|
Post by rsmith7 on Jan 11, 2011 23:05:42 GMT 1
Here's one for Helen and Jonjel: Remember my telling you, and everyone who would listen, that the North Sea is full of cod? Well good old Fearnley Whittingstall is on the box proving me right. It's on Channel 4 now and the next three nights. I suggest you watch. Unfortunately, it won't end well for fishermen despite a promising first programme. He's supported by some real low-lifes - Greenpeace, WWF, Marine Conservation Society and other assorted fascists. dev.fishfight.net/
|
|
|
Post by jonjel on Jan 12, 2011 13:14:28 GMT 1
Mr Smith.
I am glad you started this thread because I was going to do so if you had not. Today my time is limited but it is a subject very dear to my heart and something that needs proper debate.
I have never said there are no fish in the sea. What I have said is that the current fisheries policy is bordering on lunacy. By-catch as Hugh said beggars belief.
Whether he is supported by the green party, the monster raving loony party or anyone else does not make what he says wrong.
There has to be a better way than what we have now, becasue it neither conserves nor benefits anyone, least of all the fishermen.
There have to be some controls, but you only have to look at the size of some of the fleets when compared to the fishing grounds they have in their own waters to realise that Britain has been seen for far too long as a 'nice lttle earner'
I will come back on this asap.
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Jan 13, 2011 7:09:53 GMT 1
Nice about-face there jonjel! I remember arguing ad nauseum with you on the subject of lack of cod in the North Sea. Remember, I said they'd moved north and you said they'd been "fished out"? Maybe you got your "facts" from here: www.ypte.org.uk/environmental/over-fishing/29
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Jan 13, 2011 8:05:35 GMT 1
As predicted the downward spiral into eco-propaganda begins. Despite going to sea and seeing for himself the abundant cod, whittingstall asserts that we should eat coley and mackeral to help "severely over-fished" cod.
The eco-fascists managed to murder at least one person on tonight's episode. Their two undercover activists in Ghana managed to get some un-guarded comments out of a couple of local tuna guys. They'll be dead by now without a doubt. Ah well, at least greenpeace got their story.
|
|
|
Post by jonjel on Jan 13, 2011 11:51:23 GMT 1
Mr Smith,
I really don’t understand your instant attacks on me. I have never said all the cod have been fished out. What I have said is there is a real risk that if fishing is uncontrolled then certain species will reach the point where they become scarce, and commercially no longer a food source.
As far as I know you fish for lobster, and perhaps crab. That type of fishing is totally sustainable, but there are still some controls. You can not take a lobster under I think 87mm carapace length. But you will be catching quite a few under that length. Not a problem, they go back in the sea, nearly all of them alive. If every Tom Dick and Harry was allowed to fish for lobster of any size then in some areas I am certain the stock would be threatened.
I can remember seeing the sea boiling with shoals of mackerel at certain times of the year. Then along came Spanish and French boats which caught these commercially, not as a food source, but to make fish meal and fertilizer, because it was abundant and cheap.
As I said before the current fisheries policies and quotas are a disgrace. I am not interested in Whittingstalls campaign to persuade people to eat other fish. I do however think that he has done some service by demonstrating how current policies neither conserve nor protect. I am very interested in how we change that, without damaging what little remains of our fishing fleet. I am old enough to remember Hull in its heyday when 7000 men went to sea.
So, you are involved, so how would you change the fishing policies now in place?
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Jan 13, 2011 16:51:09 GMT 1
Mr Smith, I really don’t understand your instant attacks on me. I have never said all the cod have been fished out. Yes you did - at length. What I have said is there is a real risk that if fishing is uncontrolled then certain species will reach the point where they become scarce, and commercially no longer a food source. As far as I know you fish for lobster, and perhaps crab. That type of fishing is totally sustainable, but there are still some controls. You can not take a lobster under I think 87mm carapace length. But you will be catching quite a few under that length. Not a problem, they go back in the sea, nearly all of them alive. If every Tom Dick and Harry was allowed to fish for lobster of any size then in some areas I am certain the stock would be threatened. That was the case until the mid-seventies and the stock is just fine.I can remember seeing the sea boiling with shoals of mackerel at certain times of the year. Then along came Spanish and French boats which caught these commercially, not as a food source, but to make fish meal and fertilizer, because it was abundant and cheap. Whittingstall and the eco-fascists describe mackeral as "sustainably fished"As I said before the current fisheries policies and quotas are a disgrace. I am not interested in Whittingstalls campaign to persuade people to eat other fish. I do however think that he has done some service by demonstrating how current policies neither conserve nor protect. I am very interested in how we change that, without damaging what little remains of our fishing fleet. I am old enough to remember Hull in its heyday when 7000 men went to sea. It was the Icelandic 200 mile limit that caused thatSo, you are involved, so how would you change the fishing policies now in place? Ban any input from the eco-fascists
|
|
|
Post by jonjel on Jan 13, 2011 17:06:16 GMT 1
Well we are obviously not going to get a sensible debate going with you, which is a pity.
