REPORTS
Return to Reports Home

DIRECTOR'S REPORT FOR THE QUARTER ENDING 31 MARCH 2004

Weather : Unsettled. Frequent gales from the west and east. Generally mild, with two short periods of cold weather where temperatures fell below freezing. January and February were wet, March was drier.

FISHING ACTIVITY
Finfish : Trawling, netting and angling took place at very low levels during 'windows' in the weather. Cod fishing remained poor, but whiting were average. Bass remained present due to the prevailing mild weather and elevated water temperatures.

MOLLUSCS
Whelks : Nine boats fished from Tenby/Saundersfoot. The closed season took place from 1st Janu-ary to 14th February, but upon their return the vessels had to combat south easterly winds which cur-tailed fishing. Prices remained at £525 - £575 per tonne with good landings being made, conditions allowing.

Cockles : Cockling took place in the Burry Inlet, and lesser extent Whiteford Point, tailing off in March as meat yields fell due to spawning and markets closed.

Poaching effort simmered down due to poor cockle availability of the larger size, and fishing oppor-tunity at Morecambe Bay.

Cockle spat at Llanstephan, which showed promise for a future fishery, was largely washed away by inclement weather from the south.

The period has, thankfully, seen no positives for biotoxin following the adoption in mid November by CEFAS of refined and standardized analytical routines.

Mussel : Continued systematic thinning of the St Ishmael mussel was allowed under authorisation. Some adult was also taken for export to Ireland, along with some from Pwll (Llanelli). The seed was sent to Several Order areas in the Wash. In total some 248 tonnes of seed and 195 tonnes of adult were taken valued at £80 per tonne and c £300 per tonne respectively giving totals of £19,840 and £58,500 to the local economy. The remaining areas will now be monitored for mussel growth and re-cruitment having established baselines.

CRUSTACEANS
Vessels were maintained or replaced, and gear fixed. It is pleasing to note that several operators have the confidence to invest in new craft, some of which will be catamarans which have good sea keeping ability, turn of speed and deck area. No doubt, allowing more gear also to be fished!

GENERAL
Sand movements - The quarter has seen significant sand movements in Carmarthen Bay in most ar-eas - affecting the sand dune line right out to the offshore banks and intersecting channels. To such an extent, vehicle movements have become risky in the Three Rivers estuary.

Poaching ? - A night shift there intercepted suspected poachers working by torch and moonlight. In the end they turned out to be peat collectors whose only crime against SWSFC byelaws was to use an unauthorised vehicle. CCW, however, have taken further interest in respect to possible damage to SSSI features!

Staff - The Fishery Officer (east) position was filled in May following interviews on 26th March. We welcome Mathew Dawkins to the 'team' having previously been employed by the Environment Agency (again!) A knowledgeable sea angler and therefore versed in the ways of the sea, Mathew has now to learn the enforcement 'ropes' and all things "sea fish".

All officers have been given further adhoc training in various aspects, but following heavy recruit-ment in recent years there is a need to renew / induct officers to the advanced power boat certificate, and a dedicated course is in hand. Two officers attended the annual SFC Fishery Officers course at Torquay.

DEFRA licensing - is again topical.
a) Officers continue to talk to the industry over their perceived lack of enforcement by DEFRA of 'black economy' fishing - especially for bass. Again, some are threatening to join the ranks of the 'unaccountables' unless something is done. Senior officers continue to liaise with DEFRA on op-tions.

b) The restricted shellfish licence scheme comes into effect for < 10 metre vessels on the 1st April, which means that all DEFRA licensed vessels must now have an additional endorsement in order to continue to land quantities of crabs and lobsters. Entitlements allowing unrestricted landings of crabs and lobsters have been issued to owners of vessels already licenced by fisheries departments pro-vided they demonstrated that they caught more that 200 kg lobsters or more than 750 kgs of crabs, us-ing pots or fixed nets in any 12 month period between 1998 and 2002. Owners of under 10 metre vessels using these entitlements will be required to complete a return of daily activity, these returns are now likely to be in operation by 1st October 2004. The SWSFC scheme will continue in the in-terim.

