Marine Conservation Zones - can we match them?

Can us Irish match what the English are doing for marine conservation? Fair play to them guys! Take a look here at their recent march:

http://youtu.be/AJSmIlB3KLc

I'd absolutely love us guys to try and implement marine conservation zones!

John D.

There seems to be much confusion as to the types of MCZ's. Some seem to be the perfect solution where some traditional/sustainable means are allowed and destructive means are not allowed. The problem seems to come about when there are "reference" areas - these are areas where nothing is allowed - so scientists can use these areas are reference points to judge the success or failure of the MCZ's.

I am not sure if they declared a "reference" area on my favorite patch would I be a happy bunny!

I hear what your saying Jim but if giving up an area I loved fishing meant that it would act as a safe haven for those species I loved catching then I'd do it, the long term benefits are just too good to turn down. If you told me inner Donegal Bay was going to be designated a 'no take' zone then I'd take it, it is a place i've grown up fishing but the chance to safeguard it, for me, would be a sacrifice worth taking. The alternative is the current status quo which is continuous, sometimes slow, sometimes fast decline in species size and abundance which no amount of CFP is managing to or ever will manage to halt.

In saying that were a hundred years behind the UK in the whole process and with out being a cynic I'd say there would be a lot of resistance by the commercial sector to any moves to designate here.

I wouldn't mind "no take" it's "no fishing" that causes the pain.

I saw a program recently where they sent a camera down to the bottom of a no fish zone. The place was full of cold water soft corals, fish, etc...looked amazing. All the delicate stuff that gets wiped out by a trawling and the like. Would love to see more of it.

MCZs/MCAs are definitely the way forward, but like others I'd be pretty depressed if I couldnt fish the local patch that brought me to live here in the first place. Guess that makes me a NIMBY.....

Wonder how big these reference zones are?

That video is an extract from the recently shown series on channel 4 "Hugh's Fish Fight"

In the UK the scientific community recommended 127 areas as conservation zones, but the government have only decided to implement only 31 or something like that.

Very interesting series, if you can view it online. Especially the first episode which concentrates on dredging. It shows video footage of the destruction that dredging causes, and also shows footage of what the seabed looks like in areas where dredging is banned ( Massive difference)

I think its a great idea, and something similar like this should definately be done here.

Will it? I doubt it.

http://www.fishfight.net/the-fish-fight-charter/
http://www.fishfight.net/marine-conservation-zones/
http://www.fishfight.net/why-are-mpas-important/
http://www.fishfight.net/mpas-around-the-world/

There has been so much damage done that radical measures have to be implemented. If that means turning a section of coastal water into an aquarium then so be it, I think that we all can make sacrifices for the common good.

Think of the benefits of spill over from a "no take area", it's not all doom and gloom.

Regarding Donal's point on dredging, back in the early eighties I plaice fished within a couple of hundred meters of the mussel dredgers working the Kilcoole bank, I saw what they brought up, mussels, substrate, stones, rocks, everything.

When we used to fish Reillys Ridge off Kilcoole (an extensive mussel bank 30 feet below the surface) on a good day we would choose our onshore cross reference points and match them up with a darkening of the water caused by the sunlight reflecting off the mussels down below.

After the mussel dredgers did their work, the sunlight reflected light blue instead of a dark geeny/blue. The sunlight was now reflecting off sand, mussels will never fix on sand. Result; end of mussel bank with subsequent deterioration in fishing, as the extensive mussel bank was removed over the years, so disappeared the fish never to return.

A post script, that mussel bank in periods of calm really settled weather had the filtration capability to render the sea crystal clear. I remember on a slack tide fishing straight up and down watching, with my naked eye unaided, codling and plaice take my bait on the seabed 30 feet below like as if I was looking through a pair of goggles. The water is always cloudy now.

I'll take my chances with how MPA's are set up, it's about our grand children now. If not fishing meant they could see what I saw I'd gladly do it.

http://www.arrancoast.com

This is one example of a proposed no take zone very close to where I am from. I believe that the trials were very positive and it is nice to see that they have progressed the proposals to the Scottish parliment.

Might be of interest to some of you.....

Joe

I saw a program recently where they sent a camera down to the bottom of a no fish zone. The place was full of cold water soft corals, fish, etc...looked amazing. All the delicate stuff that gets wiped out by a trawling and the like. Would love to see more of it.

I think I saw that one.... I think it was more a no trawl zone rather than no fish zone... If it was the same show.

It seems like the most rational way forward. Yes, there will be sacrifices and anglers would be inconvenienced but surely it's a sacrifice worth making? If 'no fish' and 'no take' zones were evenly dispersed in each area then you'd never be far from a legal fishing ground. And as pointed out by Ashley above, imagine fishing in a 'no take' area adjacent to a carefully selected 'no fish' zone once it's had a few years to regenerate.......... I'm virtually drooling thinking about it!