You seem to think I am some veggie nut case member of some crank organisation and I sit and knit my own muesli in my free time.
You could not be more wrong.
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Jan 13, 2011 17:08:05 GMT 1
Why don't you address the issues i pointed to. It is eco-fascist interference that has resulted in the idiotic "policy" we have today.
|
|
|
Post by helen on Jan 13, 2011 17:49:17 GMT 1
Forgive me RSmith but before we can continue this debate we have to define some terms. What, exactly is an eco-fascist? Interested to know what you believe defines the beliefs of an eco-fascist. How does it it differ from UKIP policy viz-a-viz fisheries policy and science in general, are you aware of irony?
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Jan 13, 2011 17:54:26 GMT 1
Forgive me RSmith but before we can continue this debate we have to define some terms. What, exactly is an eco-fascist? Interested to know what you believe defines the beliefs of an eco-fascist. How does it it differ from UKIP policy viz-a-viz fisheries policy and science in general, are you aware of irony? Too long in the tooth to follow you down this fruitless road helen darling. Why not address the points I've made? Too embarrassed to admit you were wrong? Very scientific.
|
|
|
Post by jonjel on Jan 14, 2011 10:46:25 GMT 1
Mr Smith,
You have asked me to address the issues you have raised. I would if I could see any but you have not raised a single 'issue' as far as I can see. All you have done is labelled everyone who is concerned as an eco-fascist. That includes concerned fishermen does it? Your take on this appears to be there are plenty of fish in the sea so lets have a free for all with no limits no quotas no size limits of any kind.
I have tried to get a sensible rational debate going and actually asked you a direct question - what would you do about it, but you are obviously not interested in discussion on any level. You sole aim in life appears to be to snipe at me and a few others.
So be it. I have far better and more productive things to do with my time.
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Jan 14, 2011 11:49:30 GMT 1
Mr Smith, You have asked me to address the issues you have raised. I would if I could see any but you have not raised a single 'issue' as far as I can see. All you have done is labelled everyone who is concerned as an eco-fascist. That includes concerned fishermen does it? Your take on this appears to be there are plenty of fish in the sea so lets have a free for all with no limits no quotas no size limits of any kind. I have tried to get a sensible rational debate going and actually asked you a direct question - what would you do about it, Ban any input from the eco-fascists but you are obviously not interested in discussion on any level. You sole aim in life appears to be to snipe at me and a few others. So be it. I have far better and more productive things to do with my time.
|
|
|
Post by jonjel on Jan 14, 2011 13:26:02 GMT 1
Mr Smith.
My general rule of being reasonably polite and courteous on message boards is being tested to the limit here.
It is quite obvious that you have absolutely nothing of any merit to contribute, so one wonders why you started the thread in the first place.
Eco fascist is not a contribution.
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Jan 14, 2011 15:58:30 GMT 1
The solution to the fish management problem is to ban any input from the eco-looneys. Greenpeace, WWF, RSPB etc. They have nothing of worth to contribute. They have no integrity and no interest in reasoned debate. Their litany of propaganda and "lies" on the subject of fisheries has rendered them irrelevent. Fishermen need to talk across borders, come up with a solution and force their political representatives to present the legislation required.
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Jan 15, 2011 14:30:18 GMT 1
Some ideas worth considering in the reform of the CFP would be: 1. Banning of discards where everything caught must be kept and used including guts (fertilizer) and livers (oil). Fishermen will quickly adjust their nets so only the most marketable fish are caught. There will be a collapse in sea-birds though.
2.Selective methods of fishing should be unrestricted. If immature and possibly egg bearing fish can be returned unharmed (or aren't captured) then the fishing method is inherently sustainable.
3. All government kitchens should have non-standard fish on the menu twice a week. Schools hospitals etc.
4.Educate people from an early age how to prepare and cook all types of fish.
|
|