Crab & Lobster Working Group
Minute of Meeting – 26 September 2008 Longman House, Inverness
Attendees
Alan Coghill (Chair)
Stewart Crichton
Sandy Gordon
Ivar McBay
Duncan MacInnes
Brian MacLeay
Lachie Murray
Jane Sandell
Graham Sinclair
James Willox
Allan Gibb (Marine Directorate)
Rob Roberts (Marine Directorate)
Susan Ewart (Marine Directorate)
Helen Dobby (FRS)
Anne Moseley (Seafood Scotland)
Libby Woodhatch (Seafood Scotland)
Beth Leslie (NAFC)
Apologies: David Shiel
Welcome/Introduction
1.
Chairman Alan Coghill opened the meeting, thanked everyone for attending
and recorded apologies.
Previous Minutes
2.
Whilst the minutes of the 30 May meeting were approved, they prompted
discussion about existing lobster legislation (please see part 7 of this minute).
Report of Transnational Meeting (primarily, brown crab)
3.
Alan and other members of the WG attended a transnational meeting on 25
September, involving representatives from the rest of UK and the Republic of Ireland.
The meeting had gone generally well and there was broad consensus that all nations
could benefit from shared expertise, shared information and consideration of some
approaches to address current problems, including the possibility of doing so on a
joint basis. All recognised however, that the nations were also competitors in an
increasingly challenging market place. Key points included:
-
-
broad transnational industry agreement to increase immediately the
minimum landing size of Brown Crab;.
there is latent capacity in the system (i.e. licence entitlements not being
used); –
there is a need to reduce effort and to prevent additional boats entering the
fishery;
Improving quality: amongst other things, increased (and possibly illegal)
imports into Europe from North and South Africa are causing problems in
the market.
whilst industries may press their respective governments on a range of
issues and how to address them, all recognise need for consultation;
-
4.
any prospective decommissioning would need to be discussed with the
Scottish Government;
Industry representatives from Scotland, England, Wales, Northern Ireland
and Republic of Ireland intend to meet with French industry to discuss crab
issues. Stewart Crichton and Lachie Murray were appointed as Scottish
representatives. The UK and Republic of Ireland group are to reconvene in
York on 9th December.
The Meeting Report prompted extensive discussion:
4.1
Scallop entitlement: Allan Gibb explained that entitlement is among
the things up for discussion under the proposed Scottish licensing review
group. Withdrawal of a Scallop Entitlement under Scottish Licensing system
is a complicated matter as there is a legitimate expectation for use. There
would have to be a full consultation and at least a 12 month period of notice
before withdrawal. Duncan MacInnes said that decommissioning for the crab
fleet would be a pointless exercise as it would only release Scallop
entitlements for others to take up. Alan Coghill said that we need to focus on
long-term issues, for example creel numbers and quotas but thought quotas
may be unpopular due to the experience of other sectors. Jane Sandell
pointed out that the SFF’s view was that creel limitation cannot be enforced.
4.2
Grahame Sinclair stated that the live crab fishery is compounding the
over-supply situation and that there are lots of new Vivier boats in the Irish
sector. Lachie Murray said that the Irish want crab fleet decommissioning.
Alan Coghill stated that they were concentrating on removing those vessels
which catch whitefish and therefore it was unlikely that crab vessels would be
included.
4.3
Allan Gibb asked for thoughts on proposed increase in brown crab
landing size; UK/Scotland decommissioning scheme; latent capacity. Scottish
Government had made no commitment to decommissioning but the Fuel Task
Force has £29m budget and is undertaking analysis by sector to find greatest
need – some fleet removal should not be ruled out. Regarding long-term
measures, would favour quotas as mortality is not an issue. Acknowledged
that trying to establish quota for a non-TAC species would be naive. Need
national management measure as opposed to international TAC. Limits on
taking forward as UK or with Ireland.
4.4
Main concern at meeting was capacity and how to adapt to the market.
Grahame Sinclair observed that raising minimum size makes a more
marketable product – there is no market for small claws. Attendees discussed
‘cripples’, noting that definition was hard, that removal from creels and
sometimes storage on board could damage claws. Arguably, taking ‘cripples’
did not fit with improved quality goal. Suggestions around the table included
improved cutting techniques, handling and crew training.
4.5
Minimum Landing Size (MinLS). All agreed that further consultation
was required on raising the minimum landing size, but to maximise benefit
this should not be on a Scottish only basis. Allan Gibb stressed the need to
be clear about proposals going forward to the Scottish Government. All
agreed that a move by Scotland to increase MinLS showed wish to protect
sustainable fishery through own initiative.