Licenced vessel owners who fail to qualify for shellfish entitlement will be allowed to land up to 5 lobsters and 25 crabs per day, or when using towed gear to land up to 5% shellfish as a by-catch. In-dividual licence variations are being considered to allow 'unqualified' vessels to land more than the daily limits - where such practice can be justified. Such vessels will have to prove to DEFRA they have a history of storing and landing shellfish from keep pots.

Several full time shellfishermen have been informed that they do not qualify for the licence entitle-ment despite having fished mainly shellfish and have appealed the decision. This can arise, for ex-ample, by having sold a vessel that gave rise to an entitlement - but re purchased a replacement ves-sel after the cut off date. DEFRA / WAG are considering these cases on a hardship basis.

The SWSFC permit scheme was invaluable to some fishermen in confirming to DEFRA their enti-tlement. Officers consider the lack of regional effort control, and loopholes created make the whole scheme unsatisfactory for its intended purpose of restricting shellfish fishing effort. Alternatives will now be looked at (See : Crustacean WG - 26 September 2003).

Grants - Welsh fishing and aquaculture enterprises can apply for financial help to fund business im-provements. The WDA has launched the Fishermen's and Aquaculture small grant scheme to gain access to Objective 1 funding. The scheme is open to fishing and aquaculture enterprises; grants will be available to support projects between £1500 and £15,000 in Objective 1 areas only. Typical pro-jects are modernization of fleet, processing and marketing, also aquaculture. The aquaculture section eligible projects can include capital investment for technical innovation and measures to protect the environment. (See Item 11(d)). Applicants have been requested by WDA to consult with SFCs in advance of submitting their application in order to confirm that their proposals are appropriate.

NOTE : Some inspections are covered under more than one legislation and therefore can appear as more than one count in each period.

OUTSTANDING CASES - END JUNE 2004

CONCLUDED CASES - JANUARY - MARCH 2004

CASE ONE
1. DEFENDANTS
Owain Harries, 22 Upper Cross St., Llanelli
Matthew Rees, Cae Cottage, Penywarc Road, Llanelli

2. CHARGES
1. Jointly, did use a drift net in the Burry Inlet where such use is prohibited. Contrary to SWSFC Byelaw 31. (Both)
2. Refused to allow a Fishery Officer to exercise the powers conferred upon him. (Harries)

3. COURT SCHEDULE
Matters were dealt with by Llanelli Magistrates Court on the following dates:
24 November 2003 - Adjourned. Defendants not at court on account of court admin. delays issu-ing Summonses.

8 December 2003 - defendant Harries attends only to enter Not Guilty plea. Prosecution applica-tion to proceed in Rees' absence denied. Trial date set.

22 January 2004 - defendant Harries attends only. Prosecution negotiate Guilty plea on netting charge in return for dropping the Obstruction matter. Main prosecution witness Fishery Officer Henson had left the employ of the Committee in the interim and difficulties/expense were antici-pated in returning him to give trial evidence despite his full cooperation. Matters were proved against defendant Rees in his absence.

4. PROSECUTION CASE
On 21 August 2003 Fishery Officer Gareth Henson was on patrol in the Burry Port area where the defendants were observed from the shore over a period of two hours operating a drift net in the low water Pwll Channel. They were intercepted upon their subsequent return to Burry Port where other Officers joined the inspection.

The defendants were abusive and uncooperative. Harries refused to allow the Officers to seize the net on board his vessel. Both refused to answer any questions under caution.

5. DEFENCE CASE
In mitigation it was said that the defendants had gone out that day with the intention of rod and line fishing only and had engaged in that activity over a number of hours. Having caught a num-ber of fish the weather conditions had deteriorated forcing them to return before they could re-cover the boat ashore. They shot the drift net to pass the time having seen some mullet at the sur-face but did not catch anything.

