Comment posted Scottish Marine Regions consultation: a depressing waste of time by newsroom.
For John in Kintyre: Foreign trawlers.
newsroom also commented
- For John in Kintyre: You’re quite right about the stand off in Loch Fyne and that nothing can be done about non-local boats. But non local boats do have a lesser sense of responsibility to an environment that is not their own. What do you see as – if not the answer, a constructive way of addressing this?
- For John in KIntyre: You say: ‘Scottish Marine Regions will have no effect on the working practices of these “foreign” vessels as it is Brussels that has the final say in Fishery matters, Marine Scotland can only tinker and fine tune the decrees handed down from Brussels’.
That is exactly what we are saying in this issue and why – along with the operations of the freebooting Crown Estate Commissioners, the headline is that the exercise is a depressing waste of time.
And if you consult creelers on Loch Fyne, you can establish for yourself what we have said on the operation of extra-territorial trawlers there. Mid Argyll councillors are also well aware of the situation.
- For Arhur MacArthur: There are a lot of insights people need to have on this complex issue. For instance, the myth is that hand dived scallops are ecologically sound where the traditional bottom scraping is not.
While the drag scraping undoubtedly ravages the sea floor – as with the well known case of Strangford Lough in Northern Ireland, it is at least indiscriminate in the scallops it takes.
Hand divers naturally take only the prime scallops, leaving the beds deprived of breeding stock and disproportionately with more immature and elderly specimens.
It should be obvious that we are not eco-fascists but are arguing for intelligent action – designed collaboratively (not simply ‘consulted’) – to support the current lives of fishermen and to support their future lives by conserving clearly threatened stocks; and protecting the ecosystem that holds species in a form of balance.
And we are principally arguing in this article for a focus on doing what can be done – with both elephants. The Government has to move away from the extravagant habit of mistaking for action the endless production of less than competent proposals for unachievable ends.
In this case all the introduction of Scottish Marine Regions could do is produce another slew of administrators to preside over a power vacuum.
And to repeat – every industry has its parcels of rogues but the west coast fishermen are generally responsible, well informed – and desperate.
They – and everyone concerned in every aspect of Scotland’s marine area, simply need determined action on the sway of the elephants. - For Andy MacArthur: We were certainly not referring to west coast fishermen.
Look at the article again. We refer specifically to foreign trawlers.
Of course there is an issue with blackfish – which fishermen hate as much as anyone and the quota system, as currently operated, makes inevitable; but we have plenty of evidence that the generality of west coast fishermen are responsible and well informed. They also have no wish to foul their own patch. Foreign trawlers have no such restraint and owe no such loyalty.
These are the ‘looters clearing the valuables’ and they are certainly an issue in Loch Fyne, for one.
We have heard Argyll fishermen praise the system adopted by the Isle of Man – of serially closing and opening scallop beds around the island and seeing stocks thriving in consequence. We have heard them wish that the UK / Scottish Governments would introduce the same strategy.
Recent comments by newsroom
- SNP meeting on Monday may be testing time for mega-coalition proposal
We’re not going to do a ’20 questions’ routine but, to let local politicians off the hook, it’s not any of them.
And we’re now taking a vow of silence. - First Minister’s choice not to condemn mob behaviour proves Farage point
Criticising behaviour – like Nimbyism [a worthy target], should not necessarily require tying it to a party or a group, although if there is good evidence why it belongs there, there is every reason to relate the two.
When you say: ‘Only in a very small number of occasions would I condone taking protest to the point of physical intimidation and I reserve that to some of the most significant ‘upheavals’ in modern times (examples being the fight against apartheid and the civil rights movement in the US) – even then there would be a line I, personally, couldn’t step over.’ – this is wholly understandable but using violence to protest against it is contradictory. I can never get playwright John Arden’s line out my head on this one: ‘You can’t cure the pox by further whoring.’
Civil disobedience is a very attractive and effective expression of disaffection but people are quite resistant to considering it.
Lynda - Arctic Convoy navies celebrated at Loch Ewe as surviving veterans receive Arctic Star medal
Email Jacky Brookes of the Russian Arctic Convoy Museum in Wester Ross: info@russianarcticconvoymuseum.co.uk (Russian Arctic Convoy Museum)
She will be glad to hear from you and of your father.
