EU "must act" to curb Faroe and Iceland - Page 12
Page 12 of 41 FirstFirst ... 2101112131422 ... LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 409

Thread: EU "must act" to curb Faroe and Iceland

  1. #111

    Default

    Surely Iceland and Faroe are entitled to catch fish in thier own waters the same as EU countries. The ban on landings of mackerel to EU markets will have no effect as there are plenty alternative markets for them. Maybe they have set the quotas on the high side, but after all what right has the EU got to dictate to them. As i have said before, if the Scottish pelagic fleet had not stopped boats from landing in Peterhead, it would be an entirely different ball game, with Iceland and Faroe cooperating with EU.

  2. #112
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    the rosses, co.donegal
    Posts
    242

    Default

    0n point 3 atlantic m-what would the european ports have done to icelandic stocks from 1975 on if let to fish?- probably the same as we have done to our own waters. at least iceland looked after it`s own waters sustainably. if the shoe was on the other foot and it was capelin that suddenly invaded our waters-would we be as sympathetic to the icelanders views on us taking a fishstock that traditionally stayed in their waters?-one thing that does amuse me slightly about all off this is the regard that is suddenly held into the stock `science`-fishermen who negated it for years,saying it was flawed and complaining that nobody was listening to them on the healthy state of the stocks are suddenly quoting the scientists figures. the simple fact is when iceland was financially on the ropes we couldn`t give a s**t about them or what happened their ports-and now they have got a gift from god they don`t give a s**t either- and i can`t say i blame their logic.

  3. #113
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    the rosses, co.donegal
    Posts
    242

    Default

    and on another point-if the european union are so aggrieved about the whole situation-where is the moratorium on the import of icelandic fish?-it`s not as if europe is going to loose any huge export markets to iceland themselves-for all europes posturing it wan`ts cheap top class icelandic fish to feed and control the prices to it`s vast consumer market-and their lies the problem-iceland holds all the cards-if europe stops taking their fish-there has as already been pointed out-alternative markets for their fleet.

  4. #114
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Fraserburgh , Scotland
    Posts
    16,040

    Default

    There is a vast difference in the science for Mackerel and Herring compared to groundfish , clean pelagic fisheries can be managed and the stocks can be relatively accurately assessed. Groundfish fisheries are mixed you never get clean haddock or cod or whiting except at certain times of years for very short periods of time , you cannot accurately assess whitefish the way they do , and have done for decades , at present.

  5. #115
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    the rosses, co.donegal
    Posts
    242

    Default

    what i meant was about stock science was that all of a sudden the fishermen are singing from the same hymn sheet as the scientists regarding the mackerel!-they icelanders and faroese fish their own waters sustainably-and on point 3 i completely agree-but the pelagic men are only getting kicked with that foot now-the whitefish men have been crippled by cheap imports for sometime -icelandic imports will drive us all out of business yet-but the consumer doesn`t care where it comes from as long as it`s available and cheap.

  6. #116
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Fraserburgh , Scotland
    Posts
    16,040

    Default MEP says Iceland mackerel landings face ban from EU ports from tomorrow

    http://www.fishnewseu.com/latest-new...-tomorrow.html

    Thursday, 13 January 2011 14:51

    SCOTTISH Tory MEP Struan Stevenson said today that Europe’s fishing supremo will call for an EU ban on Icelandic mackerel landings from tomorrow.

    Speaking ahead of a crucial meeting of the European Economic Area (EEA) Joint Committee which will be held in Brussels tomorrow (January 14), Mr Stevenson, who is Senior Vice President of the European Parliament's Fisheries Committee, said: “The EU's Fisheries Commissioner Maria Damanaki will inform the EEA Joint Committee tomorrow that the EU now wishes to block all mackerel landings into EU ports from vessels flying the flag of Iceland.

    “I fully support the Commission in taking this dramatic step.

    "The behaviour of Iceland over North East Atlantic mackerel stocks has been grossly irresponsible. They were warned that any failure to agree reasonable terms for the future sharing of this migratory species would provoke a serious backlash from the EU. But instead of reducing their catch to a reasonable level they have brazenly increased it further this year to 147,000 tonnes.

    “This is a gargantuan figure for a nation of just 320,000 people.

    “The blockade of our ports to Iceland's pelagic fleet will take immediate effect following tomorrow's meeting of the EEA Joint Committee. Norway implemented its own unilateral ban way back on 23 July 2010.

    "The only way to end this blockade will be for Iceland to return to the negotiating table with a reasonable compromise proposal.

    “Their smash and grab approach, which has seen the Icelandic mackerel catch rise from a mere 363 tonnes in 2005 to a mammoth 147,000 tonnes this year, is just not acceptable."

    The EEA is made up of the 27 EU Member States together with Norway, Iceland and Lichtenstein. The EEA agreement extends the benefits and rules of the EU single internal market to these three additional countries, while they are not covered by either the CAP or the CFP.

