|
|
As Environment and Conservation Officer, I am representing WFSA in two current Wales Assembly Government initiatives:
The Wales Fisheries Strategy Steering Group and the Stakeholder Advisory Group on the development of a new regime for the management of fisheries in Wales.
There are two new consultations of interest to sea anglers.
Any comments / observation or information can be sent direct to me by e-mail at caerodyn@hotmail.co.uk.
Environment & Conservation Report to the EC 23 January 2010
1. Wales Assembly Government Fisheries Meeting We discussed the following topics Arising from this, Stuart undertook to send us most appropriate fishery contacts and to keep this updated through the forthcoming changes. We can also send him written details about the specific issues. I have about the Cardigan Bay thornbacks and will about the others. And regarding the Implementation Plan for the Welsh Fisheries Strategy, Helen is going to write a more readable version for us to work on and link it to WFSA strategic plans. We agreed to meet again with WAG shortly after the WFSA AGM in March. Q1. What do you think about the proposed Wales Marine Fisheries Advisory Proposed Membership · Welsh Local Government Association I think this provides serious recognition for the WFSA at the top table, and has flexibility if we have to vary our representative. If we endorse the proposal we should probably say how we will engage other organizations associations representing RSA in Wales: I’d envisage a formal approach to these to be determined at the AGM and then to offer them access via our WMFAG seat though appropriate mechanisms – to optimise exchange of information and experience in everyone’s interests. Q2. Do you think this division of boundaries for Inshore Fisheries Groups? Below the WMFAG three Inshore Fisheries Groups are proposed: south (Bristol Channel), mid Wales (Cardigan Bay), North (north of Llyn) Q3. What do you think about the roles of the proposed Inshore Fisheries These IFGs will represent local standpoints dealing with local issues, including initiating local management plans “The local IFG will be the voice of local fisheries interests to the WMFAG and Fisheries Unit”. WFSA has four regions: south west and west probably overlapping the likely boundary between the south and mid IFGs .Q4. What do you think about our proposal for open membership of IFGs via Proposal is for open membership by correspondence with group of not more than 20 Proposed membership is local representatives of Q5. Do you think quarterly meetings will be sufficient? I’d think that, with correspondence between meetings, it may not be necessary for the IFGs to meet every quarter. Maybe, four meetings in the first year with the provision for fewer in subsequent years.
3. Standardising the Science – Fisheries Management in Wales: 26 January 2010 I’ve been invited to attend this WAG meeting with the following three items, about how to get better evidence about fisheries management - and hopefully about dealing with uncertainty when data is missing or unreliable. I think WAG also want to use this as a basis for priorities in their support to outside funding bodies like the EFF. 4. Article 47 Control of Recreational Fisheries The contentious Article 47 now reads (my italics) 5. England: The Sustainable Access to Inshore Fisheries Advisory Group Colin sent me this: it’s a consultation on “Steps towards sustainable inshore fisheries” and closes in two months. Lots of technical detail in the paper that is interesting and will be helpful in the IFGs. But no mention of recreational sea angling – even when one proposal is ask “Is there scope for greater social benefits? How might local authorities and other organizations promote inshore fisheries to improve tourist revenues?” I don’t think we need respond but it is interesting stuff: http://www.defra.gov.uk/foodfarm/fisheries/marine/fishman/saif.htm#pp. Roger Cook |
Marine Conservation Zones The first closes on 16 December 2009 Consultation on a Strategy for Marine Protected Areas in Wales: Protecting Welsh Seas The second closes on 26 February 2009 and is about specific proposals to protect red throated divers, common scoters and overwintering sea birds. Liverpool Bay / Bae Lerpwl pSPA Draft Conservation Objectives and Advice on Operations http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/Images/LivBay-consobj_tcm6-15189.pdf
In addition, the Marine Conservation Society has an open consultation on the areas that might be proposed as MCZs. You can see and comment on these at www.yourseasyourvoice.com and think about the issues of no take zones in relation to MCZs.
I think the concept of MCZs is clearly sensible and there are potential benefits for fish stocks as part of the overall conservation of biodiversity –there is good evidence too (from New Zealand, the Mediterranean and our own bass nursery areas) that no take zones can contribute very significantly to fish stocks. But in these new highly protected areas, the big unknown as far as we are concerned is what levels of restriction may be imposed on recreational angling. The devil is in the detail but details are lacking. I don’t want to be alarmist since at all the meetings and discussions I’ve attended most of the proponents of MCZs accept that recreational angling is a legitimate activity and mostly not regarded as a damaging activity.
But read the general statements in the consultation document such as: “The intention is that (MCZs) will be protected from the extraction and deposition of living and non-living matters, and all other damaging or disturbing activities and “One of the benefits of highly protected marine sites is by leaving areas of the seas to function in the absence of significant levels of human activity, ….” Both these statements may worry us: they could so easily be applied to prevent angling. On the other hand, in relation to site selection, the consultation notes that sites should be chosen “to maximize ecological and socio-economic benefits while minimising any conflicts with different uses of the the sea as far as possible.” This could suggest that areas important for recreational angling could be maintained for that as a socio-economic benefit. But look at the consultation on Liverpool Bay. Here to protect red throated divers, common scoters and overwintering assemblages of sea birds, risks to and vunerabilities of the birds have been made. Two of the greatest vulnerabilities are listed as boating and “specific extraction of prey species by commercial and recreational fishing”. It is unlikely that sea angling impacts directly on prey stocks for these birds but that’s not what the assessment says. We need to make this point in response to the consultation. (And anglers should note that the area covered in the proposed conservation area includes the whole of the north Wales coast.)
So have a look at the information on these three web links and let them know what you think: you could also send comments to me directly to include in the WFSA responses. I really don’t think angling is an important damaging activity in relation to the conservation goals of these proposals but I am sure we have got to say so – and in some cases may have to recognize some management or restrictions but these must be specific to particular defined problems and not blanket prohibitions.
*** Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) Assessment I have just received this note about the MSC assessment of the bass fishery in the Bristol Channel: if you follow the links you get information on how they propose to assess the fishery -with a view to deciding if it meets the MSC sustainability criteria. If you want to comment please do so directly to Jim Andrews or if you have comments you'd like me to send on behalf of WFSA then send them to me, please. I shall remind them of the arguments made about the need for a 45cm MLS if females are to breed and how important that is to sustainability of the fishery. The call for comments on this announcement can be found
Welsh Fisheries Strategy Implementation Plan
Next meeting (4 September) will decide upon a form for future stakeholder involvement – and, of course, I’ll be seeking to ensure that sea angling continues to be recognised with seats at local and national levels.
Environment Agency Consultations There are three consultation on new fishery byelaws to protect fish stocks relating to eels, trout and salmon and to removal of fish by rod and line; the last one proposes that all eel and shad caught by rod and line in any waters must be returned and that all coarse fish caught by rod and line from rivers, streams, drains and certain named large still waters must be returned with possible exceptions based on (unspecified) species/numbers/sixes and non-natives.
Proposals for the scallop fishery in Wales The Minister has published a consultation document on this – some detailed restrictions and technical proposals that we should consider and submit a response by 25 September. Again . I’d be happy to take members comments in to account in the WFSA submission if you send them to me by the 15 September. Economic value of sea angling
|