40 yrs in Marine Science fisheries data collection including operations manager, scientific diver and RV cruise leader. Now supporting industry in same aims.
@PhilRhodTaylor@NorthEPolice@SWFPA@mnwfa Perhaps OpenSeas would like to comment on their knowledge of what appears to be an illegal activity? Can they confirm that their staff were not involved in such action?
@PhilRhodTaylor@NorthEPolice@swfpa@mnwfa Perhaps the next investigation should be aimed at divers bringing flapper skate eggs (critically endangered species) to the surface despite a Marine Conservation Order forbidding such action.
@VickyQuay@lmilstead95@TheOpenSeas@ArranCoast @marinescotland @MairiGougeon Spot on. It’s become embarrassing to watch Marine Scotland staff as they wriggle to justify how they have done a complete U-Turn on their advice only to follow up within a week with another backflip. Influence from ENGOs who can’t make their minds up who to kick has backfired.
@TheOpenSeas@swfpa the data you refer to was shared in confidence but also with the aim of being transparent. From over 350 trips, cod bycatch was less than 0.5% yet you focus on data points which suit your agenda. This behaviour is despicable and shows why industry can not trust you.
@Katie__Eden@openseas As I said, my comments were directed at tweet from OurSeas so not sure where your ref to OpenSeas come in to this specific matter. Appreciate point about always learning but after 50 years in fisheries science I’m also aware of the propaganda and misinformation being peddled.
@Katie__Eden Sorry Katie but I’m not sure what you are referring to. My response was specifically at the tweet and message from OurSeas relating to Flapper Skate. Normally I am banned from commenting on their messages but for some reason, I was not restricted on this occasion, so did.
@CFAScot@Kennybyb@isleseafoods@ourseas_scot@Dunnachie3@aylott_peter @drpickerell @scotgov Yes, totally agree. Setting limits which match the highest level of activity does not send out a message promoting sustainable fishing. Neither does excluding other historic activities and preventing new entrants.
@Kennybyb@isleseafoods@ourseas_scot@CFAScot@Dunnachie3@aylott_peter @drpickerell @scotgov 1600 represented the highest level currently fished so was totally meaningless and demonstrates the real purpose of the proposal aimed at protectionism while meeting the NGO target - mobile gear. No surprise that OpenSeas tried to participate in the industry meeting with MS.
@isleseafoods@ourseas_scot@CFAScot@Kennybyb@Dunnachie3@aylott_peter @drpickerell @scotgov I understand the proposal gave a suggestion that a limit of 1600 creels may be suitable. However, no indication was given as to what the activity was at that time but it did seem that no fishers were to be impacted by the so called limit.
@SteveBackshall@ourseas_scot@mariellaf1@TimesRadio You have to understand that Scottish MPA Network was set up to protect specific features, not no-take zones and stresses that activity would be allowed where features are not present. Why would you stop an activity where features are not present. Other policy allows for HPMAs.
@swfpa Good to see this hasn’t gone unnoticed by others. I continually highlight this point but OpenSeas remain content to peddle only the figures that suit their agenda and in most cases, the data is historic, irrelevant and very often “out of context”.
@TheOpenSeas This is on the first page of your website: “We’re interested in evidence and are not afraid to call out misinformation”. Yet you are using out of date data to produce a ‘correlation = causation’ argument which is a form of misinformation.
@TheOpenSeas Couldn’t help but notice you are quoting figures from 15 years ago. Since then things have changed dramatically and from over 380 trips in 2013-14, fish caught was 5.8% of catch. However, you do know this, you have the figures but choose to mislead the public. Why?