PRESS RELEASE

The Irish Seal Sanctuary Sea Fisheries Advisory Group (SFAG) continues to oppose the total dependance on technical measures such as the Swedish Grid recently viewed by Minister Coveney, on the Syracuse out of Howth. The Grid was designed for the Kattegat Sea which is not a nursery area and does not serve the purposes it is being introduced for here in Ireland.  It does exclude the large fish but have studies been done in the mortality caused by the Grid itself? More questions than answers were raised when Minister Coveney took a trip on a trawler to view (and praise) the Swedish Grid TCM. There were a lot of dead small fish shown in the photograph of Minister Coveney, along with prawns. Where did they trawl to show the Minister? Twin riggers such as he was out on are not traditional prawn fishing vessels. It was mentioned that Minister Coveney threw a juvenile cod overboard possibly in the belief he was allowing it to reach adulthood but having handled the creature it was destined to die. The ICES and the Marine Institute have advised a zero TAC for Cod in the Irish Seal, every year since 2002. Minister Coveney told the Dail in December that he would follow scientific advice. At the December's Council meeting in Brussels where the TAC's and quotas are decided, he allowed the industry lobby to over rule his decision. Why will the industry not even consider closing the nursery areas to trawlers? The survival of nursery areas in the Irish Sea hangs in the balance. The SFAG calls for all non selective methods to be removed from the nursery areas. For further comment contact Johnny Woodlock, 0876490533. END

 

 

 

 

Irish Seal Sanctuary plays its part in protecting the future for our marine resources and fishermen.

 

Report by Johnny Woodlock

 

 

 

 When the Irish Seal Sanctuary was set up originally in Skerries, Co. Dublin. Seals were the figurehead animals but our concern was for the health of entire Marine Environment for all. So the Seal Sanctuary was never simply just about Seals. Under Brendan Price, the Seal Sanctuary also established the Irish Whale and Dolphin Group, and its members served on many of the I.W.D.G.s early committees and sub-committees. Indeed we still attend the International Whaling Commission as environmental N.G.O.s. When the E.U. established the Regional Advisory Councils (RACs) in 2005 to get stakeholder input to the Common Fisheries Policy. The Irish Seal Sanctuary was offered a seat on the Executive committee. Thus the Fishery Advisory Group came into existence. We attend the Working Group 4 meetings and executive meeting of the North West waters R.A.C. (NWWRAC). This Working Group covers the V11a area as defined by ICES, which includes the Irish Sea.

 

 

 

 

 

   ICES (International Council for the Exploration of the Sea) are the international scientific body, which advises the EU Fisheries Commission of the state of fish stock in its waters. I was asked to join the Fishery Advisory Group in 2006 as an angler and environmental Scientist to write and present a paper about discards in the Irish Sea. I have lived in Skerries all my life I have seen the harbour packed with boats, all making a decent living from fishing, and I have also in the past seen the entire harbour covered with dead small Whiting which were discarded from the Prawn trawlers. Our Group is made up of ex-commercial fishermen with lot of experience in trawling and salmon drift and draft netting, myself, and occasional others invited to give their opinion and or advise in subjects where we may be deficient. We have close ties with the European Anglers Alliance and other Environmental NGOs. Our mission statement is to ensure the sustainability of our Marine resources for all. Bearing in mind the socio-economic effects of any action on our coastal communities. (To the great surprise of many this includes the livelihood of Commercial fishermen). To this end we are trying to encourage selective and sustainable use of our Marine resources. Perhaps you can imagine my surprise and probably theirs also when we arrived into a meeting room full of “Men in Suits” the commercial fishermen’s representatives from all attending countries, and all paid to lobby for their fishermen, translation gear and all the pomp of a EU meeting. At first there were quite a few Environmental NGOs present but many thought they were up against an immovable object, but we stuck at it. This year we were proved right to do so. We made a submission to the EU and the RAC early in 2007, that various species of fish, receive special treatment. Due to the fact that they are endangered or becoming so, (usually because of commercial pressure). This list included various Shark species and Bluefin Tuna. Last year the Commission released its proposed Community Plan of Action on Sharks and asked for submissions from interested parties. The Fishery Advisory Group of the Irish Seal Sanctuary made the only submission from Ireland. However in February of 2008 the NWWRAC met and on the agenda the commercial interests wanted changes made to the plan of action, part of which intended to stop commercial exploitation of Spurdogs.

