Manuel Laura fanges mainly seafish and the popular aircraft in Spain. The Anglo-Spanish Trawler operates from Milford Haven. The large Welsh fishing port has just been renewed with EU funds. Image: Bernd Schroder
British fishing and Brexit
The EU referendum saw Great Britain Fischer united in the hope that the prescribed quotas fall within a leaving the European Union and they have been eliminated from the EU’s Common Fisheries of the EU, which is regarded by many as economically, socially and ecologically devastated. They saw the British from the beginning as a French construct, which sets the role of free market too little significance and instead to regulate regulation. Through the principle of "same access" be confiscated and divided into the EU members – 80% of the Western European fish, from which the Briton himself remained only a fraction, in the form of quotas, which they are still with "Quota" Sharing: foreign fishing vessels under British flag.
Logo of "Fishing for leaven"-campaign.
The constituency of Moray is considered a Euroskeeping area of Scotland. In the nearby are the gross fishing port of Peterhead and Fraserburgh, and there is quite context. The Scottish Fishermen’s Federation represents the Trawler fishermen and has used himself in contrast to the rest of Scotland vehemently for Brexit. You are about the strengthening of the political influence of the fisheries industry. Your promise: Exit from the EU Bring real and positive opportunities into the fishing communities of the northeast of Scotland, where today is the center of British fishing.
But the support of the fishermen for the Brexit was not limited to Scotland. From Armelanal to the Shetlands, the Fischer’s Great Britain in the "Fishing for leaven"-Campaign joined together in the "Battle on the Thames" also heard medial attention. Fishermen went together of different fishing techniques, one since the 14. Century rarely observed circumstance.
At that time, Konig Edward III had a petition for prohibiting the "Wondyrchoun" reached, the prototype of a cotton, with which the fisherman for a few years refueled the reason of the Thames-ornament and caught a lot of fish. So many that they could not sell all and a part of the catch regularly went to the pig moiety. Thus, the pioneers of trawling grid moved to the anger of the fishing, network and shell fishermen of the area whose livelihoods they destructed. This type of opposition could not stop the triumphal train of Trawlfischerei with petitions and still lives away. But for the success of "Fishing for leaven" The fishermen made an exception.
Richard Lochhead, only short-catching Scottish Fisheries Minister, now looks new, other complexities on the fisherman. He had ignited the whereabouts in the EU, just because they provided Scottish agriculture protection. Also some fishermen themselves had a remain preferred, such as the Norwegians of Marine Harvest, which dominate the Scottish aquaculture company with salmon. Or the eelfischer of the Lough Neagh in Northern Ireland, the largest subwater lake of the British islands. From here, they all extract all for three million pounds Sterling a year, the most important part goes to Germany and the Netherlands. So with some the uncertainty about what may come. Great Britain also benefited from EU subsidies in the fisheries sector. The fishermen will now be on one "Time afterwards" send.
Some environmental protection organizations were with regard to the protection of the seas for remaining in the EU, as they believe they believe that a reversal of the decline in the fish farm in the Northeast Atlantic, among other things, as a result of the reduction in fishing printing prescribed under the Common Fisheries Policy. Other studies are less optimistic. The weight of basic fish species, once important components of the marine okosystem, were collapsed. Although the EU joint fisheries policy of the EU KONNE KONNE, but under its supervision, the decline was continuing.
At least theoretically, the EU has the power to enforce a fisheries policy led by the precautionary principle, but so far, the political will, rules and scientifically recommended restrictions in the quotas also lacked previously reinforced. The EU remained only a minor significance inwards and MAB of fishing.
From the decline of the fishing industry
The fishing fleet of coincodes shrinks for decades. The landings of the basic trawling fisheries are today less than a five-art of the amount of 1970. This is partly due to the EU’s regulatory measures and the British government, on the other handlimited landfills. Another major cause is the loss of traditional fishing places in front of Iceland and Norway. The resentments because of the COD Wars are not yet abandoned, removing in cyclical, for example, boycott calls for Icelandic fish.
