Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

The Great Fish Fight.

2»

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 587 ✭✭✭some_dose


    topper75 wrote: »
    The big Irish factory ship is an international disgrace. Irish greed isn't limited to banks and developers.

    Leaving the common fisheries would mean a policing headache. Navies ain't cheap to run and our waters are huge. We can't manage as it is.

    I'm not convinced Norwegian policies will lead to a resurgence in cod.

    The guy who built the ship, Kevin McHugh, built it knowing full well it would be banned from EU waters (he wanted it to be so the boat could fish off the African coast where it catches up to 600 tonnes of fish per trawl). His other boat, the Veronica, was 104m an until the construction of the Atlantic Dawn, was the largest trawler in the world.

    Yes leaving the Common Fisheries would present a whole load of problems - however, in 50 years time I want to be able to go into a restaurant and see cod on the menu. What price are we willing to put on our environment and our biodiversity?

    The Norwegian policies are in their infancy. Scotland are adapting it this year and installing CCTV on their boats to enforce it. It is, at least, a step in the right direction. However not one word was mentioned last night about net design for protecting cod and other species. A device known as a Swedish grid (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T6N-4PYYTM6-1&_user=10&_coverDate=04/30/2008&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_origin=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1604791374&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=07cb84e65a24a59edb7532e6424d5510&searchtype=a) have shown to be up to 100% effective in reducing cod in nets. Why aren't these being used? Why isn't our fishery minister out there trying to do his be to save our fisheries?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,880 ✭✭✭Canis Lupus


    I love fish but stopped eating it because of how wasteful the industry is. It's utterly utterly utterly unbelievable how much death and waste is created by just one trawler alone.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,880 ✭✭✭Canis Lupus


    Nulty wrote: »
    I dont eat wild fish anymore in protest. Cod is all but extinct in many places. Its a small price to pay for the marine eco system

    I believe that farmed fish are fed fishmeal so buying farmed fish is still adding to the problem.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,551 ✭✭✭SeaFields


    some_dose wrote: »
    However not one word was mentioned last night about net design for protecting cod and other species. A device known as a Swedish grid (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T6N-4PYYTM6-1&_user=10&_coverDate=04/30/2008&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_origin=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1604791374&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=07cb84e65a24a59edb7532e6424d5510&searchtype=a) have shown to be up to 100% effective in reducing cod in nets. Why aren't these being used? Why isn't our fishery minister out there trying to do his be to save our fisheries?

    Off the top of my head the same presenter of that program did a program last year on sustainable fishing. One of the things he examined was various net designs to avoid catching undersized fish. I assume he will revisit this topic in a future episode of this series as the theme in a lot of his programs are anti big industry.


    And to those of you who say ye dont eat fish anymore because of the industry, why not go out and catch yer own! :) Doesnt get more sustainable than that.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,942 ✭✭✭topper75


    People back in the 19th century could never ever have believed in low cod stocks. It seemed to be invincible as a species - a voracious omnivore that lays countless eggs.

    Yet mankind has done the impossible and all but destoyed cod in a relatively short space of time.

    We may repeat that mistake now again in the 21st century with ocean fish stocks in general.

    I think it is not unethical to eat from sustainable fisheries. I wouldn't stop eating fish altogether but I would try to be mindful of how it is caught and by whom.

    Read "Cod - The History of the Fish that Changed the World" by Mark Kurlansky.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 587 ✭✭✭some_dose


    topper75 wrote: »
    People back in the 19th century could never ever have believed in low cod stocks. It seemed to be invincible as a species - a voracious omnivore that lays countless eggs.

    Yet mankind has done the impossible and all but destoyed cod in a relatively short space of time.

    We may repeat that mistake now again in the 21st century with ocean fish stocks in general.

    I think it is not unethical to eat from sustainable fisheries. I wouldn't stop eating fish altogether but I would try to be mindful of how it is caught and by whom.

    Read "Cod - The History of the Fish that Changed the World" by Mark Kurlansky.

    The thing is though that people would not have to do much to actually force a change. Just buy fish from sustainable stocks - look for line/pole caught tuna when buying tinned tuna and look for MSC (Marine Stewardship Council) approved fish when buying other frozen fish. Also try buy Irish fish, we have it all here so there is no need for us to import it.

    If you buy your fish from a fishmonger, ask him where it was caught and how it was caught (those of you buying cod from Irish waters, anything off the south coast of Ireland is relatively ok). Avoid trawled fish, instead opt for seine netted or long-lined fish. Or even better yet, change your preference and try more sustainable and healthier fish such as mackerel and sardines!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,650 ✭✭✭sensibleken


    Why would the EU want them to throw dead fish back into the sea?

    because they have no sole


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,461 ✭✭✭--Kaiser--


    because they have no sole

    I was whiting for that one


  • Users Awaiting Email Confirmation Posts: 328 ✭✭thefly


    Anyone know where I can buy line or pole caught tuna in dublin?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 339 ✭✭Sport101


    Have found both episodes pretty disappointing so far to be honest.

    The disgraceful issue is not that the fishermen in the first episode have to discard dead fish (as they are over their quotas), its that they continue to fish in the areas where they know full well that they will catch certain types of fish and then have to discard them. This is somewhat mindboggling as fishermen are well aware of the current scientific evidence which states that current quotas are not even low enough to help stocks recover. Clearly the quota system does not work if they are killing the fish anyway, but instead of addressing this issue themselves and trying to figure a way not to needlessly catch fish whose quotas have been used up, they catch them anyway and blame the EU, typical. When stocks disappear they will have noone to blame but themselves.

    The EU is not the main villain in this story, but unfortunately that's not the message that came across from the first episode.

    The second episode seemed to be more focused on sharks, dolphins and turtles, once again missing the bigger issue of many tuna stocks endangerment.

    The series seems like a missed opportunity, but hopefully it will raise awareness about the bigger problem of overfishing, and result in people educating themselves on the main issues and endangered species.

    I do like the Mackerel in the chipper bit though.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 16,286 Mod ✭✭✭✭quickbeam


    I didn't see the original program but just saw Hugh whatsisname on The One Show. I don't really get his point. Throwing dead fish back isn't a good thing of course, but he offered no alternative solutions. I looked on the website too. Wouldn't things be a lot worse if there were no quotas and the fishermen could take what they want? I know fishermen have to make a living but it's really no excuse if your job results in the extinction of animals and the ecological distruction of their environment. Fishermen more to blame than EU, I think.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 846 ✭✭✭the watchman


    As mentioned earlier, where can we buy Pole caught tuna????????


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,798 ✭✭✭goose2005


    SeaFields wrote: »
    Saw this too. It was a good watch. Hugh Fernley Whitingstall was behind it - he had some success in last few years with a campaign to stop intensive chicken breeding in the UK.

    For those that dont know, once a trawler reaches its quota for a certain species, it must throw back any more of that species that it catches. And since nets cant discriminate as to what they catch, a lot of dead fish get thrown overboard.

    Basically the EU are retarded.
    If they didn't force them to do that, fisherman could just "accidentally" go over the limit and then sell the extra fish.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 34,808 ✭✭✭✭smash


    did anyone catch the Joe Duffy piece this week regarding commercial Bass fishing? I missed it but I heard Joe was being even more or a dick than usual.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,650 ✭✭✭sensibleken


    smash wrote: »
    did anyone catch the Joe Duffy piece this week regarding commercial Bass fishing? I missed it but I heard Joe was being even more or a dick than usual.

    the only way he vould possibly be that is if he was broadcasting live from inside a vagina!


Advertisement
Advertisement