Re: Flexible extension???

Well said Swims

Re: Flexible extension???

Hi

We are on opposite sides of the fence, I am a Leaver, but I do respect the accuracy of your posts.

I do not hate the EU, it is just not for me.

I would have voted Remain if our Politicians had stood up for us, but they didn't, so out we go.

I am simply fed up with the UK being used because none of our lot are capable of outwitting a drunken sot like Juncker.

I despair, I really do.

Re: Flexible extension???

No answers....

Re: Flexible extension???

Still no answers....

Re: Flexible extension???

Indeed. And if you won't take the trouble to do the minimal bit of research (on google), you don't want answers. You just want to nag some of us who are annoyed by your ignorance, which doesn't keep you from uttering downright lies. You are just beneath contempt.

Re: Flexible extension???

and still no answers....

Re: Flexible extension???

What was the question again?

Re: Flexible extension???

In 2015, the*CFP allocated*the United Kingdom a total of 612,612 tonnes of quota from more than 100 different fish and shellfish stocks. The total EU quota for these stocks was 2,069,202 tonnes, so the UK was allocated 30% of these fish (and shellfish) quotas.

These figures include various fish which live beyond the boundaries of UK waters, such as Arctic cod and west of Ireland sole. If one considers the 73 different fish stocks which live in UK waters, the total EU quota was 1,920,915 tonnes, of which 585,211 tonnes was allocated to the UK (which also happens to be 30%). Individual quota allocations differ according to stock, as figure one below shows. For example, the UK gets 84% of the North Sea haddock quota, 81% of North Sea monkfish quota and 98% of west of Scotland prawn quota; but only 4% of North Sea sprat quota, 18% of northern hake and 28% of North Sea plaice.


https://theconversation.com/fact-che...f-europe-39966

Figure 1. 2015 quota allocations for 73 stocks which live in UK waters, grouped by region (% in brackets refers to the proportion of total quota the UK received in each region). The numbers on each bar refer to the percentage of EU quota allocated to the UK (note West of Scotland Mackerel is off the scale, as EU quota was over 420,000 tonnes).

Re: Flexible extension???

Finally thanks to Google (again) I get an answer

The EU allows the UK ~25% of the overall quota of fish to be fished from our own territorial waters. Weird huh ? It's our own waters but we have to give away 75% of fishing to other countries who sell it back to us at huge profits...

But it's not just the fish that is the issue - it's the damage that the CFP did to our fishing industry (considering we are an island surrounded by our own waters) where, over the past 40 years or so we have seen around 60% of our national fleet being scrapped thanks to the CFP since we joined.

You might think that 25% is a generous figure as well in the broad scheme of things seeing as there are 28 member states. Well, it isn't because firstly, the UK territorial waters belong 100% to the UK, and, before you start claiming that we own the waters but not the fish, then understand that you cannot get to these fish without being in our waters in the first place.

Of that 25% quota there are around 25% of the UK fleet (probably a lot more) that are foreign flag boats, quota hopping to get the UK share of the quota. What happens is, companies like Spain register a company in the UK and then register their boats as UK vessels ... except the boats never return to a UK port, unloading in Spain or France or Holland ... effectively stealing chunks of the 25% quota that have been given to the UK by the EU.

The other horrifying part of the quota system is discards. The EU claims to be conservationist and "environmentally friendly"... it's a big joke and the EU should be treated as criminals for implementing it. Should a trawler catch (say) 40 tonnes of whiting, then discover they have come across a large shoal of cod that is a much more expensive fish to sell, the 40 tonnes of whiting go over the side dead and instead the trawlers grab the cod. How on earth is this conservationist or environmentally friendly ? It's a criminal act - pure and simple but allowed because the unelected, unaccountable bastards in the EU allow it.

In (I think) was 2017, more whiting was put back dead than landed... how's that for environmentally friendly and conservationist, and this goes on day in, day out.

But there is a light at the end of the tunnel ..

When we leave the EU we will take back our fishing waters and then get rid of the catastrophic quota system and the Dutch, Spanish, Portugese and French flag boats. We will have a policy of land everything you catch and fishing licenses issued to foreign vessels with permits based on number of days at sea, beam length of the vessel and territories it can fish. Only boats that return to a UK port will be classed as British with the revenues made going directly back to the ports/regions to rejuvenate our industry and boost the economies of coastal towns such as Grimsby, Whitby, Lowestoft etc.