 

 

 

 

 

The fishermen argued that they rarely caught spurdog and admitted that they were only worth fishing for at certain times. I pointed out that this is because they form spawning aggregations and huge numbers of pregnant females can be caught at once. But they did not want a limit of 5% per trip imposed on them. They wanted 5% per month or year, or a weight of two tons per year or some such generous limit which would allow them to continue to exploit spawning aggregations.

 

 

 

 

 

Although worldwide Spurdog are fairly common. The population in the East Atlantic is thought to have dropped by 95% over the past number of years. This figure now disputed by the industry who claim a figure of 90% to be more accurate!!. One boat caught two hundred boxes of spur dog in one day near Lambda Island, North County Dublin. These fish were landed in Northern Ireland. I remember catching them on Mackerel feathers not far off Sherries in the seventies. The commercial fishermen agreed that they were scarcer than they had been. The World Wildlife Fund and the European Anglers Alliance backed our call that the proposed ban on targeted fisheries is left in place. But we were the main objectors . In its report to the Fishery Commission the RAC stated that commercial interests wanted the proposal changed. We insisted that our objections be included, which they were.

 

 

 

 

 

Subsequently, the EU reaffirmed its position on Spur dog and has left in place the 5% per trip limit on landings to allow for any caught while targeting other fish. It is now not allowed to target these fish. As sharks Spur dog are slow to reproduce and in fact are thought to have the longest gestation period of any vertebrate (18-24 months) which can be longer than an elephant. They give birth to live young (in fact their eggs hatch in the female and they feed on unfertilised eggs until they are big enough to survive outside the mother. Known as an ovoviviparous method of reproduction).

 

 

Unfortunately the fishing industry are still attempting to get access to our spur dog stocks and regularly seek quota for them. We attend a focus group set up by the RAC to keep an eye on developments and try to allow stocks to recover before any exploitation starts again, but the industry is under pressure from fishermen who report the seabed covered in these fish and want to target them, we must remain sharp to counter their claims.

 

ÓJohnnyWoodlock

Will a seal cull restore fish stocks?

 

Johnny Woodlock

 

The various commercial fishermen’s groups around the country have been calling for a seal cull to restore fish stocks, which have been at low levels and declining for a number of years. Seals eat fish, therefore if we kill the seals fish stocks will improve. A few moments thought and you will realise that seals are not the reason fish stocks are in trouble. Fishermen have overfished these stocks for many years. By overfishing I mean that they have been removing more fish than the system can replace. Seals and fish have co-existed for millions of years. Without either upsetting the natural balance regarding numbers. If there are too many seals, their numbers adjust to the available fish stocks naturally. Historically, when any animal eats too much of its feedstuff that animals numbers crash.

 

It is only when you add the enormous catching ability of mankind into the system that the position becomes unbalanced. Now we see seals more often hanging around harbours in the hope of a free handout in the form of unwanted fish thrown overboard. Because they are easily visible it is easy to blame the seals. Also, because they are seen more often, it appears that there are more and more of them around. In days gone by seals and fisherman also co-existed fairly well, but modern boats and fishing techniques mean we can catch vast quantities of fish. There has always been some conflict because seals also eat fish, and as they are not stupid they will take a fish from a fisherman’s net if they get a chance. Why expend energy chasing a meal when you can take a fish from a net. This gives the fishermen all the excuse they need to brand seals as competitors for the same resource.

 

Fish stocks are in the state they are in today, not because of the activities or appetite of seals but because mankind is such an efficient predator.

