Consultation on new controls in the Nephrops and Crabs and Lobster Fisheries - Outcome Report

Introduction

17. This report provides detailed analysis of each element of the Consultation on new controls in the Nephrops and Crab and Lobster Fisheries. It examines the responses provided to each question and gives an analysis of the views of particular groups, highlighting trends and issues where appropriate and giving a Marine Scotland response to proposals.

Background to the consultation

18. Marine Scotland had frequently been called upon to introduce controls on creel numbers over recent years. The Inshore Fisheries Spatial Management Group, five of the six IFG Management Plans as well as the Scottish

Fisheries Council sub-group on Crab and Lobster and the Langoustine Working

Group were very vocal in calling either for their introduction or for their introduction to be explored.

19. Throughout this time, Marine Scotland has had no formal policy on the introduction of restrictions on creel numbers and was unsure to what extent these calls represented the majority view of the industry.

20. Supporters of creel limits put forward the following arguments to justify their introduction:

• Increasing numbers of creels were being deployed in Scottish inshore waters which were detrimentally impacting upon catch rates in some areas. Supporters of creel limits believed that a cap could protect, and potentially improve, the catch rates in creel fisheries
• The absence of limits was encouraging a 'race to fish' where fishermen increased the number of creels they operated in response to others doing so
• Creels were being deployed in order to protect grounds (fishermen deploying gear to restrict others from being able to fish in the area)
• Limits on creels would reduce the risk and operational/financial impact of gear conflict, both 'creel to creel' and between 'trawl and creel'
• Creel limits could work as a mechanism to control market price variances, helping to limit the number and improve the quality of animals being put on the market
• Limits would reduce the danger posed by creels to other users of the sea

21. The consultation was launched in an open and transparent manner to seek views and opinions on creel limits and to better understand the potential benefits of introducing creel number restrictions.

22. In addition to canvassing opinion on creel limits, the consultation provided the opportunity to gauge stakeholder opinion on other related issues. These included:

• Restrictions on the types of creels that can be used, to allow smaller animals to escape and make them less efficient at catching/retaining animals
• Whether quotas or landing limits should be introduced in the crab and lobster fisheries
• Whether the minimum landing size of West Coast Nephrops should be increased

23. The specific questions asked were:

Question 1 - Do you think that the number of creels used by individual Nephrops vessels needs to be capped?

Question 2 - What benefits do you think the introduction of a creel limit would bring?

Question 3 - Do you think that the same single maximum limit should apply to all vessels?

Question 4 - What number should a creel limit be set at for Nephrops vessels?

Question 5 - Do you think creel limits should be based on vessel length for Nephrops vessels?

Question 6 - What number should a creel limit be set at by vessel length for Nephrops vessels?

Question 7 - In your opinion should there be a mandatory escape panel or increased mesh size on Nephrops creels?

Question 8 - Do you think that the number of creels used by individual crab and lobster vessels needs to be capped?

Question 9 - What benefits do you think the introduction of a creel limit would bring?

Question 10 - Do you think that the same single maximum limit should apply to all vessels?

Question 11 - What number should a creel limit be set at for crab and lobster vessels?

Question 12 - Do you think creel limits should be based on vessel length for crab and lobster vessels?

Question 13 - What number should a creel limit be set at by vessel length for crab and lobster vessels?

Question 14 - Do you think parlour pots should be banned or restricted in the crab and lobster fisheries?

Question 15 - Do you think quotas should be introduced in the crab and lobster fisheries?

Question 16 - Should the minimum landing size of Nephrops on the West Coast be increased to match those restrictions in the North Sea ?

Consultation Responses

24. One hundred and ten consultation responses were received by (or shortly after) the closing date for the consultation. The breakdown of responses by group is shown in Table 1 below.

Group Type	Number	Percentage
Private individuals	77	69%
Fishermen's associations	22	20%
Environmental organisations	5	5%
Processors/Suppliers	4	4%
Local authorities	2	2%
Total	110	100%

Table 1 - Breakdown of those who responded by group

Methodology

25. Consultation questions were set out to invite both closed responses (yes/no answers) and open responses (inviting qualitative answers from respondents) which required greater analysis. In addition to the proposals put forward in the consultation document many respondents proposed other management measures in their replies. Questions and Responses