VOICE FROM THE QUAYSIDE

Voice from the quayside. 

By The NFFO

The National Federation of Fishermen’s Organisations (NFFO), have conducted port visits in Norfolk and East Anglia and ports in the Devon and Cornwall to hear directly from the fishermen what their highest priorities are and what challenges they are facing.

In a move to adapt the NFFO Regional Committee structure to meet the current needs of the industry, we have adopted a port visit model to trial improved engagement with our members and wider industry. Feedback from many members is that there are too many meetings and there is reluctance to meet outside of their port unless the need is great. The NFFO feel that engaging with fishermen directly in their home port, in an informal manner and without an agenda, encourages better dialogue and ensures we are hearing the key priorities and issues from across a region and from many different voices.

In March we visited ports in East Anglia and the South West, these included Boston, Kings Lynn, Wells-Next-The-Sea, Cromer, Lowestoft, Brixham, Salcombe, Newlyn, Mevagissey, Bideford and Plymouth. There were common themes across both regions visited as well as regional, or even port-specific, challenges.

A common theme across both regions, and many other areas that reach out to the NFFO, is the ongoing challenges with services provided by the MCA. There is a lack of clarity, differing service standards and contradictory advice being given by different surveyors and in different ports. There is also a fear that if complaints are raised, there may subsequently be negative consequences for those who raise them. NFFO Safety and Training lead, Charles Blyth, has been working on ensuring service standards from the MCA are consistent and clear, although the message does not seem to have reached some of those who are inspecting vessels. Charles encourages that where there are genuine problems, formal complaints should be submitted through the correct channels, to ensure there is an evidence chain demonstrating the issues. We will continue to press for professional, cordial and most importantly consistent engagement with the fishing industry from all government agencies. The NFFO also supports the Seafish safety folder, that can help fishermen record and track all their safety paperwork. It was also recognised in both regions that the Fishing Animateurs is a fantastic scheme that supports industry in accessing grants when available.

Recruitment of new fishermen and retention of those already active is a key priority that was mentioned in both regions. Particularly for those in the non-sector, there is a shortage of workers to meet current demand and a fear that there is no new blood coming into the industry. Reputational issues, start-up costs, access to quota, legislative burden, access to fish/shellfish, licensing costs and career prospects are all suggested as barriers to recruitment. There is also concern that where there are training courses for new entrants, there needs to be increased focus on the practical skills required by the fishing industry (i.e. splicing, mending, echo sounders) alongside the health and safety and legislative elements of the training. It is perceived that many new entrants lack some of the practical skills needed to fishing, therefore when they join a vessel, they feel ill-prepared and may leave the sector. The NFFO recently encouraged the Fisheries APPG to discuss recruitment and employment in the fishing industry, raising this issue to parliamentarians to hear evidence and discuss the issue.

Concerns raised in East Anglia included market access issues for mussels grown in Class B waters; ongoing liaison issues with the offshore wind sector, and regional management challenges. The lack of opportunity to diversify when fisheries are closed for management reasons or new opportunities arise, such as increased bass on the ground, is creating increased challenges for those within the region. There was confusion around enforcement of regulations on bass caught as bycatch in pot fisheries, and the lack of attention given to the recreational take of bass.

There was a general feeling in most ports visited that engagement with either regional or national management is low. There is severe concern about the administrative charges being imposed by EIFCA for the different permit systems needed for different fisheries. The NFFO’s position is that permit charges should not exceed the costs incurred to administer the permit system. Costs associated with permits in several IFCA districts appear increasingly to be disproportionate to the costs incurred, further disadvantaging inshore fishermen. There is also concern that, whilst the fishing industry financially support the regional cockle surveys, they have little input into how those surveys are conducted and who is responsible for delivering them.

There is a growing need to improve relations between regulators and fishermen in some ports in the region; to ensure that fisheries are encouraged and supported in engaging with, and consulting on management issues whilst working towards balancing fishing opportunities against conservation goals. An issue specific to Boston is the challenges associated with the new flood defence, inhibiting access. Communication on the project appears to be poor. The NFFO have offered support to the Boston fishermen when needed.

Engagement in the South West appears to be better when compared to other regions. Many fishermen felt that, whilst they have issues with fisheries management, they are well informed and they acknowledged attempts from authorities to engage regularly. This was not the case in all ports, however, and fishermen in those places did not feel that their voices were being heard.

The greatest challenge facing inshore fishermen in the South West is the continuing zero TAC advice on pollack. There appears to be little hope for the future within the inshore fishery, and fears have been expressed that pollack fisheries will follow the same route that bass fisheries took few years ago. There is a willingness within industry to engage around pollack fishing and to investigate technical measures and other options to improve stock recovery whilst maintaining economic viability within the fleets that rely upon it.

Concern was expressed that many actions within the FMPs relevant to the region are not being implemented quickly enough, or addressing key needs, especially in the face of ecological changes in the South West, such as the influx of octopus in the region.

Again, there were port specific issues such as the local council and local environmental groups wishing to close an area of the local bay in Mevagissey to fishing. These are the kind of issues that the NFFO can actively engage with and we are experienced at supporting fishermen faced with spatial restrictions due to other interests attempting to take control of areas of the sea.

The NFFO recognise the value in quayside engagement and will be following this model for the other regions over the coming year. We will also attend to regional issues whenever requested, to provide support as issues arise. We aim to ensure the voices of our regional members are being heard and to using the information they provide to develop the NFFO’s policies and workstreams whilst offering support where needed.

Source

Main Image © The NFFO