    However, Mr Stevenson stressed today that Article 5 of the protocol allows any of the Contracting Parties "to refuse landings of fish stock of common interest over the management of which there is serious disagreement."

  7. #117
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Fraserburgh , Scotland
    Posts
    16,040

    Default Iceland mackerel ban thought to be imminent

    http://www.fishupdate.com/news/fulls..._imminent.html

    AN EU ban on Icelandic and Faroese mackerel is thought to be imminent. The website Icelandreview.com is reporting that a formal announcement could come as soon as today (Thursday).

    Such a ban has been expected since talks over mackerel quotas broke down before Christmas.

    The EU Fisheries Commissioner Maria Damanaki made it clear that she would press hard for such an embargo.

    Icelandreview.com said that a source in Brussels had told Reuters news agency that EU officials are about to reveal their plans to refuse all landings of mackerel from Iceland and the Faroe Islands.

    Iceland has now given itself a unilateral mackerel quota of 147,000 tons for this and the Faroese are expected to repeat their 85,000 ton quota from last year. The Icelandic argument is that warmer seas have driven the mackerel shoals into their waters which they are now entitled to catch. Reykjavik has also criticised the EU and Norway for claiming 90 per cent of the total ICES (International Council for the Exploration of the Seas) quota.

    But the EU and Scottish fishermen in particular believe that Iceland and the Faroese could destroy the mackerel stock with their self proclaimed quotas because they are far too high.

    With an ever increasing world wide demand for quality fish protein, both Iceland and the Faroes are expected to get around any European ban by selling outside the EU.

    Many people in Scotland believe that only a total ban on all Icelandic fish products would be effective. But that is thought highly unlikely because of the impact on fish processing jobs in the UK and Europe generally.

    UK Liberal Democrat Fisheries spokesperson Liam McArthur MSP said: “Iceland has shown irresponsible disregard for sustainable fishing. They’ve been rightly condemned, but the continued failure to reach a suitable agreement is untenable.

    "This type of punitive action should never been undertaken lightly. But it has become increasingly clear over recent months that all other means of persuading Iceland to come to its senses have failed.

    “Mackerel is a key species for the Scottish fleet. Like the pelagic sector itself, I’m now looking to the EU to be robust in bringing an end to this crisis.”

  8. #118
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Fraserburgh , Scotland
    Posts
    16,040

    Default Iceland will not challenge landing ban, says Heidar

    http://www.fishnewseu.com/latest-new...ys-heidar.html

    Friday, 14 January 2011 16:01

    ICELAND’S chief mackerel negotiator said today that Iceland remains committed to finding a solution to the ongoing quota wrangle. And he said that Iceland will not object to a mackerel landing ban being imposed on Icelandic vessels at EU ports, given the lack of a shared stock management agreement.



    Speaking in the wake of what was described by Scottish fishermen as a statement of intent from the EU to impose a community mackerel landing ban on the Icelandic fleet, Tomas H. Heidar told fishnewseu.com:

    “ We remain committed to finding, in co-operation with the other coastal
    states, a fair solution on the allocation of mackerel that takes into
    account the legitimate interests of all the parties.”

    Earlier, he said that according to Icelandic law, foreign vessels fishing from shared stocks, on
    which there is no management agreement, are not permitted to land their catches from such stocks in Icelandic ports.

    This is in full accordance, he said, with the relevant provisions of the EEA Agreement and identical provisions are to be found in Norwegian law.

    Mr Heidar went on:

    “At a meeting of the Joint EEA Committee this morning, the EU informed that
    a ban was “being considered” on landing by Icelandic vessels of mackerel
    catches in EU ports in accordance with the relevant provisions of the EEA
    Agreement.

    “Icelandic authorities will not object to the EU applying the
    same rules as Iceland and Norway on landing by foreign fishing vessels in
    EU ports of catches from shared stocks on which there is no management
    agreement.

    “We emphasise that any such ban must be in full accordance with
    the EEA Agreement.

    “It should be noted in this context that mackerel fisheries by Icelandic
    vessels have in recent years almost exclusively taken place within the
    200-mile exclusive economic zone of Iceland and all catches have been
    landed in Icelandic ports and processed in Iceland.

    “In my view, it is important that we do not get distracted from the main
    task ahead of us. It is imperative that the four coastal states, Iceland,
    the EU, the Faroe Islands and Norway, reach an agreement on comprehensive
    management of the mackerel stock in order to ensure a sustainable fishery. We
    emphasise that all the parties carry joint responsibility in this regard.
    “We remain committed to finding, in cooperation with the other coastal
    States, a fair solution on the allocation of mackerel that takes into
    account the legitimate interests of all the parties.”


