# Foreign EU trawlers catch more than half fish landed from British waters



## RHP (Nov 1, 2007)

Simon Johnson, scottish political editor 

11 OCTOBER 2016 • 1:27PM

Fishing leaders have said Brexit will provide a “sea of opportunity” for the industry after a major report found more than half the fish caught in British waters are currently landed by trawlers from the rest of the EU.

The study by the University of the Highlands and Islands’ NAFC Marine Centre discovered that boats from other EU countries on average caught 58 per cent of the fish and shellfish landed from UK waters between 2012 and 2014.

This equates to around 650,000 tonnes of fish and shellfish worth more than £400 million per year, most of which was caught around Scotland. In contrast, UK fishing boats fishing elsewhere in EU waters landed on average 90,000 tonnes of fish and shellfish, worth about £100 million.

However, leaving the EU will spell the end of the hated Common Fisheries Policy and enable the UK to assert control over its 200-mile Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). This means that foreign vessels could not then fish in the zone without express consent.

More than half the UK’s EEZ is around Scotland and fishing leaders north of the Border are furious with Nicola Sturgeon’s attempts to somehow bypass the Brexit vote and keep Scotland in the EU.

Bertie Armstrong, chief executive of the Scottish Fishermen’s Federation said: “This detailed analysis of these landing figures is a bombshell that reveals the truly shocking extent of how our rich fishing grounds have been given away in recent decades.

“Brexit provides a sea of opportunity to breathe new life into our coastal communities by ensuring increased catching opportunities and fit for purpose management within our own EEZ.”

But he warned: “It would be a monumental betrayal of our coastal communities if this opportunity was traded away in the forthcoming Brexit negotiations.”

Fishermen are angry at Nicola Sturgeon's attempts to keep Scotland in Europe

The 124-page study found that trawlers from the rest of the EU land around 650,000 tons of fish and shellfish worth £408 million from British waters each year.

This total includes 99,000 tons (£179 million) of demersal fish, such as cod, haddock and plaice, and 424,000 tons (£183 million) of pelagic fish, which includes species such as mackerel and herring.

They also catch 16,000 tons (£34 million) of shellfish and 111,000 tons (£11 million) of ‘industrial’ fish, which includes species such as sandeels and pout not suitable for human consumption.

In contrast, UK fishing boats land only 90,000 tons of fish and shellfish, worth £103 million, from the waters of other EU member states.

Trawlers from the rest of the EU caught half of the demersal fish, almost two-thirds of the pelagic fish and almost all of the industrial fish landed from UK waters.

The Scottish part of the UK EEZ covers more than 180,000 square miles, accounting for 61 per cent of the total. It is bounded by the zones of Norway, Faroe and Ireland, as well as England, Wales and Northern Ireland.

The study also found that more than half (51 per cent) of the fish and shellfish landed from the Scottish part was caught by non-UK boats. They landed 386,000 tons from Scottish waters per year, worth £210 million.

This is the equivalent of a third of the demersal fish, more than half of the pelagic fish and almost all of the industrial fish landed from the Scottish part of the UK EEZ.

While detailed catch data are not available for these non-EU countries, the report said their inclusion would not “substantially change” the overall figures as they land relatively little.
++

Hopefully the Spanish boats will catch Nicola Sturgeon and Alex Salmon in their last haul and ship 'em off to a cannery.


----------



## Dartskipper (Jan 16, 2015)

(Quote.)In contrast, UK fishing boats land only 90,000 tons of fish and shellfish, worth £103 million, from the waters of other EU member states. 


Often at risk to their gear, boats, and personal safety if fishing in "French" waters of the Western Channel. Many a crabber and trawler has returned to port with broken wheelhouse windows.


----------



## James_C (Feb 17, 2005)

I note the report doesn't say where these foreign vessels procured their quotas from.


----------



## Hamish Mackintosh (Jan 5, 2006)

James_C said:


> I note the report doesn't say where these foreign vessels procured their quotas from.