This does not come to all the match, especially not those on Icelandic fishlands of British centers of fish processing in Grimsby and Hull – in just those portstates, which have lost a considerable part of their fishing fleets as a result of the expansion of the Icelandic and Norwegian sovereignty water. 1974 still paid Grimsby’s Remote Fishing Fleet alone 2000 Fischer. There is still about 12 in the United Kingdom.000 Direct workplaces in fishing, 12% less than 2004. There are more 3.000 workplaces in aquaculture and 19.000 in fish processing.
Fish branches in Greater Britain 1887-2014, in a thousand tons
In 2014, the total fishing with landings in foreign port was 756.000 tons. Thus, coincidence belongs to the top three-catchers of the EU. More than half of the British fish is located in the Scottish harbor of Peterhead, Fraserburgh and Lerwick. Despite shrinking, fishery has become more profitable. The value of the total catch hit in 2014 with the record amount of 861 million pounds sterling to beech.
Fisheries quotas as commodity
The British fishermen have no confidence in the European Union, where they wit corruption. You often do not understand the quotas that you have received. However, the latter are not only the blame of the EU. Her fishing committee proposes catch restrictions on the basis of scientific reports. The current total catches in turn are determined by the Council of the Fisheries Minister. How these are then distributed on the fleet on-site, is the responsibility of the respective member state.
Some BREXIT commutations carauded already in advance of the referendum with other quota allocation mechanisms, such as individually transferable quotas (ITQ), for example, in Iceland. But the experiences there have shown that the de facto privatization of the resource fish is not a stone of the fields using ITQS and brings new problems for the fishermen, especially for small fisheries, which should actually experience a new upswing through the Brexit. And especially the reputed reference to Iceland as a model is a spicy with regard to the importance of the banking system for the Bobbea in a way. The transition to the ITQ management of the fish lot is considered today as one of the reasons that Iceland drifted into the financial melting. In the crisis, rough fisheries companies were also having problems that are not completely unused today. In 2013, tourism uplifted for the first time the fishery as the most important Icelandic industry.
In doing so, the current quota scheme in the Great Britain sustains that remind of ITQ systems, on their controversial peculiarities. The EU-approved total scaling for a fish species in the UK are translated into a fixed allocation rate (FQA). These are tradable, and that leads to improvements in the industry.
The quotas now focus in the hands of a few odds barons. So included 61% of the quotas of England and Wales three coarse fisheries companies. Especially disadvantaged by this arrangement are the small fishermen. Come with the small quota assigned to you, you do not have to lease odds of other quota holders. The prices fluctuate; For example, the leases of a ton of cod can cost between 300 and 800 pounds sterling.
In the uneven conditions at this distorted market, the catch often brings in the end of the line only slightly. The hoarding of quotas is not illegal and sometimes leads to absurd constellations, as in the case of not even five meter-long motorboats Nina May, which is already a legend in the Sudwest England, although there was hardly anyone ever driving. The boat has a quota of 1.500 tons of fish in the year. The owner thus aligns quota intestine of his other, significantly larger boats, a rest of 10% leases he. The fixed allocation rates should be originally reflected in the fishing activity of a British boat, but the case of Nina May shows how far one has since the FQA entry in late 1990s.
And more: British lawsuits conclude that the British quota system is legally seen from the beginning on tonal piles. UNORTHODOX is the ease with which the common product was monitored and converted to the private sector without any need for appropriate consideration to the private sector. So the community declined for at least one billion pounds sterling.
The National Federation of Fishermen’s Organization (NFFO) sees itself after the exit of the referendum in unknown waters, in turbulent still. Although one wife that seismic changes in the fisheries industry, however, will look concretely, is less slightly predicted. Only one thing seems to be clear: it will take. As long as the Bobbank is still EU member, the agreed quotas apply. The negotiation of new odds and access rights will take time and cause costs that could either subsidize from the government or directly to the customer. In addition, the coarse part of the island relevant fish is divided with other countries. For their management, international law applies, from which the British does not adopt easily by departing from the EU.