4.6
Allan Gibb referred to the Pelagic Protocol – high profile, applying to
the whole sector. Suggested something similar could be used in this sector.
Legislation tricky to implement and we are trying to reduce/simplify
regulations. Maybe a protocol is the answer? 850/98 revision – could
amendment to landing size be put in at EU level? Could Seafood Scotland
draft a protocol and bring to next meeting? Libby Woodhatch agreed to look
at it and advised that the pelagic protocol only worked because all processors
agreed.
Lobster update, including current legislation
5.
Duncan MacInnes advised that Western Isles fishermen v-notch around one
lobster a week and that this good practice should be promoted throughout sector.
There was broad agreement that there was no great market for large lobsters;
customers preferred something “portion sized”.
6.
Allan Gibb reported that the term “lobster” covered a number of sub-species,
and – for the Maine fishery - different minimum sizes and weights could apply. Some
attendees suggested that it would be beneficial – and fairer – to have greater clarity
in the market place and wondered if the market-place name (ie of the small North
American lobster) could be changed. However, some suggested that it was not an
issue for consumers, that there was a place in the market for smaller portions and
that the Scottish C & L sector had to accept imported “lobster” as straightforward
market competition.
7.
Uncertainties remained about aspects of existing lobster legislation, including
the geographical reach of restrictions (e.g. 6 or 12nm) and whether the Orders apply
to catching, landing or both.
Post meeting note. The bullets below outline key aspects of the relevant
legislation. Please refer to the Orders themselves for detail:
7.1
Inshore
Fishing
Amendment
Order
2003
No.
404
(http://www.opsi.gov.uk/legislation/scotland/ssi2003/ssi_20030404_en.pdf)
- prohibits fishing for male lobsters under 87mm carapace;
- prohibits fishing for female lobsters under 87mm and above
155mm;
- made under the Inshore Fishing (Scotland) Act 1984, which applies
out to 6nm.
7.2
Lobsters & Crawfish (Prohibition of Fishing and Landing) (Scotland)
Order 1999
(http://www.oqps.gov.uk/legislation/ssi/ssi1999/ssi_19990088_en_1)
- Prohibits fishing for and landing of v-notched lobsters, or lobsters
mutilated to hide a v-notch;
- made under the Sea Fish (Conservation) Act 1967; applies to
“Scottish zone”, therefore out to 12nm.
7.3
Lobster
mutilated
Fishing
Order
2004
No.
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/legislation/scotland/ssi2004/20040276.htm
276
Actions: Marine Directorate to send information note to fishermen regarding the
landing of female lobsters. Seafood Scotland to bring draft protocol to next meeting.
Marine Directorate to actively review regulations to include consideration for a
reduced maximum landing size.
Marketing Sub-group – update
8.
Anne Moseley gave an update on the Marketing Sub-group. Update and
discussion included:
8.1
some PR needed to promote Scotland, plus scope for consumer
education. Anne circulated a Seafish poster highlighting the health benefits of
eating shellfish. Some attendees felt that whilst the sentiment was right, it did
not have a Scottish focus or feel and might not be suitable for industry here.
Libby Woodhatch advised that time was required to design a Scottish poster,
add message, use different languages etc and, importantly, to decide target
audience. Libby highlighted that distribution can be very expensive. The
Marine Directorate advised that it could support a Scottish poster, but that it
was not right to undermine Seafish’s role or existing work.
8.2
To raise awareness of Scottish shellfish, one option was to take a
generic shellfish stand at the Expo in Brussels, .
8.3
For some buyers, however, origin is not important, just quality and a
“Scottish flag” is not necessarily the answer.
8.4
All recognised that there is a need to anticipate and respond to what
the rest of the world is doing, e.g. Norway and Russia are producing good
quality crab product.
8.5
Attendees discussed
Seafood Scotland’s funding arrangements.
Catching and processing sectors present expressed a wish to improve
funding and are minded to make a recommendation to SFC on this basis.
Libby Woodhatch advised that Seafood Scotland receive funding from EFF
but need funding match. Graham Sinclair stated that whilst industry could be
ambivalent about Seafish, there was only high support and praise for Seafood
Scotland. Libby explained that Seafood Scotland drew very substantially on
Seafish’s expertise, e.g. on marketing insight and economics.
8.6
Duncan MacInnes – need commitment from buyers and processors.
25,000t crab landed in Scotland – only 40% of that was landed by Scottish
vessels. Western Isles V-notch a lobster a week – good practice to promote
throughout sector. Contributes to stock enhancement.