If you go to this webpage: http://www.veterans-uk.info/arctic_star_index.htm
- you will find an Application Form for the Arctic Star on it.
Alternatively, you can phone: 08457 800 900 and take it from there.
You will be able to get a posthumous medal for your father for his Arctic Convoy service – and although, painfully, he will never have known of it or seen it, he earned it and the medal will be very important to your family. - First Minister’s choice not to condemn mob behaviour proves Farage point
We have people in Community Councils in Argyll who are on the record as not wanting ‘people of low incomes’ in their area. And those will be people of a variety of political persuasions. The socialist NIMBY is not a rare bird.
It is unsafe to give representational status to the fringe adherents of any cause – and that is why the cause itself – any cause – must be clear about what it finds acceptable and what it does not.
The need for the formal, official representative of a country to be clear on matters like this is even greater – and it sets the bar.
How would Mr Salmond react to the same treatment the mob offered Mr Farage in Edinburgh?
It was sudden and unexpected.
It began with an invasion of the pub he was in.
It was intimidating – the mob crowded tight in, creating a real pressure.
The shouting and the abuse was literally ‘in his face’.
There was no way through nor any offered.
It would be surprising if the First Minister were not to feel equally shaken by such an experience – and very surprising if he had effectively condoned it as gleefully afterwards.
Personally, I’m not afraid of much – but the pressure of shouting bodies, the level of unreason, the aggression – with no signals that this might not turn to physical aggression… I wouldn’t have run but I would have been worried for my safety and I would have had no certainty as to the outcome.
The police clearly had reason to take a quite extraordinary series of measures to protect Mr Farage.
One of these was locking him in a pub for his own safety.
That meant that they were uncertain of their ability to protect him against a violence they, who were present – clearly felt was a potential development.
I feel – on good evidence – that Tony Blair did more damage than anyone to the political life of this country, to its expectation of honesty in those who govern, to its essential democracy and to its security – and that he has blood on his hands: of untold thousands of innocent Iraqis, of Dr David Kelly, of those who died in London in the bombings of 7th July 2005. I feel the most profound contempt for him.[And Nigel Farage has nothing of this level of gravity on his record.]
But I would act to protect Blair were he to be the butt of anything like this – because I do not wish to be implicated either in what he has done or in any primitive lynch mob response to it.
The best punishment for the attention-seeking and egotistical Blair is to pay him no attention. He is not an homme serieux.
The best response to UKIP and MR Farage, if you are opposed to their politics, is not to vote for them.
Lynda - Walsh to lead all but Lib Dems, Conservatives and George Freeman
No – not speculation – otherwise we would have said so.
But this is not a done deal.
It has to go for approval to an SNP meeting tomorrow [Monday].
powered by SEO Super Comments
So much smoke an mirrors;
Though slightly off at a tangent this is not the only poorly managed and rushed consultation Please read below:
As sent to the Herald yesterday
The analysis by W. Flood of the economic realities behind Alex Salmond’s scramble for wind (Dream of being the sheikhs of green energy is wide of the mark, The Herald, February 5) is entirely believable. The prediction is that our wind generation capacity could reach eventually almost 300 GW. This is enough to string fairy lights many times around the moon in time for next Christmas but it is about 80 times the amount of energy we actually need. The vast wealth created on the back of huge government subsidies will flow into the coffers of the energy giants rather than into those of the state. The expense of it all, particularly that of the construction of off-shore windfarms, will, of course, be heaped on the hard-pressed consumer. No doubt about that.
Another side to the story, however, reveals even more serious weaknesses and negative issues which undermine the credibility of Salmond’s grandiose vision of Scotland as a ‘green Saudi Arabia’. This quest for sheikhdom on his part will impact dangerously in economic terms on the nation’s tourist industry and the small communities who foster and promote such an important source of national income. It will downgrade Scotland’s image in the world as an unspoiled haven with spectacular scenery. In the political sphere it may even undermine what confidence we have left in our own democracy.