"Rule, Britannia! Britannia Rule the Waves .."
The British Fisheries Minister and Unprocised Brexit Before George Eustice is now hoping for a coarse long-term stability for the industry, which should adopt fishing rights from a better negotiation position in the quota award and access. Many barriers imposed by the EU Commission became poem. For example, fishing in the North Sea is economically important, but the interests of the island are represented here by an EU subhandler in the ordinary meetings of the North East Atlantic Fisheries Commission (NEAFC), while others in the region are important fishing institutions such as Norway and Iceland own seats at the negotiating table. The British now see their own chair within reach.
J. M. W. Turner, Fishermen at Sea, 1796. Tate Gallery. Image: Google Art Project / Common-free
Furthermore, the British fishermen of the recovery of control over their 200-nautical zone and thus hoped for improving the quota allocation in many fish species. For example, Eustice finds that the French 5.500 tons of cod out of the Celtic lake Hieven durf, while the British must face with 800 tonnes. He had been able to adding perfectly to the same time that Great Britain 2015 with almost 30.000 tonnes kept the coarse cod exercise in the EU.
The Brexit-Beffern was mainly on the mediation of the fact that French fishing boats of the British six-nautical zone can fish meet, during the reverse the British with their trawlers and shellfishers not even in the French Zwolf nautical miles zone Vinning car thirst.
After a successful Brexit, the British prefer a regional fisheries management, which is more accessible for their concerns and through the expansion of the wealth of foreign competitors from the body – in any case, where the geographical and virtually is possible at all possible. The French are now worried that the British make seriously and hunt all more foreign from their wasses.
The principles of conservation and management regulated by the United Nations Seakeeper income (UNCLOS) and wide-wandering fish castings were not attributed to it, are the British. It would like to definitively continue to give quotas. Only the access rights had to be re-regulated, taking into account of historical access rights.
One will not stop BREXIT according to Eustice: The 2013 common fishing policy of 2013, which must not be brought into the sea, which is not allowed to return to the sea according to the Common Fisheries Policy, and which the fishery represents some logistical problems. After decades of resource waste due to ruck, the fishermen see the "Discard Ban" As a step in the right direction, which is still no guarantee for a sustainable fishing and does not stop the resource theft in the British killed. Which can only be achieved with the recovery of the sovereignty.
The fish trade will also be affected. 70% of the value of traded edible sea animals is imported or landings of foreign fishing vessels attributable. With 500.000 tonnes are exported a gross part of the British fishing, as he achieves higher ponds abroad, about 1.5 billion pounds Sterling. Many products land at the EU market, including 40% of Scottish salmon exports.
With the excretion from the EU, new trade agreements with European trading partners and the UNIGIG, where the British benefited as EU members, benefited from EU trade agreements. Side effects are not excluded, for example at the British market main EU exporter of fish products, Danemark. As the main reason Danemarks for a membership in the European Union, at the time, the country’s chief was made to hedge its agricultural exports to the Great Britain. The changed situation could now give new food to the widespread Euroscepticism of Danen.
Tread "Quota Hopper"
In 2014, there was emport in the British press as well known that a single Trawler, namely Cornelis Vrolijk, a quarter of England-shared fishing rates, or 6% of the complete British quota. The Trawler ride under British flag, but belong to the Dutch fisheries company Cornelis Vrolijk / Jaczon: "Quota Hopper".
European rules of 1999 allow boats of foreign owners access to quotas of a country, as long as at least half of the team lives in this country or the half of the cargo is laughed here. Cornelis Vrolijk lands his goods in the Hollandic Ijmuid: for the not very precipitated mackerel, herring and blue witttings, it was simply no market in the UK.
"Quota Hopper" have been a topic in the Great Britain for more than three decades. Your number exploded in the 1980s. On the island, as in Europe’s fishing instations, it was thought that the fishery printing is drastically lowered, in which one offered the fishermen financial incentives to scrap their boats.
