|
Dear All
The opportunity arises to keep the industry informed of some developments:
Your application form for 2002 for a
permit to fish a boat under byelaw 41 is enclosed.
You will note some proposed changes, which will make administration
easier. Once you have provided the boat details as requested a permit
will be renewed automatically by SWSFC office upon receipt of catch
returns for the year.
However, this will only be issued provided all catch return forms
are up to date. As a reminder these are:-
For Crustaceans (Class 1) or Molluscs (Class II) monthly returns
submitted for the periods:
January - April (due May) : May - August (due September) : September
- December (Due January)
For Class III (White fish), an annual statement of landings taken
from the District due at the end of December.
If there are any changes of ownership or to the vessel, you must
inform the SWSFC office to enable the permit to be amended. This
is your obligation, and may otherwise render a permit invalid.
The Committee continues to face an acute shortage
of funding from local authorities. Most of its costs are staff costs,
and the uncertainty has seen numbers fall from 13 (including the
EU funded biologist) to 7 persons. (Excluding temporary staff).
The departure of two staff, and sickness of a third has caused further
difficulties during 2001.
Over the years the Committee has used its resources very prudently,
and 'ring fenced' to reserves reimbursement of its costs in relation
to the Sea Empress claim for the pur
poses of a lobster enhancement fund and vessel renewal. A local
authority sponsored funding formula, backed by the NAW, sought to
put in place a cap for 2001/02 which, in real terms, was like trying
to live today on the same money that was in your pocket over ten
years ago. This is in spite of new environmental responsibilities
and a growing public awareness of the problems facing marine fisheries.
The five years of local authority/ SFC/Welsh Office (NAW) discussion
on a future funding formula culminated in the recent SWSFC Judicial
Review of the NAW, which was determined in the Committee's favour.
A funding formula for the long term will continue to be debated,
but meanwhile the Committee has suggested to the funding local authorities
that they fix its budget for four years at a level equivalent of
five years ago. This is an extremely tight budget, and will inevitably
restrict the Committee's future contribution to voluntary initiatives
such as lobster enhancement. In addition environmental demands will,
of legal necessity, spread scarce resources even more thinly.
If you share our concerns, then you should contact your local Council/Councillor,
NAW member to make representations accordingly.
The Committee's EU PESCA backed grant aid scheme
has just come to an end. A total of 6332 female lobsters (most egg
bearing) have been V-notched and returned to the sea covering all
areas from Gower to Cemaes Head, most of which (86%) were returned
in 2001. Our congratulations go to those fishermen who committed
themselves to the scheme in 2001 to make it a success. Credit ought
also to go to SWSFC Fishery Officers who, although short staffed
throughout the year, endeavoured to meet as many fishermen at keep
boxes as quickly as possible.
The Committee has paid out of its own funds (saved over many years
for the purpose) over £30,000 plus admission and audit fees,
as well as many hundreds of hours time by officers on the ground
and in administrative support.
The end result is that egg production will have been increased in
each year of release. Moreover, these breeders can continue to be
protected as long as the notches or mutilated fins are apparent.
As these lobsters have effectively been paid for, the industry is
strongly recommended to carefully re-notch any lobster they find
when, through moulting regeneration, the notch has become less clear.
Of course, the benefits do not end solely with the egg production
of these releases in this and future years. Their offspring will
recruit to the fishery and themselves become breeders. Eventually,
the notches on adult lobsters will be lost, and they can then legally
be removed when, at a larger size, they will be worth more than
the original price paid to fishermen!
It is perhaps therefore not surprising that many within the industry
wish the scheme to continue. It is a case of potentially rich rewards
for little financial outlay.
Unlike lobster regeneration schemes in Ireland, Northumberland,
North East and in Cornwall, local fishermen (and company sponsors)
have contributed little. We are grateful for the pledges of support
received from the three local vessels. Furthermore, some fishermen
have said that they already contribute 'in kind' by either releasing
all berried females or themselves V-notching and returning cripples.
The existence of EU Objective 1 funding, we believe, presents an
opportunity to continue the scheme perhaps on an all Wales basis,
and at a greater level of subsidy.
The SWSFC Committee would be very keen to support such an initiative,
particularly if linked to a form of regionally restrictive shellfish
licence where the benefits could be said to accrue locally and for
the long term.