Having decided to blight the heart of highland Scotland with the Beauly to Denny pylons, it is now becoming clear that if the First Minister holds to his dream there is a real possibility that large areas of ocean off the West Coast of Scotland and around the Western Isles will be scarred with ugly cohorts of giant turbines. This will downgrade and industrialise one of the most beautiful places on earth. It is a well-known fact that many thousands of tourists coming to Scotland to find land and seascape beauty do not like windfarms. Wilderness Scotland, which was the 2005 Tourism Business of the Year, conducted a survey of 1,600 clients from all over the world that same year to discover that 91 per cent of them would not return to the highlands of Scotland if there was significant development of windfarms.
Take the case of Tiree, the outermost island of the Inner Hebrides, famed for its wildlife, tranquillity, beaches and glorious seascapes. The tourist industry on the island will be wiped out if a proposal by the Spanish-owned Scottish Power Renewables to build hundreds of turbines (between 180 and 500 depending on size), starting just two miles from Tiree’s shores. Some of these will be 600ft high, topping the highest point on Tiree and will be seen from 70 per cent of the island. Throughout the years of disruption in the building of onshore facilities and the erection of of turbines near to land tourists will be driven away from this little island forever. Once the turbines are installed no one will have the slightest inclination to travel for four hours on a ferry from Oban to look at a monstrous windfarm. This will have a hugely negative effect on the island’s income and welfare and, projected over many other popular tourist areas of Scotland a big impact on the national economy.
Equally disturbing, however, is the fact that the First Minister’s obsession with windpower blows along with it an unhealthy ‘energy fascism’. Offshore windfarm consultation processes are farcical, leaving communities virtually no say in their future. When the proposed Tiree development was first announced the island folk were told that even if everyone on the island rejected the plan, that would make no difference at all – it would still go ahead. Proposals for this and other developments offshore, which do not need to adhere to the normal planning procedures, are being railroaded through with an eye to the May elections for the Scottish Parliament. Tragic enough is the blight to be cast upon upon this little country and its seas by the subsidised turbine industry, even more catastrophic would be the weakening of our democratic principles in order to facilitate its growth.
The No-Tiree-Array group have 4 submissions to complete by the 18th Feb !!! and as stated by Phil Gilmour of Marine Scotland…there is a ‘RUSH’ to have the SEA presented to the 1st Minister prior to the election.
Haste ye not back Alex and Jim…
Offshore View
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Tiree is the worst example yet of Salmond’s windfarm juggernaut. This dreadful project would be the worst disaster in this beautiful island’s history. £billions of taxpayers’ money spent to destroy a community, all for the sake of political ambition and commercial greed. And the damn things don’t even work! Come on Scotland. Get behind the No-Tiree-Array campaign.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The situation between the Crown Estate and the Scottish Government is utterly absurd. Pls keep us informed on the outcome of the Freedom of Information request.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Pingback: Scottish Marine Regions consultation: a depressing waste of time – For Argyll
“Looters clearing the valuables” – You really have no concept of the life and livihood of a West Coast creel fisherman – emotive language such as this will hardly do your cause any good. Creel fishing is recognised as a highly sustainable method, with little or no bycatch and does little or no damage to the marine ecosystem. Again, Mr Carter, in a broad sweeping and frankly idiotic statement you have alienated the very people you need to get on side.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
For Andy MacArthur: We were certainly not referring to west coast fishermen.
Look at the article again. We refer specifically to foreign trawlers.
Of course there is an issue with blackfish – which fishermen hate as much as anyone and the quota system, as currently operated, makes inevitable; but we have plenty of evidence that the generality of west coast fishermen are responsible and well informed. They also have no wish to foul their own patch. Foreign trawlers have no such restraint and owe no such loyalty.
These are the ‘looters clearing the valuables’ and they are certainly an issue in Loch Fyne, for one.
We have heard Argyll fishermen praise the system adopted by the Isle of Man – of serially closing and opening scallop beds around the island and seeing stocks thriving in consequence. We have heard them wish that the UK / Scottish Governments would introduce the same strategy.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Mr MacArthur: The phrase “looters clearing the valuables” in the original item surely refers to the Crown Estate Commissioners, the Holyrood Government etc, and not to sustainable users of the environment as it now stands.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Thank you for this most useful article. Indeed it is a scandal that the Crown Estate has managed to sell ‘leases’ in Scottish waters for exploitation of offshore wind energy before any public consultation took place; and that the subsequent ‘consultation’ has been both incompetently managed (by common account of those who have attended meetings) and widely considered disingenuous and irrelevant, with the outcome decided in advance. (See ‘Offshore View’s’ comment above re Tiree.)
