OPPONENTS of a planned Regulating Order which would allow a private company to manage the shellfish fishery around the Highland coastline, have criticised Shetland MSP Tavish Scott for taking what they say is an underhand route to making this easier and threatening their livelihoods.
Highland Council has given full backing to the Highland Shellfish Management Organisation, which has proposed a Regulating Order to control and manage shellfish stocks to the six-mile limit from Nairn to Lochaber. The draft Order, which is likely to be the subject of a public inquiry this summer, would be the largest in the UK and would control oysters, mussels, cockles, clams, lobsters, squat lobsters, queen scallops, crabs, whelks, razorfish and crawfish.
Tavish Scott, who is also the Executive’s transport minister, has tabled an amendment to the Police, Public Order and Criminal Justice (Scotland) Bill to give the Scottish Fisheries Protection Agency powers to enforce Regulating Orders. Shetland already has had a Regulating Order since 2000, and it has been seen as a weakness that the current regulations to prevent poaching of managed stocks by non-members, leave policing up to the management board of the Order area. The regulations, which allow the Shetland Shellfish Management Organisation to manage and license inshore fisheries and set quotas and minimum landing sizes for a range of shellfish species, cannot be enforced without a significant expenditure on monitoring systems and protection vessels. The amendment would give the SFPA powers to police all Regulating Order areas.
Regulating Orders place the responsibility for managing a sustainable fishery on local stakeholders, including fishermen, conservationists, scientists and local authority representatives. The Mallaig and North-west Fishermen’s Association, and the Clyde Fishermen’s Association are totally opposed to the proposed Highland Order.
John Hermse, secretary of the MNWFA, said Mr Scott’s amendment is self-serving and an abuse of ministerial powers. “It is an absolute disgrace that Mr Scott has tabled this amendment. He is attempting to abuse the Executive’s enforcement powers for his own ends. The Executive has used the problems with the Solway Firth cockle fishery as an excuse to try to make Regulating Orders more acceptable, but these problems could have been dealt with using existing legislation. The cockle fishery appears to be run by gang-masters and other legislation can be used to control them. Regulating Orders should be policed by the management groups, but Mr Scott is trying to assuage demands from his own constituency by trying to get Order areas policed for free at the taxpayers’ expense,” said Mr Hermse.
Mr Hermse also criticised the curtailment of consultation on the amendment. He said the normal period of three months was shortened to one month to fit in with the Police Bill timetable. “The Executive have tried to say that they have taken cognisance of our views, but the first reading of the Bill including this amendment occurred on the day the consultation ended. We had asked for an extension of two weeks, so they were discussing this issue when our views were still not in. The amendment was obviously inserted at a stage where discussion would be limited,” he said.
Should people be 'stimulated' to eat white fish alternatives to cod?