 

As a founder member of the Irish Seal Sanctuary I know that the Seal sanctuary is often in the firing line when seal culls are debated. We have always tried to work with the fishing industry to solve conflicts. Recent reports from Kerry included an invitation to go out and see the damage seals are doing to catches in tangle nets and gill nets. We have never denied that seals will take fish from nets. I have seen nineteen fish heads left in a gill net by a seal. Fish farms use “Seal Scarers” to discourage seals to good effect. We have been in contact with the Sea Mammal Research Unit in Scotland trying to find the best non-lethal deterrent to keep seals away from fisherman’s nets. But there is an alternative. What would be the advantage of keeping fisherman’s nets away from the seals. The areas of greatest conflict between fishermen and seals appear to be in the vacinity of large seal colonies such as around the Blasket Islands. This is supported by European studies, which indicate greatest problems being with static gear such as tangle and gill nets deployed close to seal colonies. This same study also concluded that fish caught in the vacinity of seal colonies have the highest incidence of Cod-worm, also known as sealworm and whaleworm.

 

This parasitic worm Anaskis simplex is found in fish flesh and can cause a condition known as anasakiasis in humans. It is not certain how many people suffer this condition as it is often misdiagnosed, but it is severe. Anyone who has seen a fish fillet infected with these worms knows how bad this parasite can be. But I am not offering a new stick to beat the seals with (excuse the pun). The primary host for this nasty parasite is not seals or humans but dolphins and porpoises. No one in Kerry is going to suggest a cull of dolphins. Which raises another issue. Seal and dolphin watching trips are providing much needed income to many fishermen around our coastline. Perhaps the fishermen should consider leaving the areas around large seal colonies such as the Blasket Islands to those operating seal watching trips and use the nets in another area where seals will not be tempted and there will be less worms in the fish. I am not a “seal –hugger” and would advise against anyone trying it. But there are probably more African Elephants in the world than Grey Seals.

 

Past experience in other countries has shown that seal culls do not lead to a restoration of fish stocks. The Sea Fishery Advisory Group of the Irish Seal Sanctuary is actively working in European circles as an Environmental NGO to secure the future of all users of our marine resources including fishermen, and anglers. Words and Pics.

Johnny Woodlock

Maria Damanaki 

European Commissioner for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries

The Future Economics of the Sea 

Meeting of the Employers' Group of the European Economic and Social Committee 

Brussels, 14 March 2011

 

Dear President Malosse, dear Members,

 

It is a great pleasure to meet you all. Today I have at least two reasons to thank you: thank you for inviting me; and thank you for thinking about the maritime perspective, acknowledging the immense economic potential of our seas.

 

We may be at the dawn of a "maritime era".

 

Today I'd like to show you with a few concrete figures and examples what I mean and why it is important that you take part in this process of change.

The seas are simultaneously ways of transport, sources of raw material, sources of energy, sources of food, water reservoirs, the world's climate engine, and a place for leisure. With about 70% of its surface covered by water, Earth is the blue planet.

 

Europe's coastal regions are home to about 40% of the EU population, while the maritime economy accounts for a production value of some 450 billion euro.

Maritime economic activities are of huge economic importance to Europe as a whole, and also to individual countries.

 

To give you an example, in France, over 540 000 people are directly employed in the maritime industry, generating roughly 75 billion euro in 2009. Island states like Malta or Cyprus have more than 10% of their total employment in maritime sectors. In Denmark, no part of the country is further away from the sea than 50 km.

 

I could go on, but I think you see my point.  We are still underestimating the seas' importance to man's life. Yet, already huge today, it is only bound to grow in the future.

These figures prompted Commission President Barroso to pinpoint the maritime sector as a prime source of new growth, employment and social cohesion. The "EUROPE 2020 strategy" stressed that Europe cannot continue to rely on demand-driven economic growth and reiterates the importance of the maritime sectors in the particular context of resource efficiency, competitiveness and climate action.

 

We know that there is clearly scope for the oceans, seas and coasts to unlock new sustainable sources of growth. And we must be capable of channelling these activities into industrial applications and ensuring that they benefit society. It is what I like to call "Blue Growth".

 

I think we can all play a role here – and by 'we' I mean on the one hand we as EU institutions and on the other you as representatives of European employers.

It is up to the IMP to put in place the measures that will bring "Blue Growth" – and the "Blue Jobs" that go with it – to fruition.

