Saturday 9 May 2020

Response to the Wrasse Consultation

Until very recently there was no commercial demand for wrasse, because they have never been seen by the British public as a food species. They are said to be tasteless and bony and have, it seems, traditionally mainly been fished for sport from small boats. Their habitat is close inshore, rocky inlets, harbour mouths etcetera. I live at the head of Loch na Cille in Loch Melfort and was interested to note the arrival of a couple of small fishing boats setting traps around the shore, apparently in the hope of catching them. At that time the possibility of their use as sacrificial cleaner fish in salmon cages was beyond the contemplation of anyone outwith the aquaculture industry.
I am not a scientist, but have over the last forty years or so observed the environment of our coast and researched the changes that have taken place caused mainly by the arrival of aquaculture in mid Argyll, in particular the sealoch system comprising Seil, Shuna and Melfort. The lesson that we should all have learned long ago is that interfering in the balance of the ecology is something that we do at our peril.
Research done by others, notable SIFT, has shown that when commercial fishers moved into wrasse fishing catches were initially high, but quickly tailed off. There are a number of factors peculiar to wrasse that suggest reasons for this. They are extremely slow growing and long lived, also have strange hermaphrodite behaviour, starting out as female and some becoming male when a certain size is reached. This suggests that there should be very strict limits on minimum size of catch and that fishing should take place only outside the normal breeding season, rather than when it suits aquaculture.
I am aware that environmentalists elsewhere, for example in Devon, became extremely concerned some years ago at the arrival of “rogue” fishers in numbers, stripping out wrasse from inshore waters. The latest report suggests that when strictly controlled certain amounts of various species of wrasse can be removed sustainably, but also highlights the problems even one non-conforming fisher can cause. See:
A number of factors suggest that rogue fishers are likely to appear: this is a non-standard type of fishing, using baited traps set from small boats with the capacity to work close inshore, plus the rewards are enormous with ongoing very high wrasse prices. The situation lends itself to new entrants to fishing with concern only to make quick profits.
What this report was unable to assess was the impact of the removal of quantities of cleaner from the environment, which is most unlikely to be beneficial. The report also evidences the need for the wrasse fishery to be looked at on a UK wide basis. Strict regulation in one area would only cause the fisheries to move elsewhere.
Environmental Impact Assessments by law are only required for potentially damaging activities at a particular location. Aquaculture already benefits from this with wellboats, whose use is damaging but unregulated. Wrasse fishing appears to be in the same category. The lesson is that there should be a pause, while a proper comprehensive assessment of all impacts, not only on sustainability of the actual fishery but on the residual effects around the shoreline, before this fishery is allowed.
I have not touched on the aspect of animal cruelty involved in removing a wild species from its habitat to a new life in salmon cages, where they are themsleves the victims of sea lice and disease and where they are eventually killed off at the end of the cycle. In the modern, enlightened Scotland that we all aspire to live up to and that is actively promoted by the First Minister the wrasse fishery has a nasty look.

No comments:

Post a Comment

For obvious reasons we will moderate all comments. Our policy is to publish everything, whether or not we agree with it, unless it is clearly irrelevant or abusive or defamatory. The moderator's decision is final.