    * Following talks today at the European Commission over the unilateral mackerel quotas
    set by Iceland, Scottish Fisheries Secretary Richard Lochhead said:

    "I'm pleased that the European Commission has today signalled its intent to take forward swift action against Iceland if required. We must not forget the Faroe Islands and I urge the Commissioner to bring also forward proposals that would allow similar provisions to be put in place for the Faroes.

    "However, Scotland's overarching priority remains the agreement of a new four-party deal to safeguard the future of the mackerel stock. Therefore, I welcome Iceland's indication that they are willing to resume talks and hope that they will come back to the table as a matter of urgency.

    "We will continue to work closely with the EU to explore every avenue that could lead to further talks and a new international mackerel agreement. However, we cannot give in to unreasonable demands or reward irresponsible behaviour and that is why it is important we have the mechanisms in place to allow sanctions if parties continue to behave unreasonably."

  9. #119
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Fraserburgh , Scotland
    Posts
    16,040

    Default Smiles as large supplies of Iceland fish return to Humber

    http://www.fishupdate.com/news/fulls...to_Humber.html

    RELIEF returned to Grimsby Fish Market this week after it received its first substantial fish supplies from Iceland for the first time several weeks. Almost 4,000 boxes were landed during the first three days. Although bidding was brisk, prices fell back from their previous high levels.

    Shipments have been at an all time low since before Christmas and the situation has been worrying buyers in the port. Last week was one of the worst on record with only a few hundred boxes on the two busiest days of the market. Prices were also high. But the situation improved this week with the arrival of a more normal shipment on Tuesday.

    Some merchants have decided to buy directly by bringing in supplies of cod and haddock from Norway and some of this did get onto the market, which remains Grimsby's central buying and selling point.

    The atrocious weather off Iceland has to take some blame for the recent cod famine. However, the Iceland government decision to deduct a five per cent quota share on fresh fish exports is thought to be the main factor. It means that for every 100 tons exported unprocessed, five tons of a trawler company's quota is being deducted. It is thought that Reykjavik has introduced this rule to protect fish processing jobs at home.

    Grimsby FMA chief executive Steve Norton said he was pleased for his members that the supply situation had improved but he would still like to see more fish from Iceland. He added that even more worrying was the problem of discards within the EU with perfectly good fish being thrown back into the sea, highlighted in the Fish Fight TV series. "We are pressing for something to be done about this," he added.

    The weather issue was borne out by the fishing firm HB Grandi which had to halt fishing for capelin because of ice and heavy seas. Company spokesman Arnthór Hjörleifsson said: "Sea ice and the weather was as bad as it has been since New Year." One of his ships the Faxi RE had bad weather for the whole trip and he said that with such difficult seas, conditions were bordering on being too rough to fish.

  10. #120
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Fraserburgh , Scotland
    Posts
    16,040

    Default More sanctions and a halt to EU accession talks required to bring resolution to macke

    http://www.fishupdate.com/news/fulls...l_dispute.html

    Ian Gatt, chief executive of the Scottish Pelagic Fishermen’s Association, has told the Fisheries Committee of the European Parliament in Brussels today (25 January) that further sanctions must be imposed upon Iceland and their accession talks to join the EU put on hold until there is a satisfactory resolution to the ongoing dispute over international mackerel quotas.

    In a presentation to the committee on behalf of European fishing representative body Europeche, Mr Gatt said that Iceland’s significant unilateral quota for mackerel is threatening the sustainability of the stock and undermining the future livelihoods of European fishing communities.

    “How can Iceland justify fishing flat out for mackerel when the stock is in their waters?,” he said. “If the European fleet adopted that attitude when the stock is in the EU zone, there would be very little fish left to swim in Icelandic waters. That’s simply no way to manage fisheries if we are to pass on healthy stocks and viable enterprises to the next generation.”

    He added: “Commissioner Damanaki has written to the Parliament stating the EU’s intention to ban Icelandic mackerel landings into EU ports. This move is very much welcomed by the European pelagic fleet as a first step, but further stronger sanctions will be needed to have any meaningful effect as Icelandic vessels don’t have a history of landing mackerel in the EU.

    “It’s quite incredible the Commission needs to invoke sanctions against a country seeking to join the Union, but clearly, protecting the rights of the existing Members must be the priority.

    “The EU must stand up for the rights of those Member States already in the Union and ensure the stocks we rely on and our businesses are protected from countries on the outside. Given this is probably the EU’s most valuable fish stock it’s only right and proper that resolution of the dispute is a pre-condition for accepting Iceland into the body of the EU.”

    Mr Gatt concluded: “The EU must also deploy consequential sanctions against Iceland until the dispute has been resolved to the satisfaction of the 14 Member States reliant on this stock.

    “In addition, the EU must urgently develop policies to arm itself against those who seek to damage the businesses and fabric of the Member State’s Communities.”

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •