THE headline “Fisheries policy ‘an outrage'” is liable, unfortunately, to appear any week in the UK. The game is to guess whether it refers, for example, to last month’s Royal Society report accusing the European Union of gambling with stocks while allowing any fishing at all – or to a political candidate proclaiming that a vote for them will be a vote “for the fishing industry”.
So I am pleased to hear that there are now, at long last, serious discussions within the European Union not only about emergency quotas, but also on long-term recovery plans for commercial fish species such as tuna and cod. I asked Elliot Morley, Minister for Fisheries, Water and Nature Protection, about the controversial idea of adding commercial fish species to the CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species) lists.
Morley told me that the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) is holding consultations on applying the CITES-listing criteria to such species. The UK government recently got basking sharks added to the CITES Appendix II list of species “in which trade must be controlled in order to avoid utilisation incompatible with their survival”.
Advertisement
The CITES listing criteria are being reviewed, and the revised criteria must be robust and deal with what Morley calls “the special difficulties posed by some commercially exploited aquatic organisms”.
“Aquatic organisms” is not just bureaucratese for “fish”. Morley adds that “there is great hostility to this idea from some countries, Japan in particular”. Thus the fate of North Sea cod is tied, politically, to Antarctic whaling.
The fact that sturgeon are already on a CITES list does not inspire excessive confidence in the process when one looks at their bleak future (èƵ, 20 September, p 6). Still, CITES listing is, as they say, the only game in town – however much it depends on local sheriffs to enforce the rules.
THE north coast of Scotland is extremely beautiful – though I have never had as cold a swim as I did from one of its beaches when I was a child. Now there is concern that the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA) may land up in court for allegedly contaminating beaches with radioactive particles from the reactors or reprocessing plant at Dounreay, near Thurso.
John McKeown, Chief Executive of the UKAEA, confirms that the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) is considering investigating a number of issues at Dounreay, with a view to regulatory action. He describes these as “known historical problems” that “include issues relating to the particles”.
He repeats that the “UKAEA accepts that Dounreay was responsible for these particles escaping. We greatly regret that this happened. We are doing all we can now to meet the standards required of us, and develop the right strategy for the future.”
SEPA must now decide whether to refer this issue to the Procurator Fiscal, the Scottish prosecutor.