6 VERDICT
The Court found the allegations to be proved against Matthew Rees
Harries was fined £200 plus £60 costs.
Rees was fined £300 plus £60 costs.
(Prosecution application for costs was £120)

CASE TWO
1. DEFENDANTS
M F Nowell, 24 North Corner, Newlyn, Penzance, Cornwall
S J Nowell, 20 Donning ton Rd, Penzance, Cornwall
P Brown, 19 Western Avenue, Portsmouth

2. CHARGES
1. Used a vessel in excess of 150 VCUs capacity. Contrary to SWSFC byelaw 38. Skipper li-ability with respect to MFV 'Semper Allegro' and owner liability with respect to MFV 'Nellie' for M F Nowell.
Owner liability with respect to MFV 'Semper Allegro' and owner liability with respect to MFV 'Nellie' for S J Nowell.
Skipper liability with respect to MFV 'Nellie' for P Brown.
2. Used a vessel without a Permit. Contrary to SWSFC byelaw 41
Liabilities as above.
Other charges relating to the use of excess aggregate length of beam trawls could not be sus-tained on the available evidence and were withdrawn.

3. COURT SCHEDULE
Matters were dealt with by Tenby/Pembrokeshire Magistrates Court on the following dates:
13 March 2003: Case listed but defendants unavailable. Not guilty pleas indicated. Adjourned in ab-sence of parties for Pre Trial Review.

20 May 2003: PTR adjourned. By this time another similar case involving the Admiral Blake had failed in the Tenby Magistrates Court and the process of an Appeal was initiated. In these circum-stances matters in this case were serially adjourned until that case passed through the High Court in late 2003.
26 January 2004: PTR adjourned in absence of defendants.
2 March 2004; PTR takes place; pleas confirmed. Trial date set.
16 March 2004; Trial.

4. PROSECUTION CASE
On 20 September 2002 whilst Cranogwen was on patrol along the south Pembs coast, two beam trawlers were sighted some 3 miles within the District off St Govan's Head. They were seen to haul their trawls to the surface and both commenced steaming toward the District boundary streaming their fishing gear on the surface.

Both vessels were closed by Cranogwen, were identified and their positions fixed. The weather con-ditions were deemed too severe to deploy the boarding RIB. No radio contact was attempted with the fishing vessels; there was some conflict in the prosecution evidence as to why this was the case.

Some 7 days later the defendants were interviewed under caution as the vessels lay alongside in Mil-ford Haven. Both vessel skippers gave debris dumping explanations for their activities within the Dis-trict and denied engaging in fishing activity although they both expressed the view that they should still be allowed to fish there (having once held Permits) despite the Byelaw.

Case law was relied upon to support the central theme that if fishing gear is in a state of readiness to be deployed for its purpose in a very short space of time, it is deemed to be in use. Regardless of why the vessels were in the District they should not have had their trawls on the surface from where they could be fishing within seconds.

5. DEFENCE CASE
The defence case followed the version of events given by the defendants when interviewed by Offi-cers under caution. One vessel was ridding itself of rocks and mud caught in its trawl whilst the other was jettisoning rubbish from the decks picked up during the previous night and washing the remnants from the nets. The cod ends of one vessel's trawls were open whilst the other's were ripped; in both cases neither were capable of fishing.

The 'Admiral Blake' case was cited but did not appear to have particular bearing upon the case as al-though the safety/rock dumping procedure was challenged, the prosecution case hinged around what took place afterwards.

6. VERDICT
The Magistrates did not find the case proved as they were not satisfied that the vessel's activities con-stituted a fishing operation in the absence of prosecution evidence on the condition of the cod ends. They also alluded to contradictions in the prosecution evidence.

7. DISCUSSION
The inability to undertake a boarding inspection of these vessels was fatal to the case; unfortunately this will not be an uncommon set of circumstances. Whilst the point of law regarding the readiness of fishing gears to be used may prevail on another occasion, it is clear that far more in the way of col-lecting available evidence will need to happen in future if there is to be any prospect of a conviction on a similar occasion.