I'm probably playing devils advocate here... somewhat....
Me not fish for the sake of my grand kids.... I'm afraid I am not prepared to make that sacrifice. I am an angler!
No fishing for me because we have to pay for the pillaging by commercial interests.... (Thats like paying for the mistakes of bankers....Oh we're doing that already ).
Impose zones in the areas I can fish and now have commercials competing with me for the same areas of ground that remain open and have them fishing more intensively in the allowed areas... that really has me drooling...no make that frothing Remember not all areas hold fish!

From the Scottish site above:

What is a No Take Zone?
A NTZ is an area of sea and seabed from which no marine life can be removed by any method.
The NTZ was established in the autumn of 2008 to protect Maerl beds and to promote natural regeneration of all marine life. It benifits the local economy by attracting visitors and divers to Arran. Eventually commercial fishermen gain with bigger and better catches in the neighbouring overspill areas.
Scientific evidence from New Zealand show that NTZ's do work, so the future looks positive for Lamlash Bay.
Everyone has a responsibility to protect the NTZ from fishing acivities, so if you see any fishing activity taking place call SFPA on 0845 270 3990 or visit http://www.sfpa.gov.uk/suspicious.asp

Is angling allowed in a NTZ/Reference Area on a catch and release basis? I'm not sure...

I always think of the plethora of lights you see at night fishing inside the 12 mile limit....Oui Messieurs we respect ze limit! Si Senoir

Let's be clear, Ashley hayden is not advocating NTZ's, remember he is an angler also. In advocating MPA's though, anglers may be faced with certain areas being designated as NTZ's and others as MPA's allowing catch and release. I'm sure even you Jim could live with that.

Most inportant to understand though is that MPA's will have to happen period if we want to restore our seas and oceans to any semblance of what they were.

How these protected areas come about and what status they hold comes back to angler's getting their act together politically and driving the issues rather than the present status quo of hanging onto the coat tails and tugging the forelock.

MPA's and also NTZ's can play a role in a well managed marine environment. Sadly in my opinion, without radical changes to how the commercial sector operate and are managed the improvements that sea anglers dream about simply will not happen. As it stands there are simply to many people chasing to few fish. As JimC already mentioned MPS's will simply concentrate effort even more in open areas and therefore further reduce anglers chances of catching. Much as I would love to see it happen anglers are very unlikely to get access to MPA's if commercials are prohibited from them. We as anglers may be proud of catch and release but some policy makers argue that this is exactly the same as discarding. The fact that we know they are wrong is irrelevant as our point of view is not heard.
We as anglers did not create this problem. I'm sure many of us would be prepared to be part of the solution but we have already been discriminated against for decades. I would happily support MPA's and even some NTZ's as long as those who do the most damage suffer the most restrictions.

As it stands there are simply too many people chasing to few fish.

I was involved in inshore commercial fishing in the 1970s and there are far fewer people in it these days than back then. As in many other fields, industrial technology has made a greedy few rich and the majority redundant.

There is obvious value in MPZs etc, but I suspect they'll be a long time coming here. As JimC rightly points out, the authorities cant police existing restrictions, so how would they stretch non-existent resources to cover new areas?

No doubt they're only part of the solution but in all likelihood an essential one. I'm still a relative novice compared to most on here and fear that unless radical changes occur then I could be a short-term angler. I'd love to see a viable and sustainable commercial sector co-existing with anglers. I'm not naive enough to think this is going to happen overnight, and it will take an almost complete change in commercial fishing culture, but I'm willing to take some inconvenience in the form of 'no fish/ take zones' even if it means some favourite marks become off-limits.
As for bankers, well now I'm frothing at the mouth .................

I live right on the coast, have spent most of my adult life at sea and this idea that there are loads of French vessels inside the 12 mile limit at night is rubbish. Most Irish boats of a similar size fish mostly outside 12 miles in recent years as this is where the best Prawn, Haddock, Monk and Cod fishing (mainstay catches) grounds are located. The chances are that the lights you may see at night are Kilmore Quay beam trawlers sneaking inside the 12 mile zone for a quich tow, knowing full well that the local naval fleet are gone home for their tea!

The assertion that MPA's will create further problems by concentrating effort is without foundation. Marine scientists advocate that if 10 - 20% of the worlds seas and oceans are set aside, covering spawning, nursery, and migratory routes, that this will help to redress, not totally correct, the imbalance created by commercial overfishing.

Fishing nations and economic groupings to include the EU, are working towards balancing fleet capacity and effort with fish stocks. We can take the jaundiced view that this will not happen, or we can believe that it will and work towards making it happen. Either way a coherant channelled voice from the sea angling fraternity is a must.

a coherent channelled voice from the sea angling fraternity is a must.

It would certainly be a big help on this issue, and generally. But how can coherence be achieved?