Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Value of Irish Fisheries

Options
2

Comments

  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 10,079 Mod ✭✭✭✭marco_polo


    I have heard the such figures as 200 bn banidied mainly from this article below alot, so I decided to have a closer look at the accuracy of some of the assertions made. I posted this in the thread in AH yesterday but perhaps it it better here. People seemed more interest in the 'Describe your c*ck thread' :)

    I am neither a fishing or economic expert so I may not be 100% correct but I think raises a
    Reposted from another thread, originally printed in Magill...

    STATISTICS BLOW MYTH OF IRELAND AS EU BENEFICIARY

    - Because of fish supply, nation is second biggest indirect contributor to EU coffers
    by Tom Prendiville, Daily Ireland, Wednesday 28 March 2006


    Official European Union statistics reveal that Ireland's past image as one of Europe's largest financial beneficiaries is largely a myth.

    Statistics indicate that, year on year off, Ireland has consistently been one of the biggest net financial contributors to Europe as a result of fish supply.

    Official figures from the EU's statistical gathering agency, Eurostat, reveal that Ireland is second only to Germany as an indirect contributor to EU coffers.

    First of all Eurostate fisheries reports are in regard to fish catches and the fishing sector in general.

    The analysis of the overall contributions of member states to the EU is not within the scope of these reports and no mention of this is made, so that is the authors own assertion, not eurostats, based on his rather faulty calculations might I add.
    Although Ireland did well in extracting almost E40 billion (£27.8 billion sterling) in transfer funds from the EU, the fish extracted from Irish territorial waters has been worth almost E200 billion (£139 billion sterling) in comparison.

    As I have said this figure has been grossly inflated and is based on incorrect assumptions so I'll get back to this one in a while.
    The EU fish wars have raged in Irish waters for decades, and have now left Ireland facing a massive crisis with the prospect of the extinction of many fish species.

    The EU has a poor record over the past few decades with regard to fish stock protection so this is a valid point.
    Statistics covering the period from 1974 to 2004 throw some light on the true cost of Ireland's EU membership to date, and the enormous financial contribution Ireland has made to the European Community.

    Since 1974, the accumulated value of fish taken from Irish territorial waters,"the second most important in the EU", amounts to a E200 billion (£139 billion).

    The EU fishing industry is worth almost E20 billion (£13.9 billion) per annum.

    On average, more than five million tonnes of edible fish varieties, valued at E7 billion (£4.8 billion), are fished from EU waters every year, 40 per cent of which originates from Irish waters.

    So that is an estimated value of 7,000,000,000 bn / 5,000,000 t = 1300 euros per tonne. Which is interesting because if you look at the CSO statistics for 2004 for the volume and value of all landings at all Irish ports you get the following figures.

    http://www.cso.ie/releasespublications/documents/agriculture/current/fishery.pdf

    Demersal Species (Cod whiting etc) - Total Catch 27,645 tonnes - Total Value 48,941,000 - Average Price per tonne = 1,773 euros.

    Pelagic (Herring macrel tuna etc) - Total Catch 243,935 tonnes - Total Value 66,125,000 - Price per tonne = 271 euro

    Shellfish - Total Catch 34,803 tonnes - Total Value 62,195,000 - Price per tonne 1787 euro

    Deepwater - Total Catch 2,949 tonnes - Total Value 3,646,000 - Price per tonne 1236 euro

    All Species - Total Catch - 309,332 - Total Value 180,907,000 - Average Price per tonne = 584 euros

    I shall assume that this is typical of the catch in the North Atlantic by all nations fleets (and I see no reason why this would not be the case).

    For now I will leave the claim that 40% of all fish comes from Irish waters uncontested.

    So taking 40% of 5,000,000 tonnes this leaves 2,000,000 tonnes or so as coming from Irish waters.

    Doing a crude calculation using these figures we have the following:

    2,000,000 tonnes * 584 euros per tonne = 1.16 Bn per year.

    By the authors calculations:

    2,000,000 tonnes * 1300 euros per tonne = 2.6 Billion per year.
    The true commercial value of the haul, according to David Cross, who compiled earlier Eurostat reports into the fishing industry, is double that again after processing has been considered.

    He said: "The value of the output of the processing industry is nearly twice the value of the catching sector. In other words, for every euro generated in fish sales another two are generated in processing."

    The most important fishery in Europe are the seas west of Ireland, the so-called Irish Box, which produce over 40 per cent of all the edible fish consumed in Europe. In monetary terms, the seas off Ireland are worth E8 billion (£5.5 billion) a year to the EU.

    His 8 billion figure I assume he gets as follows:

    Value of catch + Value of processing which by his figures would be approximately 2.6 + 2.6*2 = 7.8 Billion.

    I am also assuming that it is the accumulation of this 7.8 Billion per year over thirty years is where he gets his figure of 200Bn or so from (actually 234 billion by my calculation, nice of him to round it down :)).

    By using the CSO figures for the price of fish per tonne caught by Irish fisherman in the North Atlantic and including his double processing value we get the following, .

    1.15 + 1.15 * 2 = 3.45 billion per year.

    Putting this crude figure into his even cruder calculation we get the following:
    3.45 * 30 years we have halved the figure already to just 103 billion or so.

    He also suggests that the value of outfish processing is double the value of the catching sector so I will assume that is in fact true. Now I am no economist but I would assume that the the processing industry must first actually buy the fish off those the catching sector, so surely the overall net economic output of the processing sector is roughly the same as the catching sector minus this overhead.

    Revising my figure to take this into account we get a total value of about (1.15 + 1.15) = 2.3 bn taken out each year from what the author claims are Irish waters.

    Taking another third off the total figure on this basis we are left with 66 billion taken out of Irish waters over thirty years.

    But we have only gained 40m out of europe in funds, so I guess we are still net contributers. :mad:.

    But this is based on my crude calculation of the average price of a tonne of fish caught in the North Atlantic as well as being based on the author assertion that 40% of all EU finsh are caught in Irish waters so lets see what the official Irish position is on the matter.

    Here the author asserts these figure again just for emphasis.
    Every year, roughly two million tonnes are fished in Irish coastal waters. However, Ireland's share of the catch is miniscule and therein lie the current difficulties. While Ireland produces 40 per cent of the edible fish, the country's fishermen are only entitled to catch less than ten percent of
    that. The rest is fished by foreign trawlers.

    http://historical-debates.oireachtas.ie/D/0553/D.0553.200206260023.html

    In this dail debate Trevor Sargent asks a question based on similar logic to that in this article. The answers are most illuminating.

    The first thing that we learn is that that 40% of all EU catch comes from ICES zones VI and VII, a large proportion of which are international waters and not the Irish Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) - the 200 mile limit.

    "Around 40% of all catches in EU Atlantic waters come from ICES areas VI and VII and the proportion of these made in the Irish 200 mile limit can only be estimated."

    "Based on available data sources at our disposal and within the significant limitations of the assumptions made and the factors to which I have referred, we can estimate that the Irish and other fleets catch approximately one million metric tonnes of fish annually within the Irish 200 mile limit."


    So esentially only half the number of fish that the author suggest are in fact fished from waters under direct Irish control. My crude estimate is now down to about 33 billion or so over the past thirty years.

    As we have dipped under the 40 billion mark suggested by the author for direct EU funding it looks like we are getting back towards being a net benificary of the EU again.

    Also the total amount of fish caught by Irish fishermen is estimated at 309,332 by the CAO figures I linked to earlier which means it looks like Irish fisherman get a cut of roughly 15% of all catches in zones VI and VII which includes both Irish and International waters not well under the 10% suggested by the author.

    Subtracting this 15% from our running total we are now looking at a figure of 28 Billion for the net gain of other EU state from fishing in both international waters and irish owned waters surrounding the Island.

    The dail answer also mentions a figures for 2001 of 315,000 tonnes with an estimated catch value of more than €250 million. Which seems to stack up pretty well with my rough estimates :pac:.

    But sure all politicians are liars I hear you say. Is this evidence backed up any where else? Yes as a matter of fact. Here is a document that Scofflaw dug up a few weeks ago that mostly validates the assertions I have just made.

    http://www.marine.ie/NR/rdonlyres/B274034C-8DCA-4CEA-ADD7-F0FC5652DA0B/0/Valueoflandings.pdf

    This document suggests that the total tonnes caught is in fact only 1,500,000 tonnes per year around the coast of Ireland. Again the figure of a 15% total share from these waters are in pretty precise agreement with the figures above.

    Looking more closly we discover that in the Irish Exclusive Economic Zone Irish (the area of water we would in control if we were not in the EU) the volume of the catch is roughly 680,000 tonnes and Irish fisherman have a 30% share of all the fish caught by volume in this area of the ocean. So a total of some 490,000 tonnes per year are fished from Irish waters by foriegn owned vessels.

    As a matter of interest the value per tonne suggested by this report is 680,000,000 / 460,000 tonnes = 676 euro per ton. Higher than the figure I had earlier but way lower than the 1300 proposed in the article.

    Lets putting these revised figures into the basic formulas and see what happens.

    From Irish territorial waters:
    490,000 tonnes * 676 euro per tonne = 332,710,000m per year.

    Multiplying by thirty years that leaves gives not much more than 10 billion caught by foreign trawlers in Irish controlled waters over a thirty year period.

    Also this is not money the government would have got directly, the actual net tax gain to the government would be no more than in the region of 1-2 billion depending on profit margins of the fishermen and applicable tax rates. How many roads and bridges would that have built compared to the 17 billion or so in Structural funds. Not much left over to replace the CAP payments either.

    Of course these figures neglect a number of important aspects, one is that the price of fish was lower in the past as fish stocks were more plentiful, and also does not take inflation into account going back thirty years. Also the Irish fleet numbers were much higher when we first joined to the best of my knowledge.

    Finally the Spanish, the largest fishing nation did not join the EU until 1986 so that was at least 13 years without their presence. When they joined it all but doubled the size of the existing EU fleet.
    In recent weeks, the government has been involved in a showdown with Irish fishermen, some of whom have been flaunting the conservation quotas. Meanwhile, in the midst of the acrimonious dispute, ten Dutch factory ships, each one the size of Croke Park, have been hoovering up fish with apparent impunity in international waters 12 miles off the coast near Cork.

    "The situation with foreign boats is even worse, as our naval service does not even know what the quota is," said Eamonn Ryan, Green Party spokesperson for maritime and natural resources.

    "This flawed system has allowed what is in effect the open fishing of our waters. They are hunting to extinction most of the fish stocks in Irish waters."

    In terms of importance, the once teeming Mediterranean produces less than 500,000 tonnes of fish yearly.

    Some critism of our illegal fishing which is both valid and true. The fact that there is illegal fishing taking place in international waters is no reason for us not to enforce the legislation within our waters though. It is true that the Mediterranean is nearly exhausted from years of over fishing as well.
    The Irish zone which extends out 200 miles into the West Atlantic is also the second most important in terms of Europe's edible fish stocks.
    Adjusted Eurostat estimates for all fishing activity in Irish territorial waters since the mid-1970s indicate that over forty million tonnes of fish have been extracted.

    Not too sure about this paragraph, as I don't know if he is talking about Irish territorial waters or what he thinks are Irish territorial waters. Taking 680,00 * 30 years = 20,400,000 tonnes or so I presume he is counting the international waters as well.

    In short the entire article is a highly questionable


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,314 ✭✭✭sink


    marco_polo wrote: »
    People seemed more interest in the 'Describe your c*ck thread' :)

    Do you have a link? :D


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 10,079 Mod ✭✭✭✭marco_polo


    sink wrote: »
    Do you have a link? :D

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055319169

    I haven't posted anything I swear :)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,738 ✭✭✭thehighground


    marco_polo wrote: »
    In short the entire article is a highly questionable

    You better get onto RTE and question them - "The Week in Politics" did a piece on Irish fisheries last Sunday. Their reporters seemed to be of the opinion that Ireland did rather badly out of this exchange with the EU. Politicians on panel didn't refute it either.

    I could be wrong, but I think they said that 43% of EU fishing waters are in Irish waters.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 10,079 Mod ✭✭✭✭marco_polo


    You better get onto RTE and question them - "The Week in Politics" did a piece on Irish fisheries last Sunday. Their reporters seemed to be of the opinion that Ireland did rather badly out of this exchange with the EU. Politicians on panel didn't refute it either.

    I could be wrong, but I think they said that 43% of EU fishing waters are in Irish waters.

    http://www.military.ie/navy/roles/index.htm

    Our Exclusive Economic Zone contains 16 % of all EU fishing water according to our naval service and various other sources. I am not sure if this 40% figure comes from. It is either an honest misconception or something more deliberate twisting of the truth by those with an agenda (I am not referring to you here just to clarify).

    Why I believe this figure comes from is that ICES zones VI and VII make aproximately 40% of the EUs total fishing area and our EEZ is fully contained within those two zones. However well half of these zones are in fact international waters not Irish waters.

    I didn't see the program so I cannot comment on that. If the discussion was that we have not done as quite well for our fishermen as we should have then they probably have a fair point. If they were suggesting that 200 billion worth of fish have been plundered from our 200 mile zone, then probably not.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    You better get onto RTE and question them - "The Week in Politics" did a piece on Irish fisheries last Sunday. Their reporters seemed to be of the opinion that Ireland did rather badly out of this exchange with the EU. Politicians on panel didn't refute it either.

    I could be wrong, but I think they said that 43% of EU fishing waters are in Irish waters.

    That would be a rather amazing claim. Ireland has an EEZ of 650,000 sq km, the EU has a combined EEZ of 25,000,000 sq km. So we have 2.6% of the fishing waters of the EU.

    Frankly, what seems to be happening is that people are simply repeating claims, and no-one is bothering to check them - or even reality-check them.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,738 ✭✭✭thehighground


    Scofflaw wrote: »
    That would be a rather amazing claim. Ireland has an EEZ of 650,000 sq km, the EU has a combined EEZ of 25,000,000 sq km. So we have 2.6% of the fishing waters of the EU.

    Frankly, what seems to be happening is that people are simply repeating claims, and no-one is bothering to check them - or even reality-check them.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw

    Well, they did say that the EU did very well out of Ireland. Do you think RTE would make up something like that :eek:

    Is it possible that the politicians don't know this to say that is not true :eek::eek:


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,314 ✭✭✭sink


    Well, they did say that the EU did very well out of Ireland. Do you think RTE would make up something like that :eek:

    Is it possible that the politicians don't know this to say that is not true :eek::eek:

    Well some politicians didn't know how many commissioners there were so yes I would say it's more than possible that they were not familiar with the size of the Irish and EU box.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 10,079 Mod ✭✭✭✭marco_polo


    Well, they did say that the EU did very well out of Ireland. Do you think RTE would make up something like that :eek:

    Is it possible that the politicians don't know this to say that is not true :eek::eek:

    I don't know on both counts, do you have any actual opinions on the matter yourself? :eek::eek:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,738 ✭✭✭thehighground


    marco_polo wrote: »
    I don't know on both counts, do you have any actual opinions on the matter yourself? :eek::eek:

    I think it was a two way street - EU was good for Ireland and Ireland was good for EU. I find it embarrasing that Irish people feel compelled to demean the value of Ireland's contribution to the EU (particularly with regard to fishing - whole coastal communities have been wiped out because they weren't protected and helped to compete).

    And it annoys me to read some of the comments from people on this message board who seems to think that we should be down on our hands and knees kissing the feet of Sarkozy & Merkel, despite the very negative effect on some people's lives.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 10,079 Mod ✭✭✭✭marco_polo


    I think it was a two way street - EU was good for Ireland and Ireland was good for EU. I find it embarrasing that Irish people feel compelled to demean the value of Ireland's contribution to the EU (particularly with regard to fishing - whole coastal communities have been wiped out because they weren't protected and helped to compete).

    And it annoys me to read some of the comments from people on this message board who seems to think that we should be down on our hands and knees kissing the feet of Sarkozy & Merkel, despite the very negative effect on some people's lives.

    Where did I say that the Government have done well for our fishermen in negotiation of the common EU fisheries policy? When this is clearly not the case. But it is not the topic of this tread either.

    I am just dealing with the facts on this thread and there is no evidence to support the allegation that, as a result allowing other EU countries to fish in our territorial waters we have put far more into the EU than we have got out.


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    Well, they did say that the EU did very well out of Ireland. Do you think RTE would make up something like that :eek:

    Is it possible that the politicians don't know this to say that is not true :eek::eek:

    Yes, and yes. An RTE researcher will have "read it somewhere" (probably Prendiville's article), assumed that Prendiville had at least vaguely 'checked out the facts', and reckoned that even if he was exaggerating by 100% it was still usable.

    The politicians are afraid of simply saying "that can't be right" without any information - they've been badly briefed throughout this whole business.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,314 ✭✭✭sink


    I think it was a two way street - EU was good for Ireland and Ireland was good for EU. I find it embarrasing that Irish people feel compelled to demean the value of Ireland's contribution to the EU (particularly with regard to fishing - whole coastal communities have been wiped out because they weren't protected and helped to compete).

    And it annoys me to read some of the comments from people on this message board who seems to think that we should be down on our hands and knees kissing the feet of Sarkozy & Merkel, despite the very negative effect on some people's lives.

    Well I for one don't deny we have made a decent contribution to the EU but we gained relatively more from membership than other countries. I have no respect for Sarkozy, I think he is a loud mouth and a hot head. I have much respect for Merkel as she is a skilled mediator and negotiator I however will not be bowing down to kiss anyone's feet any time soon. Ireland should remain in the EU to maintain stability and contribute to the development of eastern European countries.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,031 ✭✭✭FrankGrimes


    I think it was a two way street - EU was good for Ireland and Ireland was good for EU. I find it embarrasing that Irish people feel compelled to demean the value of Ireland's contribution to the EU (particularly with regard to fishing - whole coastal communities have been wiped out because they weren't protected and helped to compete).

    And it annoys me to read some of the comments from people on this message board who seems to think that we should be down on our hands and knees kissing the feet of Sarkozy & Merkel, despite the very negative effect on some people's lives.

    I find it embarassing that there are Irish people out there that are prepared to spout gross misinformation on topics such as this in order to give the impression that Ireland has not been a significant beneficiary of the EU. It is also highly disappointing that our national broadcaster would publicise inacurrate information, particularly when it is of political interest to some parties and I would not be at all surprised if little to know research was done by RTE beyond referencing other media articles. Likewise, the fact that no politician has come out to definitively clarify the facts on this is highly disappointing.

    Any opposition TDs out there reading this? If so, please use a Dail question to request a definitive official response on this.

    This doesn't mean that we owe the EU anything but let's not go revising history just because we don't want to feel obliged to Europe for the benefits we have enjoyed from our EU membership.

    The problem is, the more people hear this misinformation, the more they will believe it (just like my friends that voted no 'cos they can't be taking our Commissioner off us, we'd have no veto then'). We have now seen this from several posters on here, Magill, RTE, the Letters page in the Irish Times and there has been no definitive response.

    If I had the background to respond to any queries on this, I would gladly at least write to the Irish Times, but it's clear that Marco Polo and Scofflaw both have a lot more knowledge on this, if either was inclined to summarise their findings in a letter to the IT, it wouldn't change the world, but it would be a start in turning the tide against the constant waves of misinformation.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,735 ✭✭✭Irish and Proud


    At the moment, I'm trying to get more info in relation to our fishing, but certainly, the figure of €80m per year (in government revenue) that Scofflaw calculated does not seem quite right - fish is an extremely lucrative business - that includes everything from the fish catch, to the factory, to the shop, to the table!

    Also, if we had a large fishing industry, surely we could establish a boat building industry too - the larger fishing vessels could be built in Belfast - yet another peace dividend which would benefit (directly and indirectly) the economies either side of the border.

    In any case, here's an interesting discussion I came across:

    http://www.politics.ie/viewtopic.php?f=172&t=36794&start=24


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    At the moment, I'm trying to get more info in relation to our fishing, but certainly, the figure of €80m per year (in government revenue) that Scofflaw calculated does not seem quite right - fish is an extremely lucrative business - that includes everything from the fish catch, to the factory, to the shop, to the table!

    Also, if we had a large fishing industry, surely we could establish a boat building industry too - the larger fishing vessels could be built in Belfast - yet another peace dividend which would benefit (directly and indirectly) the economies either side of the border.

    In any case, here's an interesting discussion I came across:

    http://www.politics.ie/viewtopic.php?f=172&t=36794&start=24

    Well, bear in mind that very low figure is the benefit to the Irish exchequer, not the total benefit to the economy. The latter figure is difficult to calculate, since you have to follow the fish from the landing point through the various steps - and there are several possibilities at least:

    1. fish caught by Irish vessels, but landed abroad - here the value to the Irish economy is purely the value of the catch (assuming the fishermen don't buy anything abroad).

    2. fish caught by Irish vessels, landed in Ireland, sold direct to Irish retailers.

    3. fish caught by Irish vessels, landed in Ireland, sold to foreign buyers

    4. fish caught by Irish vessels, landed in Ireland, sold to processors, on to Irish retailers

    5. fish caught by Irish vessels, landed in Ireland, sold to processors, on to foreign buyers

    These are not particularly long chains, but working out what proportion of the total Irish catch would have travelled these various routes, and the value of each route, is both complicated and speculative. Further, if one is really going to look at value, one needs to consider that the fishermen, and fish processing employees, will be spending their money in local economies, and that the fishing businesses will be supporting other suppliers (such as IT companies, packing companies, etc).

    Even more complicated would be tracking the total value to the Irish economy of the EU payments. Farm support payments have value chains like the ones above, but often longer. Calculating the value of the structural funds is even harder, since their effects are almost entirely indirect - what value is a motorway, and to whom?

    As usual, the "facts" in public circulation are cartoon factoids with very little relation to the complexity of reality. Prendiville's figures are essentially meaningless.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,738 ✭✭✭thehighground


    It seems some estimates can be put on fishing in EU. How does 1.1bn worth of illegal fish get into the EU?


    EU agrees new fishing measures
    watch Tuesday, 24 June 2008 20:04

    Fisheries ministers have agreed new measures to counter the import of illegal and unregulated fish products into the EU.

    Increased inspections at European ports, a new certificate system for fishing boats from outside the EU and increased fines were adopted at a meeting in Luxembourg this morning.

    Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing (IUU) is valued at €10bn worldwide and is regarded as a major contributor to over-fishing.
    Advertisement

    It is estimated that some 500,000 tonnes of IUU fish products, worth about €1.1bn, enter the EU each year resulting in a loss of market share for EU fishermen.

    Under the new measures, there will be increased inspections at EU ports based on a risk analysis with a strong focus on vessels from countries which have offended in the past.

    The majority of fish landed in Europe from outside the EU is thought to be at the Dutch port of Rotterdam.

    Vessels landing fish from outside EU waters will need a certificate verifying that the fish was caught legally.

