Welsh Assembly Government to manage Welsh fisherie

[seajunky]

Welsh Assembly Government to manage Welsh fisheries
Rural Affairs Minister Elin Jones has announced that the Welsh Assembly Government will assume full responsibility for the management and enforcement of sea fisheries in Wales. Currently, fisheries in Wales are managed by the Welsh Assembly Government, by two Sea Fisheries Committees and by the Environment Agency.

The decision has been taken following extensive consultation with stakeholders, including the Welsh fishing industry, Sea Fisheries Committees, local authorities and environmental interests.

The aim of the new policy is to modernise fisheries management, providing a consistent management structure for the whole of Wales by simplifying the current regime and ensuring greater transparency. Some new powers will be necessary and the intention is that these will be secured through the Marine Bill, and the aim is that the new structure will be in place by April 2010.

Elin Jones said:

In arriving at this decision, I have listened carefully to responses to the consultation on the management of sea fisheries in Wales, which raised a number of concerns which I am keen to allay.

I am determined that the new arrangements will not result in the loss of the expertise of the Sea Fisheries Committees (SFCs) and their officers, nor their close working relationship with fishermen. We will be integrating current SFC staff into the new structure to ensure continuity, and retaining legislative powers similar to those which the SFCs have at present.

The new Welsh Assembly Government Fisheries Unit will be responsible for the management and enforcement of sea fisheries as an integral part of coherent policies for safeguarding the marine environment. This is an issue we take very seriously and my officials have already begun discussions with environmental interests to ensure the marine environment is properly protected.

I am also sensitive to concerns that the new system might not allow for the current level of local input. I believe that the involvement of local interests in the formulation of policy and regulation is vital. The new management and enforcement arrangements will operate on the principles of openness, transparency and inclusivity. We will need to work very closely with all sectors of the fishing industry, and I will develop mechanisms to ensure all relevant stakeholders and local interests can feed effectively into policy development and delivery.

I believe that we are taking an important step towards securing the aim of the recently published Wales Fisheries Strategy, of a sustainable, financially viable and effectively regulated fishing industry in Wales. The development of that Strategy was achieved in partnership with all sectors of the industry, and I and my officials look forward to continuing that partnership as we work towards this new regime.

[seajunky]

WAG TO MANAGE AND ENFORCE FUTURE SEA FISHERIES IN WELSH WATERS ?
The Welsh Assembly Government (WAG) has announced its intention to dispose
of Sea Fisheries Committees (SFCs) and manage fisheries ‘in house’; that
means determine policy and deliver it. That is in keeping with previous Assembly
(NAW) decisions for the WDA, Tourist Board and ELWa. But SFCs and
Marine management and enforcement are very different tasks.
SFCs have been around for over 100 years, and they maintain that the current
good standing of the inshore area reflects their good stewardship. This contrasts
with the seas outside 6 n miles which are managed by Governments under
the EU Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) and where finfish are generally in poor
fettle.
On the face of it the proposal looks a sensible one. Manage Welsh waters as a
single unit. Reduce the number of Organisations and therefore boundaries; all
work to a single enforcement ‘uniform’, accountable to one body - NAW.
What could be better?
But why do WAG wish to extend as Phase II its waters beyond 12 n miles to the
mid line of territorial waters? Especially since it cannot manage the majority of
vessels fishing there as the EU CFP has primacy. In fact Government departments
poorly manage even UK vessels fishing 6-12 n miles because they cannot
apply rules to the EU vessels which fish alongside, and the EU largely refuses
to do so. Review of SFCs is said to be a natural consequence of phase II
Fundamental questions arise as to the content of the consultation document as
it lacks even the slightest detail on how WAG intend to progress the new structure.
There are no management plans, no detail as to what work is to be undertaken,
how, where, or by whom.
What capital resources (e.g. Patrol Vessels, RIBs, offices, etc.) will be required?
What are the relevant costings? Indeed, only a proportion of SFC ‘grant’ will
be captured from local authorities so costs will be increased; on top of the set up
costs etc. In England ‘new burden’ costs for new duties of Inshore Fisheries &
Conservation Authorities (IFCAs) (replacement SFCs) are of the order of £4-
6m. This will be extra, albeit for delivery of extra environmental services on
which Wales might be missing out.
There is also no information given on liaison structures that might replace the
current SFC participatory membership, or on accountability or accessibility
aspects - especially as the offices are said to be moving to Aberystwyth and all
the existing WAG Fish staff have recently left or are leaving.
Questions arise in many other areas as well, for instance scientific expertise;
from where will the body obtain fishery conservation advice and will it balance
this against fishery development? What of collection of fisheries statistics,
comment on developments or development of grant aid functions such as lobster
V-notching? Will the body directly contribute to EU Special Area of Conservation
(SAC) management schemes as do SFCs?
But perhaps the biggest area of concern relates to the extent that fishery powers
will exist and/or will be implemented and enforced to secure appropriate local
management especially of intertidal (beach) fisheries? WAG is not an enforcement
or management body. Regionalisation would go against the grain of
WAG Nationalistic policy. On the future of important Regulated (licensing)
and Several (cultivated) fisheries the consultation paper is silent. It merely
wishes to “investigate what provisions might be available”. Current licence
holders might well be worried, not only as to the possibility that the Orders may
disappear, but if they continue whether they will have to pay the costs to meet
the funding gap? Compliance is also questionable with EU Conservation Directives.
Serious questions exist as to whether WAG is capable of undertaking the number
of inspections currently undertaken by SFCs and of the subsequent enforcement
actions (e.g. see over) taken in court.
WAG PROPOSAL
PROS
Fewer organisational boundaries
‘One Fishery Officer uniform’ in marine waters
Accountability is clear - with WAG (NAW)
Financing does not depend upon LAs who
seem not to fully value SFCs
CONS
No costings given, but likely expensive to
establish and run
Finances at the whim of WAG
Will industry have to pay (more) for the services?
Central Government models have poor
reputation. Inefficient
Plans not laid down
Asset use? Protection vessels?
Unlike SFCs, model is untested
Fishery Officers to have less flexible working?
Not as operationally efficient as IFCAs
Will prosecutions take place?
Sources of scientific information?
Will fishery decisions be subservient to
environmental ones?
Will fishery development (e.g. lobster Vnotching)
cease?
Will Marine Stewardship Council accreditation
cease?
Future of Regulating & Several Orders?
Compliance with EU Envt. Directives?
Decisions will not be taken locally
Fishermen will not be closely involved with
decision making detail
Assembly Members will be held vociferously
to account
Limited accessibility to policy people
SFC efficiency and ‘goodwill’ will be lost
within an amorphous WAG
Reduced impartial expert response to marine
developments?
Loss of SFC impartiality
Dear SWSFC Permit Holder June 2008
AVERAGED ANNUAL COUNT OF ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS : 2003—2008 (inc)
Inspections on
land
Inspections at
Sea
Inspections at
Premises VW HoC WW Individuals
Prosecuted
Hours at
Sea
No of Sea
Miles
1643 372 55.6 100 3.6 35.4 27 757 3736
NAW Assembly members are bravely putting themselves
in the firing line in the highly specialist, ‘political’, rapid
moving, contentious world of inshore fisheries management.
That the consultation says AMs may become involved
is an understatement.
The SFCs themselves say that there is no need for such
concerns. The solution in Wales lies, as in England, with
new Inshore Fisheries Conservation Authorities (IFCAs) -
complete with new powers under the Marine Bill.
SFCs say that the above is not only the most sensible option,
which has not at all been ruled out by the WAG consultation,
but it carries low execution risk AND WAG
could still dissolve IFCAs in the future if it did not work
out.
But what of WAG concerns regarding an alleged lack of
delivery of Habitats Directive provisions as claimed in the
consultation as the main reason to disband SFCs?
The SWSFC most emphatically denies this and say not
only is WAG wrong in law, but that it is WAG itself that
has failed to deliver. In fact, dissolving SFCs increases
the risk of infraction upon UK government.
SFCs have the vast expertise (referred to positively in the
WAG document) which they use to balance fishing and
habitat protection, and which has not seriously been questioned
by the EU. Importantly, the SWSFC fears that
without their expertise and services, the fishing industry
will be unnecessarily closed down in large areas, a question
of ‘guilty, because they cannot prove their innocence’.
In any case the Marine Bill provides the simple option to
lay down Ministerial powers of direction for IFCAs for
matters of EU competence, just as is proposed for the new
Marine Management Organisation (MMO) in England.
VERDICT
There are evidently pros and cons to any model, but until WAG produce a comprehensive consultation
document, it is impossible to make any valid judgements. Meanwhile, the IFCA
model in England, as consulted upon Marine Bill ,should be pursued. Strategic management
approach will come from WAG Fishery Strategy and ‘a hand on the tiller’.
SOUTH WALES SEA FISHERIES COMMITTEE - Queens Buildings, Cambrian Place, Swansea, SA1 1TW
Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone] Email: [e-mail] Website: www.swsfc.org.uk