Brussels??


----------



## James_C (Feb 17, 2005)

Hamish Mackintosh said:


> Brussels??


Nope.


----------



## Hamish Mackintosh (Jan 5, 2006)

James_C said:


> Nope.


I'm sure I read somewhere that Portugal, Spain , and of all places Sweden were given the lions share of quotas, from an edict of the EU, Britain opposed of course but was out voted


----------



## Hamish Mackintosh (Jan 5, 2006)

Oops France should have been in there someplace, and scrub Sweden


----------



## James_C (Feb 17, 2005)

Hamish,
European waters are split up and administered by the countries which border them. Therefore a Spanish trawler (for example) wanting to fish in UK administered waters has to have a UK quota - obtained from the UK government (or organs of). The other method is to purchase a quota from a UK fisherman who already has one - many foreign fishermen have done this and there are some very well off UK fishermen (ex and current) as a result.
The reasons quotas exist in the first place is to ensure fish stocks are conserved, and came into effect due to the near collapse of European fishing grounds due to near-calamitous over-fishing in the decades upto the 1970s. Quite simply fishermen cannot be trusted to fish responsibly, because the more they fish the more they earn and UK fishermen were some of the worst offenders of the lot. Accordingly British fishing grounds suffered more than most.
Any fishermen out there who think our exit from the EU will mean the end to quotas and a free for all (for them alone) in UK waters are delusional. It will not happen because the government of the day cannot not listen to the scientists and ecological advice. Yet bizarrely that's what they all think will happen!


----------



## John Dryden (Sep 26, 2009)

Well then Jim maybe it is not a coincidence that most of the fish is landed in Scotland and the smaller ports on the NE coast of England obliged the stock situation,hopefully for a good result.


----------



## NoR (Mar 24, 2008)

James_C said:


> Hamish,
> European waters are split up and administered by the countries which border them. Therefore a Spanish trawler (for example) wanting to fish in UK administered waters has to have a UK quota - obtained from the UK government (or organs of). The other method is to purchase a quota from a UK fisherman who already has one - many foreign fishermen have done this and there are some very well off UK fishermen (ex and current) as a result.
> The reasons quotas exist in the first place is to ensure fish stocks are conserved, and came into effect due to the near collapse of European fishing grounds due to near-calamitous over-fishing in the decades upto the 1970s. Quite simply fishermen cannot be trusted to fish responsibly, because the more they fish the more they earn and UK fishermen were some of the worst offenders of the lot. Accordingly British fishing grounds suffered more than most.
> Any fishermen out there who think our exit from the EU will mean the end to quotas and a free for all (for them alone) in UK waters are delusional. It will not happen because the government of the day cannot not listen to the scientists and ecological advice. Yet bizarrely that's what they all think will happen!


What absolute rubbish. Britain had a far more efficient fisheries inspectorate than any other European country. OK so some fishermen broke the law and probably still do but that's no reason to tar them all with the same brush. There are malefactors in every industry.
I don't believe either that British fishermen are naive to believe that Brexit presages a fishing free for all.


----------



## James_C (Feb 17, 2005)

NoR said:


> What absolute rubbish. Britain had a far more efficient fisheries inspectorate than any other European country. OK so some fishermen broke the law and probably still do but that's no reason to tar them all with the same brush. There are malefactors in every industry.
> I don't believe either that British fishermen are naive to believe that Brexit presages a fishing free for all.


Oh really? Perhaps you can tell us about the state of the Cod and Herring stocks in the early 70s?
Perhaps you can also tell us about what the many British deepwater trawlers got upto off the Iceland or Artic grounds pre "cod wars"? Perhaps you could educate us all as to the degrees of fishing control in operation in those places.
As for your latter point, you either know nothing of which you speak or you have selective hearing if you actually associate with fishermen.