 

This will require an approach on three fronts.

 

•      Firstly, we need to analyse sustainable maritime growth scenarios, their drivers and the policy measures required to make these scenarios a reality.

This means identifying areas where more basic or applied research efforts are needed prior to commercialisation, and which generic innovation trends and technological developments should be supported – a striking example being the harvesting of wave energy in the United Kingdom, where innovators, investors and the government are now moving fast towards the marketing of this marine renewable energy, creating high-quality jobs and paving the way for a new green industry.

•     Secondly, we need to establish and satisfy our marine and maritime knowledge and data needs.

You may be aware that at end of last year I launched the "Marine Knowledge 2020" initiative to establish a network of accessible, compatible and timely data about the status of our seas and oceans, so that our policy-making is based on our best science. The Commission is also proposing a new "innovation partnership" that will improve the viability of deep-sea mining by developing Europe's marine knowledge base. Europe remains a world leader in the enabling technologies for this new frontier. We need a sound understanding of deep-sea environment, which will also ensure that investments are shielded from disasters like the one we have seen in the Gulf of Mexico. Europe has promising sites for mining deep-sea minerals, for example in the Acores and in Italy, but more research is clearly needed for complete protection of the eco-systems that could be affected.

•      The third and final front involves us agreeing on what steps are needed from regulatory authorities to set the appropriate framework conditions to foster growth. I am thinking here of moves such as overcoming legal and regulatory obstacles, providing market incentives, optimising planning, licensing and certification processes, addressing training shortcomings and activating financing.
•  

In late 2012 we want to bring this three-pronged approach into a Communication on a blue growth strategy and on the industrial and research policy push needed to make it real.

 

Without pre-empting on-going studies, we can already see, for example, that bio-economy has a huge potential. The Commission is currently running a public consultation on this, pointing out that the sustainable use of biological resources from both land and sea in order to replace fossil-based resources while guaranteeing food security will have to be one strand of our long-term economic strategy.

 

Another example is the infrastructure needed by 2020 and 2030 to bring offshore and marine renewable energy onshore to consumers. Here, huge investments will be needed, but they will be compensated by the savings on our fossil fuel bill, which is only bound to increase in the future; plus they will create high-quality jobs in the EU.

 

So far I have talked about untapped sources of growth. But we must not neglect the sustainable development of well-established industries such as tourism, renewable marine energy, shipbuilding, short-sea shipping, fisheries and aquaculture.

 

Let's start with tourism: The Lisbon Treaty endowed the EU with a new competence as regards tourism. To translate this into a vision, in 2010 the Commission set out a new political framework to promote Europe as the world's No 1 tourist destination.

 

A next step will now be to develop a "strategy for sustainable coastal and marine tourism". The challenge here is to identify how to promote responsible, high-quality tourism that will deliver sustainable jobs - jobs that will stay in Europe and have a strong local impact.

 

I shall be following and contributing to this initiative very closely, as it is of great economic significance for us all, whether we live along the coasts of Europe or visit them as tourists.

 

Another traditional maritime sector with growth potential is shipping. We need to secure a global level playinfg field for the sector and to enhance its environmental performance with regard to pollutants, emissions, waste treatment, litter control and ship recycling. This will not only benefit the environment, it will also create jobs as we move to more sophisticated solutions. If we exploit the full potential of short-sea shipping through the trans-European networks and the motorways of the seas; if we have better port infrastructures and adopt e-maritime solutions; if we establish a truly internal market in shipping services, all this will open up new business opportunities and produce an overall benefit to society – especially coastal regions.

 

As for fisheries, there is a new system in the making that clearly focuses on sustainability in all its aspects: environmental, social and economic. By adopting an ecosystem-based approach, we make sure we exploit resources sustainably and derive stable catches in the long term – which in turn means stability for the sector. By moving decision-making away from Brussels, we make sure that the needs of regional and local communities are accounted for. By financing only projects that contribute to the EU 2020 agenda for growth, we encourage fishermen and other operators to find innovative solutions with green credentials.

