Scotland Marking Lobster Pots

[C08]

It is good to see that Scotland is now marking lobster pots and nets with proper Danbuoys but poor that the rest of the UK is so behind on this safety issue. I hate passing places like Portland Bill close inshore as the pathetic pot marker buoys are under water at many stages of the tide. I have only once picked up a buoy hooked on a rudder and being tethered stern to the waves , even quite small waves on that occasion brought home the serious consequences of picking up a rope. Hopefully the UK will follow this good scottish initiative.
Why are the RYA so passive about things that matter?

 

[pvb]

It is good to see that Scotland is now marking lobster pots and nets with proper Danbuoys but poor that the rest of the UK is so behind on this safety issue.

I can't see any penalties for non-compliance in The Marking of Creels (Scotland) Order 2020, so I wonder whether the rogue fishermen will take much notice.

Also note that the Order doesn't specify that danbuoys have to be used, and it doesn't apply to nets.

 

[prv]

The Solent has had mandatory requirements on markers for years, imposed by Southampton Harbourmaster and Portsmouth QHM. Doesn‘t mean the gear is actually marked in practice.

Pete

 

[JumbleDuck]

I can't see any penalties for non-compliance in The Marking of Creels (Scotland) Order 2020, so I wonder whether the rogue fishermen will take much notice.

I have hardly seen any unmarked buoys for some years now; since whatever the previous legislation was came in.

 

[dgadee]

I can't see any penalties for non-compliance in The Marking of Creels (Scotland) Order 2020, so I wonder whether the rogue fishermen will take much notice.

"Offences for breach of this Order are contained in section 3(5) and (5A) of the Act. Penalties, whichare set out at section 11 of the Act, include a fine not exceeding £50,000 on summary convictionand a fine on conviction on indictment. The court may also order the forfeiture of the fishing gearin respect of which the contravention constituting the offence occurred."

 

[Channel Sailor]

On the charts there is a larger area around Portsmouth marked as no fishing or anchoring. A month ago I saw two tiny pot markers off Gosport by Haslar Bank, which I heard mentioned to the QHM on the VHF later in the day. A few days ago i passed two off South Parade pier, both of these areas marked as no fishing and are right where there is a lot of passing traffic. the two off Southsea were tiny, the size of a seal’s head.

No Policing I suppose. Ignorance maybe by new fisherman (doubtful). Maybe they just don’t care in the slightest, which is a a worrying trend. It is like littering or fly tipping.

 

[Quandary]

Professional creel fisherman around W.Scotland use decent size buoys, they need to when you take account of the value of the gear on the bottom, it is amateurs and holidaymakers who drop a single creel on a bunch of milk cartons etc, often they get bored and just abandon them and they hang about for years, around here there are a also few proper markers which also have been abandoned. The abandoned creel does more damage than the floats as it becomes self baiting. Until someone is charged with finding and removing them no amount of legislation is going to make any difference.

 

[pvb]

"Offences for breach of this Order are contained in section 3(5) and (5A) of the Act. Penalties, whichare set out at section 11 of the Act, include a fine not exceeding £50,000 on summary convictionand a fine on conviction on indictment. The court may also order the forfeiture of the fishing gearin respect of which the contravention constituting the offence occurred."

Ah, that wording isn't in the Order, only in the attached explanatory notes. I only read to the end of the Order itself.

 

[dgadee]

Ah, that wording isn't in the Order, only in the attached explanatory notes. I only read to the end of the Order itself.

The glories of legislative drafting. These days most/much law appears in order format - makes a pig's ear of interpretation and is less liable to parliamentary scrutiny.

 

[ProDave]

It is good to see that Scotland is now marking lobster pots and nets with proper Danbuoys

Are they?

None of the pot markers that I saw yesterday were anything other than small round bouys.

At least I have not seen any marked with old milk cartons for a while.

 

[NormanS]

I have hardly seen any unmarked buoys for some years now; since whatever the previous legislation was came in.

You need to get out more. Loads of tiny wee floats around in the Outer Isles. Particularly beware in the Sound of Harris, and off the west of North Uist.

 

[JumbleDuck]

You need to get out more. Loads of tiny wee floats around in the Outer Isles. Particularly beware in the Sound of Harris, and off the west of North Uist.

Sounds as if the Outer Hebrideans are rather less well behaved than the Inner ones. My favourite twit was the one who used to string buoys and floating lines over 100m or so out from Ardbeg Point (yes, I know, PIN number) exactly where boats heading into Port Bannatyne would go.

 

[[165264]]

Naive question, but can't you punish them by stopping, lifting the pot and taking the contents?

 

[JumbleDuck]

Naive question, but can't you punish them by stopping, lifting the pot and taking the contents?

A simple explosive device which arms at 5m depth and increasing and detonates five seconds after passing 1m depth and reducing would be the obvious solution, but it might attract official attention.

 

[NormanS]

Naive question, but can't you punish them by stopping, lifting the pot and taking the contents?

Would that not be a bit like helping yourself to the contents of a car, because it was parked on the pavement? ?
Both scenarios could land you in a lot of strife.

 

[JumbleDuck]

Would that not be a bit like helping yourself to the contents of a car, because it was parked on the pavement? ?
Both scenarios could land you in a lot of strife.

Raises an interesting question ... at what point does the owner of the pot become the owner of the lobster within it?

 

[dgadee]

Raises an interesting question ... at what point does the owner of the pot become the owner of the lobster within it?

I think it's just theft. I seem to remember case law from years ago. But it's a 'massive problem' they say:

'Marine crime is a massive problem': Fishermen cry foul as lobster thief gets off with a caution

 

[KAM]

Is there any specification on what the marker should be. Can't see anything. There seems to be an increasing trend for having a pick up bouy attached to the marker and sometimes just two very small bouys together with associated floating line. Presumably to aid retrieval. You don't stand a chance if you hit one and impossible to see at night.

 

[Birdseye]

It is good to see that Scotland is now marking lobster pots and nets with proper Danbuoys but poor that the rest of the UK is so behind on this safety issue. I hate passing places like Portland Bill close inshore as the pathetic pot marker buoys are under water at many stages of the tide. I have only once picked up a buoy hooked on a rudder and being tethered stern to the waves , even quite small waves on that occasion brought home the serious consequences of picking up a rope. Hopefully the UK will follow this good scottish initiative.
Why are the RYA so passive about things that matter?

So who is policing the fishing industry up there? Who is out on the water making sure that every pot is marked? Or have they just passed a law and left it at that?

 

[KAM]

Just found the guidance on marking.

Guideline 3:
For creels, fishing for species other than Nephrops, deployed at depths of less than
27 metres, at mean low water springs, within 12 nautical miles from Scottish
Baselines, by licensed vessels, each end of the fleet must be marked with at least 1
purse seine or trawl float with a minimum diameter of 7 cm (3”) or circumference of
22 cm (9”). The optional deployment of dhans with flags at either or both ends would
meet this minimum requirement.

3 inches diameter. It must be an April fool's joke surely.