There is a very serious conflict of interest developing here, especially with the recent settlement whereby the monarchy is henceforth to be financed directly from the revenues of the Crown Estate rather than from the Civil List. The Prince of Wales as Duke of Cornwall is on record as saying that wind farms are ‘a horrendous blot on the landscape’ and has refused permission for any such to be erected on Duchy land. As Duke of Rothesay it will be interesting to see what his views are on the despoliation of the coastal landscapes of the Western Highlands and Islands (it is pure sophistry to think that ‘landscape must be 100 per cent on land or that wind farms one or two miles off an coastline interlaced with islands do not have every bit as great an impact on the landscape). It would be good to think that developments inflicting such appalling damage on the land- and seascape would be no less unacceptable than windmills on Bodmin Moor.
It is indeed unfortunate that the commercial interests of the Crown Estate for the moment chime with the delusional visions of the current First Minister. In the longer term, it may do neither the government, nor the acceptability of the monarchy in Scotland (which I devoutly support) any good if a ruinously expensive scheme involving the destruction of a unique landscape, which has an economic as well as a spiritual value, is foisted upon the Scottish people.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Pingback: Scottish Marine Regions consultation: a depressing waste of time | Wind Energy Investing
HMF – That may well be the case but that’s not how it reads. What about the other elephant?
Newsroom:
“We were certainly not referring to west coast fishermen.”
I don’t know if I find that reassuring?
“We have heard Argyll fishermen praise the system adopted by the Isle of Man – of serially closing and opening scallop beds around the island and seeing stocks thriving in consequence. We have heard them wish that the UK / Scottish Governments would introduce the same strategy.”
I’m sure most West Coast fisherman are in favour of that – but again ‘we have heard’ that’s not whats being muted in the Firth of Lorn – not serial closure of scallop beds – just closure period – with no plan to ever reopen these areas, in locations scallops aren’t fished where only sustainable ‘responsible and well informed’ creel fishing for nephrops takes place.
Indeed these areas have sustainably supported, and continue to support many local fisherman and their families – and in most cases because of the territorial nature of static gear fishing are the only grounds open to them.
Closure simply for closures sake, without even a base line invertebrate data to asses the current standing stock biomass, yield, CPU etc., in fact with no evidence other than that which applies to a completely different fishery and its methods, with no thought given to how these hard working men or their families are going live when you take away their livelihood away is nothing short of eco-facism.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
For Arhur MacArthur: There are a lot of insights people need to have on this complex issue. For instance, the myth is that hand dived scallops are ecologically sound where the traditional bottom scraping is not.
While the drag scraping undoubtedly ravages the sea floor – as with the well known case of Strangford Lough in Northern Ireland, it is at least indiscriminate in the scallops it takes.
Hand divers naturally take only the prime scallops, leaving the beds deprived of breeding stock and disproportionately with more immature and elderly specimens.
It should be obvious that we are not eco-fascists but are arguing for intelligent action – designed collaboratively (not simply ‘consulted’) – to support the current lives of fishermen and to support their future lives by conserving clearly threatened stocks; and protecting the ecosystem that holds species in a form of balance.
And we are principally arguing in this article for a focus on doing what can be done – with both elephants. The Government has to move away from the extravagant habit of mistaking for action the endless production of less than competent proposals for unachievable ends.
In this case all the introduction of Scottish Marine Regions could do is produce another slew of administrators to preside over a power vacuum.
And to repeat – every industry has its parcels of rogues but the west coast fishermen are generally responsible, well informed – and desperate.
They – and everyone concerned in every aspect of Scotland’s marine area, simply need determined action on the sway of the elephants.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Newsroom,
Please explain and enlighten further on the statements:-
“We are not referring to West Coast fishermen”.
Then it is stated,
“These are the “looters clearing the valuables” and they are certainly an issue in Loch Fyne, for one.”
Please define “looters” in the context of the article.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
For John in Kintyre: Foreign trawlers.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Foreign trawlers in Loch Fyne? Really! find that hard to believe.
So if I substitue “looters” with “Foreigners” should it read and are viewers to understand that,
“There are the “foreigners clearing the valuables” and they are certainly an issue in Loch Fyne, for one”.
