14 January 2016
In a letter to UK fisheries Minister George Eustice, NFFO President Paul Trebilcock, has bitterly criticised the decision to add small-eyed ray to the list of species fishermen can’t retain.
Dear Minister
Small-eyed Ray
The decision
by the December Council to include small-eyed ray on the list of species that
must not be landed was made with no advance notice, no discussion with the
people potentially affected and no thought about the consequences.
But there are
consequences. In the Bristol Channel, where for some vessels small-eyed ray
constitutes 40% of their annual catch, vessels are already being put up for sale, and fishermen forced from the
industry, with dire consequences for families, mortgages and futures.
This is an
abysmal way to run an industry. And it should not escape your notice that along
with the bass measures agreed at the December Council, it is inshore fishermen
who will bear the brunt.
A completely
arbitrary decision, made behind closed doors, with no prior discussion and
devastating consequences is almost the epitome of bad governance and completely
destroys any faith that fishermen may have had that you and your team were in
Brussels to protect their interests; or dissuade them from the view that the
European Commission is an institution that has only malevolent intentions
towards them.
Fishermen in
the Bristol Channel have been amongst the most progressive in the country and
been at the cutting edge of developing ways of harvesting rays in a sustainable
way. A voluntary increase in the minimum landing size, a voluntary seasonal
closure, along with cooperation with scientists in identifying individual
species in the ray catch, have been amongst their past contributions. The sense
of disillusionment and betrayal from those who worked in this positive way,
only to see their livelihoods subsequently destroyed is overwhelming.
What is the
evidence that justified such extreme measures? Surely this kind of measure with
these kind of consequences should be used only in the most extreme emergency
situation?
Were there no
alternatives? These are some of the questions that should have been asked
before some bureaucrat blithely added a species to a list.
Can this
decision be reversed and quickly? You should already know that the NFFO can be
found wherever it is necessary to work on complex and challenging fisheries
management issues; and the management of skates and rays is certainly one of
those areas. But you must realise how difficult it is going to be to get
fishermen to engage with scientists and fisheries administrators against
background of arbitrary decisions like this.
We understand
that there is a potential to reverse this decision at the March Council through
an amendment to the TACs and Quotas Regulation.
Damage has been done and a mistake has been made but the damage can be
limited by swift remedial action. We eagerly await your confirmation that the
UK will take the lead in rectifying the situation.
Yours
sincerely,
Paul Trebilcock
President
National Federation
of Fishermen’s Organisations