 

Your involvement is only bound to increase under the reform. It is my belief that part of the burden of resource management should lie with the industry. Fish farmers, for example, can flank our conservation efforts with innovative, environment-friendly techniques; producers' organisations can and should take on the sustainability challenge by preparing and implementing sustainable fishing plans or planning and steering market demand. We also plan to improve information to consumers and for that, too, we will need your help.

 

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I'd like to turn now to what you can do to contribute to Blue Growth. As representatives of the European employers, I believe you are the perfect interface between us and the European investors.

 

You can help us enter into a dialogue with private industry and convince them that Blue Growth is the way to go; show them that maintaining both high environmental standards and high social standards is in fact a win-win choice; explain that investing in clean technologies and creating new, attractive jobs in Europe is a smart move right now.

 

Help us explain that initial capital investment or daily operating costs should not be the main concern: long-term prosperity and a stable society are. Strategic thinking is required here, as the Chinese have clearly understood.

 

Through a study we have recently launched, we are going to interview some 150 key people from private industry and ask them what they think is needed to trigger new investments. We need their expertise and knowledge of the market – and I believe you can bring that to us.

 

In conclusion, ladies and gentlemen,

Maritime policy i is called on to play a full part in pulling Europe out of the ongoing economic downturn, providing it with the economic and social backbone to help it stand strong in the face of future challenges.

 

Sustainability not only enhances skills and promotes advanced technologies. It also implies long-term economic opportunities.  It is also the only way we know to protect Europe's maritime zones, biodiversity and the marine environment.

 

In my vision, your Group is fully involved in this change and, together, we shape a maritime policy that helps change Europe for the better.

 

Thank you.

 

 

Why close the Irish Sea to trawlers?

A paper by The Sea Fishery Advisory Group of The Irish Seal sanctuary. Prepared by Johnny Woodlock M.Sc., M.I.F.M., Cenv.

As the fishing community knows the Irish Sea was once a vibrant mixed stock fishery with many fishing boats, crew and coastal communities benefiting from its rich resources. As boats got larger and more efficient stock became overfished. This combined with a move towards the more profitable Nephrops fishery, which forms a major part of the Cod diet meant that while Nephops numbers increased due to reduced predation by Cod, more boats used trawling gear to target the Nephrops. The result of this change has been a degradation of the fishery from a healthy mixed stock fishery to a fishery, which is now almost completely dependent on Nephrops. Other fisheries have reported similar situations where Nephrops have become the primary target species (The Clyde fishery for example).

 

The F.A.O. has warned fishery managers to consider "Global warming" when making management decisions about fisheries. It is much more likely that a healthy mixed stock fishery, which contains a diverse biodiversity, can survive changing environmental conditions than one dependent on a single species. Cod stocked declined to the point that the EU introduced a Long-term Management Plan to establish measures to allow for the safe recovery of the cod stocks in the Irish Sea (E.C. reg. 423/2004). This relied heavily on temporal/spatial exclusion measures to protect the spawning stock and vessel decommissioning to reduce effort. But while it excluded cod fishing from spawning areas it did not exclude vessels fishing for Nephrops.

 

Trawling by its very nature is non-selective, so cod were still caught. Initial plans, which aimed at a recovery rate of 30% each year proved optimistic, and stocks continued to decline. In 2008 a new Long-term Management plan for cod stocks was agreed (E.C. Reg.1342/2008), this new plan relies more on TACs and effort control. Harvest control Rules (HCR) will mean that fishing effort and allowable catches will depend on stock size as assessed stock size and scientific advice. Situations when scientific data is not sufficient or accurate enough to make advice possible is also catered for in the new Plan. The plan also imposes strict penalties on countries whose catches exceed the annual targets (article 12). On a number of occasions already fishing effort and catches have been reduced by 25% year on year, in an attempt to allow cod stocks to recover. The plan also rewards vessels who can demonstrate that they constantly catch less than 1.5% Cod (article 11), by making them exempt from effort control. At present the only successful application under article 11 has been a fishery which uses the Technical Conservation Measure (T.C.M.) known as the Swedish Grid. However as this ridged inclined panel has bars 35mm apart it can still catch and kill large amounts of undersize fish. By-catch of commercially valuable fish is very reduced but future spawning stock is still at risk, especially if it is used in nursery areas despite the combined use of other T.C.M.s such as square mesh cod-ends.