----------



## Satanic Mechanic (Feb 23, 2009)

NoR said:


> What absolute rubbish. Britain had a far more efficient fisheries inspectorate than any other European country. OK so some fishermen broke the law and probably still do but that's no reason to tar them all with the same brush. There are malefactors in every industry.
> I don't believe either that British fishermen are naive to believe that Brexit presages a fishing free for all.


Two words

Purse seiner


----------



## NoR (Mar 24, 2008)

James_C said:


> Oh really? Perhaps you can tell us about the state of the Cod and Herring stocks in the early 70s?
> Perhaps you can also tell us about what the many British deepwater trawlers got upto off the Iceland or Artic grounds pre "cod wars"? Perhaps you could educate us all as to the degrees of fishing control in operation in those places.
> As for your latter point, you either know nothing of which you speak or you have selective hearing if you actually associate with fishermen.


I was a fisheries officer for a period, so yes I know exactly what I'm talking about.
Giving away control of our fisheries to those morons in Brussels was an act of lunacy (if not treason).
Re. The Cod Wars. I don't blame the Icelanders for taking control of their waters. We should have used that as a reason to take control of our own waters up to 200 miles (or the meadian line), but at the time we had a particularly useless Labour Govt (Harold Wilson)and an equally useless Tory opposition (Edward Heath).


----------



## James_C (Feb 17, 2005)

NoR said:


> I was a fisheries officer for a period, so yes I know exactly what I'm talking about.
> Giving away control of our fisheries to those morons in Brussels was an act of lunacy (if not treason).
> Re. The Cod Wars. I don't blame the Icelanders for taking control of their waters. We should have used that as a reason to take control of our own waters up to 200 miles (or the meadian line), but at the time we had a particularly useless Labour Govt (Harold Wilson)and an equally useless Tory opposition (Edward Heath).


So cod and herring stocks in our waters in the early 70s were bountiful then were they?


----------



## NoR (Mar 24, 2008)

James_C said:


> So cod and herring stocks in our waters in the early 70s were bountiful then were they?


No they weren't but in the seventies we ceded control of fisheries to the EU. We could have imposed a far more effective conservation regime ourselves but thanks to Mr Heath that couldn't happen.


----------



## James_C (Feb 17, 2005)

NoR said:


> No they weren't but in the seventies we ceded control of fisheries to the EU. We could have imposed a far more effective conservation regime ourselves but thanks to Mr Heath that couldn't happen.


Right, so you admit that our fishermen overfished those stocks to near extinction?
There's no point in UK only stock conservation because fish have that annoying habit of not respecting territorial borders.
We didn't cede control of our fisheries to the EU, we retained control as it is still UK administrations who issue catching quotas (and they can and do refuse to issue them). The common fisheries policy is to ensure stocks are managed sensibly, and in that sense it has been a roaring success for the past 40 years. Witness the recovery of many once threatened species.


----------



## Hamish Mackintosh (Jan 5, 2006)

Hey Jim, I stick to my guns re the EU issues said quotas! Sure the Brit goverment distributes the quotas to applicants, be they Brit or French, but Britain had to apply to the EU in the first place for a country quota, and the EU still controls any area they deem being over fished(see Denmark 2015reef fishing)and close it down? I am quite familiar with quota systems having worked 37 years in an industry governed by quotas, supply management iswhat we termed it, which ensures a stable price for his product from the supplier , while also keeping pricing under control, works well untill offshore agreement come along then it is termed protectionism


----------



## Bill.B (Oct 19, 2013)

While working a ship here a couple of weeks ago the Master was from the Faroe Islands he said the talk in the islands was that Iceland, Faroes,Norway and an independant UK basically have the lion share of European northern fisheries and this was causing some anxiety in the EU.