However, the acute shortage of Committee funding, and the effect
this has on officers time (both outstationed and at HQ), and the
uncertainty regarding future staff levels and even vessel operations,
means that we cannot commit ourselves to a contribution at this
stage. We have, however, offered to assist any future scheme in
any way we are able, and have suggested that local fishermen lobby
the economic development officers of local authorities to draw up
a scheme, which the SWSFC fishery officers (assuming numbers are
kept at historical levels) can assist be verification and co-ordination
on the ground.
The formation of strong co-operatives and Fishing Associations would
assist these processes no end.
A letter dated 14th December from Simon
Waterfield (DEFRA, Room 421d, 17 Smith Square, London SW1 3JR) -
(simon.waterfield@defra.gsi.gov.uk) asks for views by 28th February
2002 on a proposal under UK National legislation to Prohibit the
landing of berried female lobsters. Please respond accordingly.
The matter arises from support expressed within the UK Fisheries
Conservation Group and its shellfish sub-group.
Three mechanisms exist to protect lobster broodstock:-
(a) No landing of berried hens
(b) Maximum size
(c) V-notching.
Option (a) would produce by far the greatest benefits if it is 100%
adhered to. The reality rests with the degree of acceptance with
fishermen (and therefore voluntary adherence) and the effectiveness
of enforcement of the regulations. As the proposal is for national
legislation, Fishery Officers' powers are strengthened, and the
measure would apply across wider areas.
The success of option (b) and (c) and impact upon fishermen depend
upon the actual circumstances e.g level of maximum size and whether
it includes males, voluntary or subsidised V-notching, grow out
rate etc.
Subsidised V-notching schemes are all very well, but rely upon public
money.
It is in acceptance of these circumstances that the Committee sought
Welsh Office confirmation several years ago of a 140 mm maximum
size, modified to allow males to be excluded at Committee's discretion
(to effect occasional culls). This measure would affect offshore
fishermen the greatest, and was intended to balance against the
increase in minimum size to 90 mm which mainly impacts upon inshore
fishermen.
A decision from NAW on the maximum size byelaw is still awaited,
but will no doubt now be considered in the context of the national
proposal on the ban in landing berried hens, and any shellfish licensing
scheme.
The above groups also considered the
matter of restrictive shellfish licensing before the consultation
on proposals was circulated by MAFF (now DEFRA) on 5 January 2001.
The Committee fully responded endorsing the need for such a scheme,
but emphasising the need for it to be regional at the outset. It
also disagreed with many aspects including entry levels, species
covered, enforceability, public/non-licenced entitlement, and transferability
of licence.
We have heard very little comment from local fishermen, but consider
it essential that they raise their views.
Mr E Morley, MP (Fisheries Minister) has stated his keenness to
see some form of licensing introduced, and we envisage further movement
in the near future. It may not be too late to put views in place.
Contact Mr G Perryman, NAW, (02920) 825111 or ourselves for a copy
of the consultation.
The Committee received representations
to again postpone the closed season. Last year's closure was relaxed
due to exceptionally bad weather. Whilst a planned meeting of interests
did not take place due to unforeseen circumstances, the matter was
probably well covered orally.
The Committee considered the matter and decided that the closed
season would still go ahead.
You may be aware that the Committee advertised,
and subsequently considered a byelaw restricting vessel size within
the six mile SWSFC district to 150 VCUs (and retaining the 15.90
metre overall length within three miles of the low water mark).
Exemptions were provided in order to exceed the 150 VCUs based on
historical record (31 July 1998 to April 2000).
The matter still rests with the NAW for confirmation and until such
time the old byelaw (no vessels above 14 metres registered length
inside of three miles from low water) remains in force.
Following reconsideration of the boundaries of
previous candidate sites, the government has subsequently announced
several extensions:-
(a) Pembrokeshire Marine (formerly Pembrokeshire Island) cSAC has
been extended into Carmarthen Bay to include sea caves.
(b) Carmarthen Bay and Estuaries (formerly Burry Inlet) cSAC - extended
beyond the estuaries, encompassing the proposed SPA for Scoter duck,
and to include the Helwick Bank off the Gower.
Information on both is enclosed.
Each site now has a Fisheries Liaison Group established, the Carmarthen
Bay site being in its infancy. Mr I Wisby, Secretary Joint Fishing
Community of South & West Wales is the key link with both sites
at the moment but we understand will become less involved in the
Pembrokeshire site in due course.
The SWSFC is both a 'relevant' and 'competent' authority and is
obliged by UK law to use its fishery management powers consistently
with the site designations. This is turning out to be an onerous
and difficult duty.