 

The Marine Institute considers that the only effective way to rebuild the Irish Sea stock is to have very large initial reductions in fishing mortality. Even greater than the 25% stipulated in the 2008 Long-term Management Plan. Obviously if TACs and fishing effort are reduced on a continuing basis by 25% for whatever reasons in only four years we reach the point when there is no T.A.C. or effort allowed in the Irish Sea. Irish Sea Fishermen, fisheries scientists and representatives of other interests have no wish to see this happen. Despite the measures and hardships imposed on the fishing industry over the years there has been little sign that the Long-term Management Plans have had the desired effect. The frustration is added to by the fact that the time lag between scientific assessment at sea and ICES advice to managers. When fishermen at sea claim to see a real improvement in stocks rebuilding, even if this is simply a local improvement it gives hope to all.

 

At the focus group meeting in Belfast in 2009 we were told that while some fishermen could still locate cod stocks on the Grand Banks prior to its collapse it turned out it was the last of the spawning stocks they were targeting. We know from experience that given the right chances Cod stocks can rebuild quite quickly, as seen in the North Sea.

 

Since we joined the N.W.W.R.A.C. we have seen a number of industry led initiatives proposed such as The Fisheries Science Partnership projects and the Irish Sea Discards Project. While these initiatives together with the 2009 focus group on the Irish Sea which was held in Belfast have all been laudable, we have not witnessed positive action on these initiatives and some indeed failed to happen at all. We have continued to see that scientific stock assessments and T.A.C. advise for a number of commercial species in the Irish Sea continues to decline. In a paper we delivered to Working Group 4 on discards in 2006 we called for the exclusion of all non-selective fishing methods from known spawning and nursery grounds to allow for increased recruitment to the spawning stocks and allow juvenile fish to mature before they were harvested. Had this happened in 2007 we believe it is possible that stocks would not now be in the depleted state they are in. The position is now so bad that we must call for the scientific advice and of the Fisheries Science Service (F.S.S.) of the Marine Institute to be followed. They agree with I.C.E.S. advice that fisheries for cod should be closed until an initial recovery of Spawning stock has been proven. Both scientific bodies warn that a failure to reduce fishing mortality to zero will result in a high risk that stocks will fail to recover.

 

The Marine Institute advises that only fisheries that can prove a zero by-catch of cod should be permitted. Despite these warnings we continue to see fishermen being allocated a quota for cod in the Irish Sea. Even industry representatives attending Working Group 4 of the N.W.W.R.A.C. have admitted that it is possible that fishermen could soon face a zero quota for many species in the Irish Sea. Historically there have been instances when stocks in a state of collapse have made remarkable recoveries when closed to commercial fisheries for even short periods. European fish stocks were very much at risk of total collapse prior to both "World wars". On both occasions the fisheries were practically closed for the wartime period. We believe that the industry should be investigating ways to alleviate any hardships that a cessation of trawling in the Irish Sea would cause. Incentivising vessels to participate in selective fisheries. The growing offshore energy industry could possibly offer lucrative opportunities for vessels and crews. This industry will close large areas of the Irish Sea to fishing for extended periods during the construction phase anyway, and impact on fisheries in the long term. We recognise that there could be problems with a certain amount of displacement of fishing effort to other sea areas by trawlers who do not wish to adapt to selective methods. We believe that it is in everyone’s long-term interest to close the Irish Sea to trawlers even for a term long enough to allow a single year class of demersal fish to mature and spawn. By restoring the stocks in what is a relatively small sea area to a healthy mixed stock which can then be managed in a sustainable manner will require sacrifices in the short term but ensure a future for the Irish Sea fishing fleet.

 

Without the co-operation of all interests around the Irish Sea basin especially the fishermen this proposal cannot happen. We would like to see the industry itself forward this proposal to safeguard the interests of future fishermen. Again we ask that the industry consider closing the inshore spawning and nursery areas to non-selective methods to protect future stocks. We feel that suspending the use all mobile fishing gear in the Irish Sea for a period agreed by fishery scientists would greatly enhance the stocks of many species. After this set term the fishing methods allowed should be reassessed. We do not call for a closure of fisheries as selective methods such as creeling for nephrops is used in other areas to great effect. Jigging for mackerel and squid is another option, so we do not see a need to close the fishery.

 By Johnny Woodlock

 

Report from Ocean 2012  

• More selective fishing methods, gears and practices that reduce unintentional catches of non-target species and lessen the impact on the marine environment;
• Vessels and fishing methods that consume less energy per tonne of fish caught;
• Working conditions that comply with relevant international standards, particularly the 2007 International Labour Organization Work in Fishing Convention; and
• A good record of compliance with the rules of the CFP.

 

1. OCEAN2012 is an alliance of 88 organisations dedicated to transforming European Fisheries Policy to stop overfishing, end destructive fishing practices and deliver fair and equitable use of healthy fish stocks.
2. OCEAN2012 was initiated, and is co-ordinated, by the Pew Environment Group, the conservation arm of The Pew Charitable Trusts, a non-governmental organisation working to end overfishing in the world´s oceans.
3. The steering group of OCEAN2012 is the Coalition for Fair Fisheries Arrangements (CFFA), Ecologistas en Acción, the Fisheries Secretariat (FISH), nef (new economics foundation), the Pew Environment Group and Seas At Risk (SAR).

 Paper submitted 

 

 

Stock recovery in the Irish Sea

                         Johnny Woodlock by

 Johnny Woodlock

 Sea Fishery Advisory Group

 

Since the last Irish Sea Working Group meeting in Paris in July 2010, a number of things have happened which mean that everyone attending this Working Group must strive to restore fish stocks to the satisfaction of the Commission and the industry as rapidly as possible. The Commissioner Ms. Damanaki has expressed her disappointment that all the efforts to date have not resulted in a recovery of Cod stocks in ICES areas VIIa and VIa. She has stated that she is determined to achieve a recovery of these stocks and to this end has threatened to close both areas completely to fishing to allow for stock recovery.

At the meeting in July we submitted an alternative plan to the Working Group which did not call for the closure of these fisheries. We requested that the NWWRAC propose to suspend all trawling within the Irish Sea for a period of six years to allow a single year class of demersal fish to mature and spawn. However our proposal allowed for the use of selective fishing methods to continue. The effectiveness of even a single successful year class has been demonstrated in the increase observed in Cod stocks in the Celtic Sea as the result of a single strong year class.

Despite the Cod Recovery Programme, temporary closures and all the various T.C.M.s employed, there has been no evidence of Cod Stock recovery in the Irish Sea. Faced with the possibility of complete closure, we again call on the NWWRAC to suspend trawling in the Irish Sea for a period of six years.

In 2007 the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO) called on Fishery Managers to consider the possible future effects of Global Warming when making management decisions. At present the Irish Sea is almost totally dependent on a single target species, Nephrops(Prawns), if this stock suffers due to warming seawater temperature, the entire fishing industry is at risk. This is another reason why we must not delay in restoring the Irish Sea to a mixed stock fishery.
 

Results of a study published in late 2010 show and increasing trend in Jellyfish abundance in recent years. This also showed a strong correspondence between jellyfish abundance in the Irish Sea and climate indices. This study found that jellyfish outbreaks have been more frequent since 1982. There is increasing awareness of the negative socio-economic implications of jellyfish dominated eco-systems. Not least the so called "Never-ending jellyfish joyride", wherein jellyfish become so strongly established that it may be impossible for fish stocks to recover to pre exploitation levels even if commercial fishing is reduced.

Historically jellyfish have not been the focus for research but even so some studies have shown major changes in jellyfish abundance and statistical links with climatic indices. The more fish in the Irish Sea the less food for jellyfish. So a mixed stock recovery including fish that eat plankton such as sprat and herring is very important and urgent to avoid the possibility of more frequent years of jellyfish abundance.
    

Origional paper presented to RAC in July 2010