If we do this, we should net the UK about 6 billion a year in fishing alone and jump start the coastal towns into prosperous free-ports, fish processing industries and all the trappings such as tourism, recreational sea angling retail sales, commercial charter fishing boats, B&B's, restaurants etc etc that have been absolutely decimated over the past 40 years or so. Any fish caught poaching should be toad back to the nearest UK port, impounded and fined to the value of the boat plus the catch that has been boarded. If the skipper can't pay then the boat is auctioned into the UK fishing fleet.

We can then increase the number of inshore MCZ's to ensure we can maintain our fish stocks and promote sustainability.

Getting rid of the CFP was one of the main reasons for me leaving. I'm a recreational sea angler of about 20 years, a member of B.A.S.S, campaigner for Fish Fight, Colchester Sea Angling Club, and Fish for Leave.

Re: Flexible extension???

As a result of membership of the Common Fisheries Policy, we are now allowed to catch less than 20% of the fish that swim in British waters. The other 80% we have given away to the rest of Europe.
Nigel Farage, UKIP leader,*on the campaign trail

When fact checking this statement, it is first of all worth pointing out that if the UK was allowed to catch 20% of the fish that swim in British waters and the EU took the rest, then there would be no fish left in the sea.
You use 25 and 75%, but the nonsense is the same.

Although UK waters are extensive the fish stocks which live in our waters are by no means confined to them. Some, like mackerel, make*extensive migrations*and only pass through our waters for a short period. Others are more sedentary, like*prawns*which stay close to their burrows in muddy habitats.

Many species live in different places either at different times of the year or in different phases of their life cycle. In the case of*North Sea herringfor example, most of the juveniles live in the south east corner around the German bight, whereas the adults tend to congregate around the Shetland Isles prior to spawning at various sites along the British coast.*North Sea cod*are found throughout the North Sea but prefer spawning along the border between UK and Norwegian waters.

So despite the UK having quite extensive waters, fish stocks do not respect political boundaries, and many are mobile at some stage in their life: these fish are exclusive to neither the UK, the EU, nor the bordering Scandinavian states, but are a shared resource. It would be a major undertaking to establish exactly which proportions of each fish stock would occupy any national waters. These are also likely to change throughout the year, and from year to year. The CFP was designed to manage the mobile fishing fleets that pursue these common, mobile resources.

Although the majority of fish stocks around the UK are managed under the CFP, some important stocks, mainly local shellfish species such as crabs, lobsters and scallops, are also managed under national jurisdictions and bilateral agreements, for example between the EU and states such as Norway and Iceland.

The status of all stocks is determined by the*International Council for the Exploration of the Sea*(ICES), the recognised authority that provides scientific advice to managers. This advice is updated annually and, where possible, includes measures of stock status such as the total biomass of adults and the rate of exploitation the stock has been subjected to by the fishery.

Although the CFP is much derided, various reforms have actually resulted in*improvements in the status of many fish stocks*in the last decade or so: exploitation rates are down, and in most cases, to levels which are sustainable. The ICES advice also includes recommendations for total allowable catches (TACs) for each stock. Each TAC is then considered by the EU and divided into the quotas which are allocated among the member states according to fixed percentages, under allocation keys known as “relative stability”, which are based on historic fishing patterns.

By demonstrating that the majority of fish in our waters are in fact European rather than British it highlights a key point – even if Britain left the EU we would still need to negotiate quotas which took this into account. There is no guarantee this would ensure any more of the catch.

It’s also interesting to look at these figures in terms of value rather than just landings. Three of the top five most valuable UK fisheries are for shellfish:*prawns, scallops and crabs. For these more sedentary species we already have almost complete control. Although some fish, such as haddock are mainly eaten in the UK, a lot of shellfish from British waters is exported to EU countries. The vast majority of our scallop catch – the UK’s third most valuable fishery – goes to France and Belgium. Likewise Spain and Portugal take a lot of our crabs and prawns. Let’s concentrate on looking after what we are responsible for, more wisely.