The Committee has previously authorised hydraulic
dredging subject to a range of conditions. For a number of reasons
no fishery has yet commenced, but interest remains. The Committee
is obliged to consider protection of the marine environment as well
as the fishery implications. The very rapid decline of landings
of razor fish in some areas on the West coast of Ireland is perhaps
a justification of the Committee's concern.
The identification of the species present, their location, the public
health classification and environmental impact of various dredging
gears, and control of effort is still a prerequisite for any development
of the fishery. Each element encompasses many difficulties, and
we look to government for both guidance and resources. To date we
have received very little by way of response.
Meanwhile the government is answering to a complaint to the EU,
presumably by an environmental body, who allege that the SWSFC has
paid insufficient regard to the proposed conservation designations
within Carmarthen Bay cSAC.
Similar principles apply to the Committee's management of other
fisheries district wide. Yet, ironically the government and local
authorities consider that the Committee can do with fewer resources!
This explains why the Committee has itself complained to the EU
Commission over the government's failure to resource the SWSFC.
Skates and rays are a vulnerable and
declining group of fish which have commercial, angling and conservation
value, and explains why the SWSFC followed some other SFCs in setting
a minimum size under byelaw. Not the most popular measure, it is
hoped that the byelaw can be replaced by either a new byelaw, National
or European legislation out to twelve miles in due course. The decline
of most of these species is being used as an obvious example of
how the Common Fisheries Policy is failing and for the urgent need
for a change. We have argued for the extension of member state control
and National state regulation out to twelve miles has been argued
for, and the application of National minimum fish sizes to everybody
who takes them within this area, regardless of nationality.
A Welsh Skate and Rays Working Group has been established partly
because of the interest raised by the SWSFC byelaw. The leaflet
enclosed shows the membership which includes both Sea Fisheries
Committees, Fisheries scientists from CEFAS and Universities, conservation
groups and anglers and representatives of commercial fishermen (through
I Wisby).
The aim of the group is to try and identify the state of the ray
populations for each species and assess what practical measures
can be applied to stem any decline. In the first instance this requires
the identification and then filling of gaps in our knowledge and
understanding.
There are several areas where commercial fishermen can help:-
(i) Contribute to our knowledge on the capture of species e.g. By
size, species, method, broad location and season. This could be
undertaken by filling in your own records or by inviting an observer
(student or fishery officer) on board. All the data can be collated
in confidence. Further forms are available on www.sharktrust.org
(ii) To assist in the identification of egg capsules from various
species, especially those which are less common. If you see any
egg capsule originate from a spawning ray, send the capsule and
record the species to the Shark Trust or SWSFC.
(iii)We need to identify areas which contain either small ray or
spawning aggregations, and the seasonality. This would enable the
consideration of temporary closed areas or areas where certain gear
may be restricted.
The above information would then allow some adjustment to the current
SWSFC minimum size provision. For example maximum sizes for females,
or species specific sizes may be appropriate, with perhaps replacement
of the current byelaw with a smaller sizes if more ray are protected,
for example at spawning or at juvenile holding areas.
This is an extremely difficult subject and no proposals are yet
on the table. However, the group has reached common ground in identifying
the benefits for all concerned of having as broad a based UK or
EU policy as possible. Hence the groups submission to the EU during
its review of the CFP.
On the 1st October the Committee was
awarded MSC accreditation in respect of the Burry Inlet Cockle Fishery
which it manages. The award, the first in the world for a cockle
fishery, and fifth overall, reflects the sustainable management
of fisheries, in balance with nature conservation interests. The
fishery is consistently ranked the third biggest in the UK behind
the Thames and Wash suction dredge fisheries which take place within
much larger estuaries.
Since the award local merchants have been approached to supply new
markets with accredited cockles. In addition, applications for grant
aid have received a boost through confirmation that cockle stocks
have been independently assessed as sustainable.
The principles of management can be equally applied to other fisheries
- none more so than the lobster, crab and whelk fisheries where
creels are used, and by-catch returned alive. It may also be possible
to develop a fishery for razor fish and other clams in the same
way. A prerequisite to this is believed to be a restriction on the
number of vessels fishing any one area.
In the New Year we welcome Mr M Hamblin who replaces
Neil Richardson in Pembrokeshire, and Mr M Soroka in the Burry Inlet
area. Our thanks and best wishes go to Neil who has taken up a new
post with Southern SFC.
This newsletter has been sent only to the main owner of the vessel.
There may be other members of the crew who would find interest in
its content. Please pass it on as appropriate.
Wishing you all a prosperous and calm year for 2002.
From all at SWSFC.
|
