? I'll be the first to admit I knew nothing about commerical fishing, or the fish quota laws, but good grief, which fuckwit politician came up with those?

Fisherman are only allowed to "land" a certain amount, as a way of protecting the species, yet the fisherman end up catching more than they are allowed to land so have to throw it back into the sea - dead. So that really helps protect the species doesn't it

One fleet of Scottish fisherman estimated they had to throw back £35,000 worth of fish

 

[Billy the Fish]

I don't eat tuna anymore.