Actions: Alan Coghill to take forward recommendation for assured funding for
Seafood Scotland. Alan Gibb to explore funding line for prospective poster.
Interim Management Measures
9.
Crab. Recognising that much had been done organically already and that a
number if ideas had been covered in the course of this meeting, Allan Gibb invited
ideas for anything else worth doing or including. Members discussed the various
talks regarding voluntary tie-ups and while there was good publicity to be had,
highlighted that there was some concern that the sector could be setting itself up for
closures. Duncan suggested that an increased MinLS for velvet crabs could be
valuable. Beth Leslie advised that Shetland had increased voluntarily the MinLS of
velvet crabs to 70mm and that they have seen value increase. Additionally, Shetland
has some voluntary closures for velvet crab. Allan Gibb asked if there was a market
for small velvet crab, and how old would a ‘small’ crab be? Beth replied that it is
difficult to age crustaceans and there are different sizes in different fisheries.
Processors present advised that 40% of velvet crabs sold are ‘small’, with the
majority being over 67mm. Alan Coghill suggested that the emerging IFGs might be
well placed to consider appropriate Minimum Landing Sizes for their areas.
Members noted also the news that the biggest Norwegian crab processor may close.
10.
Lobster. Alan reported that as a result of a questionnaire he sent to his
members they supported at least a part year ban on landing berried lobsters as was
discussed at the last meeting. There was extensive discussion about defining, and
distinguishing between, “part-time” and “recreational/for the pot” fishermen. Whilst
the issue prompts some strong feelings amongst fishermen around the coast and
there is a general belief that practices are poor (e.g. creels left unattended in the
water for long periods), the scale of is impact on the fishery is not so clear. Some
questioned the appropriateness of interfering with an individual’s choice on how best
to organise their working lives, e.g. by combining legal fishing activity with other
employment. MD officials confirmed that there is no limit on the number of creels an
unlicensed fisherman may work, but there is limit on number of lobsters (or crabs)
that can be landed per day. Unlicensed fisherman must not sell their catch.
Attendees advised that scuba divers took lobster too and, in particular, scallops.
Actions: Allan Gibb to establish how much unlicensed fishermen can land, and
what gear they are permitted to have in the water.
Update on science collation/SISP Brown crab tagging project
11.
Helen Dobby, FRS, advised that the SISP tagging project is supported by the
OFA and MNWFA, that 2000 brown crabs had been tagged in the windsock area,
that there was a voluntary release period with a request that fishermen report the
area in which they had caught tagged crabs. There will be a further tagging project
October to January. Helen confirmed that there are knowledge gaps, a real need for
better data on effort, a need to look at species population, structures and linkages,
better co-ordination and carefully targeted funding. The emerging IFGs may have a
role in – data collection.
SWOT Analysis
12.
Seafood Scotland had circulated the draft SWOT just prior to this meeting.
Stewart Crichton suggested that the draft might underplay brown crab processing
and does not recognise that Scotland has two of the best processors in Europe.
Graham Sinclair observed that there has been a lot of investment in the last 10 years
in an effort to add value. Responsible Fishing Scheme (RFS) was important; it will
identify actual vessel on the pack. Graham pointed out that competition is a healthy
thing, not a threat. Anne responded that the analysis is a general (UK) overview
and may not apply to all processors. Libby asked that all views on the analysis be
sent via e-mail in order that they can collate them and issue comments to the group.
The Chairman congratulated Seafood on producing the SWOT analysis which
mirrored most of the discussions to date and underlined its basic validity.
Action – All group members to email comments etc on SWOT analysis to Seafood
Scotland.
Any Other Business
13.
Fuel. Alan Coghill advised that EFF application forms have been issued. Gear
box, Propulsion, significant energy savings with both static gear vessels can get 40%
assistance under EFF. Allan Gibb was not sure if it would apply to gear box or the
whole engine. An outline of what will be eligible will be issued in the near future.
There are various categories under which you can apply. The remit is not just new
engine or scrap the vessel. The accent is on efficiency. Stewart Crichton said that
he as a processor was looking into wind power and considering making application
under EFF. Allan Gibb not sure when the scheme will be implemented and will ask
EFF team to circulate a note with details.
14.
Strategy Group. Allan highlighted the need to involve the Strategy Group and
secure their endorsement of the Working Group’s Action Plan and general activity.
Date of next meeting
15.
The next meeting will be a recall of the full Crab & Lobster Commercial
Strategy Group and is scheduled for 2nd December in Hilton Hotel, Edinburgh
Airport.
Sea Fisheries Management Division
Marine Directorate
Scottish Government