Joe, there are some similarities but the circumstances vastly different as English and Scottish fishermen were fishing LEGALLY here.

The cod wars between Iceland and Britain occurred between 1950’s and 1970’s and happened because British fishermen had always fished in the cod rich waters off Iceland. There were no 200-mile fishing exclusion limits anywhere at that time. Iceland had a 2-mile zone in place.

Iceland started the Cod wars off by making a 12-mile zone which included the rich cod fishing, The spats happened because the British ignored this new zone as they thought it unfair. They even had British naval vessels supporting them. Then Iceland brought in a 50-mile exclusion zone which at the time cut the British fishing fleet’s ability to catch cod to severe cuts. There were many altercations between the Icelandic coast guard and British naval vessels as the coast guard attempted to cut British fishing nets.
The final spat which became quite serious occurred in the early 70’s I believe, when Iceland declared a 200-mile exclusion zone in which British naval vessels accompanied British trawlers inside the zone as Britain said the fishing rights should be decided diplomatically not by warfare on the seas, It was the USA who finally settled it with persuasion to the British to respect the exclusion zone as Iceland threatened to close the locally based American base which protected the Atlantic during the height of the Cold War. Of course, the 200-mile zone became the norm after that.

The decision by Britain to respect the 200-mile Icelandic exclusion zone resulted in devastating losses to ports such as Hull and Grimsby, with 1,500 fishing jobs and thousands of associated shore jobs lost forever. Scottish fishermen suffered very badly too.

On the other hand, Iceland, NOT PART OF THE EU, has thrived ever since, being renowned as one of the largest and wealthiest fisheries in the world!

Perhaps if we all used a bit less fish ( I always wonder how much gets wasted ) there!

Maybe it isn't about us Brits eating less fish but more of trying different kinds of fish. We are very much stuck in our fish preferences here and whilst most other countries make the most of their varied catches and have adapted ..we chuck back into the sea.

Walking around a fish market abroad is another world compared to ours

I would agree with you, but apparently the fishermen are now only allowed to bring specified catches back to shore. They are told to throw the rest back....and that came from a comment by a fisherman on TV who was being interviewed!

I would agree with you, but apparently the fishermen are now only allowed to bring specified catches back to shore. They are told to throw the rest back....and that came from a comment by a fisherman on TV who was being interviewed!

Is that not due to the sizes of fish and not the different varieties ?

Fish below the following sizes shall be regarded as juveniles:


Example
cod 35cm
haddock 30cm
whiting 27cm

authorized to catch. The film showed them sorting through their catch and having to throw a lot of it back.

Of course they do have to throw the smaller fish back, but according to the report I heard, they are not allowed to bring in any type of fish they are not authorized to catch. The film showed them sorting through their catch and having to throw a lot of it back.

Supermarkets could help encourage people to try something different, by putting it on offer and selling it with a couple of suitable recipes. I know I would try them & so would others who are interesting in cooking.
People need tempting to try new fish dishes!

Found a clip that explains your point. It also explains how our fishermen are selling what they catch to Europe.

Of course we didn't do the same to Iceland some years back. Remember the Cod wars???