    Offending boat owners will be fined five times the value of the catch. It will be up to individual member states to apply criminal sanctions.

    European fishermen only provide between 30-40% of the demand for fish across the EU, so the majority of fish bought by European consumers comes from further afield.

    IUU fish tends to be landed by rogue vessels, or those flagged in states like Panama.

    http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/0624/fishing.html


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 10,079 Mod ✭✭✭✭marco_polo


    It seems some estimates can be put on fishing in EU. How does 1.1bn worth of illegal fish get into the EU?

    I though the article was pretty clear on the matter. Mostly unregistered vessels arrive in EU ports with no certificates that the catch is legal and are then caught by the authorities.

    Also as it seems to be related to fish caught outside the EU waters so the relevence to the debate at hand seems rather limited at best.

    **EDIT** Although the fact that only 30-40% of fish consumed in the EU are actually landed by EU fleet is pretty intresting come to think of it.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭ei.sdraob


    is it ok to bump up an old thread in light of recent claims by


    Coir's of 200 billion fisheries figure

    and

    Communists 180 billion fisheries figure

    ?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 113 ✭✭alrightcuz




  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭ei.sdraob


    alrightcuz wrote: »

    great now its grown to 400 billion :(


  • Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    ei.sdraob wrote: »
    great now its grown to 400 billion :(
    Indeed; suggested losses of €400 billion. Suggested by whom I wonder? Edward Corkery, perhaps?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭ei.sdraob


    K-9 wrote: »

    thanks for the link

    very interesting!

    total value of fish taken from Irish waters from 1974 to 2004 at €8.5bn. During this time, Irish ships took €3.9bn from the Irish waters and €3.16bn from British waters that Irish boats have access to because they are part of the EU.
    *
    Irish industry got aid that between 2000 and 2013 amounts to some €100 million.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    ei.sdraob wrote: »
    thanks for the link

    very interesting!


    *

    So because we're part of the EU and we also fish in their waters we've lost basically nothing and gained the 41 billion Euro the EU have given us over the years. And people are complaining... we really are a bunch of selfish bastards.

    P.S. I had a mind to say shellfish bastards but I won't. :o


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 91,732 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Forget the monetary values of what could be caught.

    What is the level of substainable fishing that could be done without affecting the viability of fish and hence the industry ?

    That's the only measure of what could be caught.


    When Europeans first went to Newfoundland cod were 5 foot long and the sea was full of them. Now the industry is gone.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    Forget the monetary values of what could be caught.

    What is the level of substainable fishing that could be done without affecting the viability of fish and hence the industry ?

    That's the only measure of what could be caught.

    When Europeans first went to Newfoundland cod were 5 foot long and the sea was full of them. Now the industry is gone.

    The EU are the ones that brought in the quotas to stop over-fishing.


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    Forget the monetary values of what could be caught.

    What is the level of substainable fishing that could be done without affecting the viability of fish and hence the industry ?

    That's the only measure of what could be caught.

    When Europeans first went to Newfoundland cod were 5 foot long and the sea was full of them. Now the industry is gone.

    In general, the scientific advice has been for quotas much smaller than the quotas which have been set through the CFP. Every years the scientists advise the politicians, and every year the politicians negotiate amongst themselves quotas that are 2-3 times as large as the scientists advise.

    The EU is trying to move over to a different system (Maximum Sustainable Yield), and that's one hopeful outcome of the CFP reconstruction next year.

    If you want to make a contribution to the CFP reform, you can do so here.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 943 ✭✭✭OldJay


    I hadn't read this thread before so I started at the beginning.
    Look what I came across . . . :eek:
    murphaph wrote: »
    It works for Iceland. :cool:


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    Justind wrote: »
    I hadn't read this thread before so I started at the beginning.
    Look what I came across . . . :eek:

    Ah yes - funny how we don't hear much these days about how Iceland is a model for living on fish outside the EU.

    amused,
    Scofflaw


Advertisement