----------



## James_C (Feb 17, 2005)

Hamish Mackintosh said:


> Hey Jim, I stick to my guns re the EU issues said quotas! Sure the Brit goverment distributes the quotas to applicants, be they Brit or French, but Britain had to apply to the EU in the first place for a country quota, and the EU still controls any area they deem being over fished(see Denmark 2015reef fishing)and close it down? I am quite familiar with quota systems having worked 37 years in an industry governed by quotas, supply management iswhat we termed it, which ensures a stable price for his product from the supplier , while also keeping pricing under control, works well untill offshore agreement come along then it is termed protectionism


You may stick to your guns but it doesn't make you correct - quotas for UK waters are issued by the appropriate UK government departments. The common fisheries policy decides how much fish is available to catch per year and allocates the numbers accordingly based on the scientific data.
Do you think it'd be a good thing for there to be no continental cohesion or control over fisheries stocks? If you want a salient reminder (that's closer to home) of just what happens when it's a free for all then just look at what happened to the Grand Banks cod fishery.


----------



## Dartskipper (Jan 16, 2015)

Fishing vessels were decommissioned from the late 1980's onwards, and their licences were sold to Spanish owners, amongst others, with the British skipper signing on to the crew so that the licence could be validated.

Inshore vessels, often going for shellfish, sprats or mackerel were arbitrarily decommissioned by size and length overall. This gave rise to some boats just over the prescribed dimensions having parts of their bows or sterns hacked off just so that the owner/skipper could carry on earning a living.

Nets and gear were also closely monitored for mesh sizes etc, and any landings would be inspected by Fisheries officials. This gave rise to large catches being thrown away because they were over quota. Trawled mackerel were generally rejected, although catches taken on hooks and feathers were OK.

I know, I was there. I couldn't restore my boat to trawling because she fell outside the size restrictions, so I went lining instead.

It was hardly a well thought out or organised policy. One trawler owner said he was going to have some signs made up so that he could hang them on his trawl doors warning any fish under quota restrictions to swim off somewhere else so that he wouldn't have to throw them away if they got into his nets.

Roy.


----------



## NoR (Mar 24, 2008)

James_C said:


> Right, so you admit that our fishermen overfished those stocks to near extinction?
> There's no point in UK only stock conservation because fish have that annoying habit of not respecting territorial borders.
> We didn't cede control of our fisheries to the EU, we retained control as it is still UK administrations who issue catching quotas (and they can and do refuse to issue them). The common fisheries policy is to ensure stocks are managed sensibly, and in that sense it has been a roaring success for the past 40 years. Witness the recovery of many once threatened species.


_"....The Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) is the fisheries policy of the European Union (EU). It sets quotas for which member states are allowed to catch what amounts of each type of fish...."_

So we don't have control of our own fisheries.


----------



## James_C (Feb 17, 2005)

NoR said:


> _"....The Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) is the fisheries policy of the European Union (EU). It sets quotas for which member states are allowed to catch what amounts of each type of fish...."_
> 
> So we don't have control of our own fisheries.


Why don't do you do some more googling and then come back and tell us who issues quotas to vessels fishing in UK waters together with the discretion the regulatory authorities have therein.
If you still don't want to understand the reason quotas exist - and indeed the reason they shall continue to exist post Brexit - then that's your business.


----------



## NoR (Mar 24, 2008)

Malim Sahib

The EU sets the quotas. End of....!!!


----------



## Hamish Mackintosh (Jan 5, 2006)

Exactly what I was driving at, the EU sets the quotas and the Brit government are the lackies who have to divvy up said quotas as it applies to Brit fishers (orrible being politically correct aint it?)


----------



## Hamish Mackintosh (Jan 5, 2006)

In the industry I was in there was a penalty for overproduction, but I can see J Cs concern as to overfishing, I think it would be a pipedream to think the same could be applied to he fishing. Industry can you imagine a self respecting scotsman being caught with a hold full of fish that he was obliged to pay for. hing a


----------



## Hamish Mackintosh (Jan 5, 2006)

Sorry for the confusion on the above post but my steam driven tripe setter seems to have a mind of its own


----------



## chadburn (Jun 2, 2008)

Read attached if you wish.


----------