But the Thatcher’s government thought its share of the compensation payments first, she had more important concerns at the agenda at that time as the fishing. And because these incentives did not exist, the British fishermen sold their trawlers in well-paying Spaniards and Netherlanders, which in turn – after British law – the fishing license and a guaranteed share of the country’s fishing rate of the country.
However, this is only part of the story that affected only about 20 boats in 1986. Another 50 "Quota Hopper" At that time, boats that had come from Spain were love to register in the UK as British fishing vessels. Fishing licenses for their preferred catch areas South of England and Ireland were still unlimited at that time and were freely reliable, the Spaniards only had to register a fishing company in Great Britain. The first Spanish boats have been sighted since 1979, occasionally, but in 1986 broke all Damme with the EU’s supermination expansion and the membership of Spain. 1987 Take the number of "Quota Hopper" Already on the above 120, you began to worry.
There was no lack of trying to get rid of the unloved competition. So the rules for the acquisition of a fishing license were encountered, which lively leaded in 1989 to the pretending decommissioning of the fishing fleet of invaders, which lasted until 1991. The affected final companies complained through the instances and, in front of the European Court of Justice, just right – for the British a first taste for the loss of their sovereignty to Brussel. the "Quota Hopper" were back in business after a necessary registration. Spanish and Hollandic fishing vessels, during this phase, were sentenced to an 18-month lying season in the harbor, was the result of 30 million pounds of sterling securities.
In England, the advent of phannomine thought of what the actual drive was, but the traditional intransparency of the fisheries sector would first be all the amptions. Today, above all, the overproportional subsidization of Spanish fishing within the EU is seen as the main reason, which has found its expression in an unprecedented fleet renewal. Also on another aspect could only be coated: the lower price of the work of the Spanish fishermen, compared to that of their British colleagues. The toleration and maintenance of social favor, combined with geographical mobility, is more than ever part of the self -understanding of the European Union, which can still be driven to the top when it succeeds in applying the affected persons.
As an argument against "Quota hopping" If ooper is also called the sale of the prisoner fish in Spanish harbor, but also original British boats sell there for better prices. In addition, the landings in Spain are obvious: from the 305000 tonnes of fish, which were landed from Booten under Boosen Britain in 2014 under the British flag, 2% went to Spain, compared to 23% to Holland and 51% to Norway. There was around 150 around the millennium turn "Quota Hopper" In the United Kingdom. Of these, 34 Anglo-Spaniards and 22 Hollander are found today.
"… Britons Never wants be slaves": What comes after the rage
Since the beginning of the millennium was about. The half of the British fishing vessels scrapped. With the 130 new indexes in the same period, there were still 756 fishing vessels later than 12m. Without the balancing effect of the shellfishing fleet, whose stock remained constant, the proportion of elevated boats was at 60%.
For the British fishermen, it is obvious that they had to decimate their fishing fleet to create space for the Spanish competition. In any case, with the often summoned sustainability, it had nothing to do in their eyes. As a net chamber, on top of that, they had increased the competitive ability of foreign caught fleets, which built new boats with British taxpayers and renewed harbor, with simultaneous negligence of their own fleet. The political class despises them for their betrayal – for this was probably a reasonable price for EU membership, with ministries as enforcement agents of the will of the EU. Thanks to those, the British are now net importers of fish, which was caught in their carriers, subsidized by their taxpayers – for many fishermen this is the perfect syringe of the politics Brussels, from whose sphare of the influence they have said goodbye.
The theses of "Fishing for leaven"-Campaign draw a duster, sometimes overspocked image of contemporary British fishing. But not all the abstands are without exception of the EU. Some go to the account of the industry themselves and were not addressed in the context of the campaign or only very much, though they are for the lives of many fishermen of existential importance, such as character and consequences of the fixed allocation rate. Referenden are unlikely to be a suitable podium, but the Brexit should actually be retracted, fishing is the chance for a well thought-out new beginning, which leads from the mistakes of the common fisheries policy in Europe and its own misconditions in the past correct conclusions and the interests all involved considered.