Like it or not Foreign trawlers/longliners and gill-netters do work on the West Coast of Scotland but not inshore, out on the edge of the continental shelf West of St Kilda for example, have done so for years and continue to do.
Working West of what is commonly called in Euro parlance the “French Line”.
Scottish Marine Regions will have no effect on the working practices of these “foreign” vessels as it is Brussels that has the final say in Fishery matters, Marine Scotland can only tinker and fine tune the decrees handed down from Brussels.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
For John in KIntyre: You say: ‘Scottish Marine Regions will have no effect on the working practices of these “foreign” vessels as it is Brussels that has the final say in Fishery matters, Marine Scotland can only tinker and fine tune the decrees handed down from Brussels’.
That is exactly what we are saying in this issue and why – along with the operations of the freebooting Crown Estate Commissioners, the headline is that the exercise is a depressing waste of time.
And if you consult creelers on Loch Fyne, you can establish for yourself what we have said on the operation of extra-territorial trawlers there. Mid Argyll councillors are also well aware of the situation.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Am in full agreement about the issue of Crown Estate Commissioners who are an unelected quango, full control of all Scottish Seabed should be the remit of Holyrood.
When it comes to Fisheries, you Newsdesk, seem to be advocating a “territioralist” policy by which I mean local waters for local men, you can not bar or ban a certain section of the fishing industry from any sea area just because they are not local, if local can indeed be defined, or if one disagrees with the method being used.
You mention Loch Fyne and tell me to consult creelers, why not consult the trawlers?
I do know of the gear conflict issue and would suggest to you it is a prime example of instrangency by a couple of individuals from both sides, who cannot or will not agree on a Code of Conduct, there will always be a couple of bad apples in the barrel and as a journalist it is always advisable to get a full perspective of the issue before commenting.
In Argyll we have a very diversified fleet, from 16m scallopers, trawlers to small 8m creel vessels, it would be very difficult to categorise it, crude division and simplistic definitions do not and will not work.
I do know of the views of one Mid Argyll Councilor, the Councilor for Minard, who has taken sides without fully consulting all the parties involved, she will certainly not be picking up many of the votes in the majority of fishing villages of Kintyre if indeed anywhere in Argyll in the forthcomming election.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
“Arhur MacArthur” WTF?
Thanks for the lecture on Scallops
“It should be obvious that we are not eco-fascists but are arguing for intelligent action – designed collaboratively (not simply ‘consulted’) – to support the current lives of fishermen and to support their future lives by conserving clearly threatened stocks; and protecting the ecosystem that holds species in a form of balance.”
By that rationale would I be right in assuming ForArgyll would oppose the the indiscriminate and permanent closure to creel fisherman of areas where stocks of the only species fished (eg nephrops) are healthy and are not threatened?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
For John in Kintyre: You’re quite right about the stand off in Loch Fyne and that nothing can be done about non-local boats. But non local boats do have a lesser sense of responsibility to an environment that is not their own. What do you see as – if not the answer, a constructive way of addressing this?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Pingback: Scottish Marine Regions consultation: a depressing waste of time – For Argyll
“What do you see as – if not the answer, a constructive way of addressing this?”
A legal and binding Code of Conduct, observed by both sides, but please remember this issue probably only involves two individuals who are poles apart.
You can take the horse to the trough but can not make it drink from the trough unless the horse is thirsty.
By this I mean there has to be a willingness and resolve to settle the issue from both parties.
We have here a classic example of trench warfare mentality where no side will give or take as they are too opposed to one another. This to me seems to be a personal issue between the warring factions with others (both creelers/trawlers) not involved in this vendetta being
mere onlookers.
Why is it that both sectors peacefully co-exist elsewhere where there is a larger concentration of both creelers and trawlers on the same grounds, because they talk and resolve any relevent issues, thus avoid conflict and confrontation.
Banning or ring-fencing one specific area for either of the methods does not work, it will and does effect the sustainibilty in the long run, take Loch Torridon as an example of a creel only MSC fishery where an influx of extra vessels negated and suspended the accreditation.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Pingback: Argyll News: Caveat emptor: Clyde Inshore Fisheries Group consultations | For Argyll