The problem with that argument is -We should stop the EU from fishing our waters, mostly France. We do not need them. Every other country looks after their fish so should we.
The EU have nothing to lose from raping our seas. It is about time we used our independence.
I think your comments are very misinformed-Commercial fishermen stop when they have reached their quota, it is the mismanagement of the quota system that causes the over fishing. This was the case with the Newfoundland Banks and the case in our own waters, it is a failed system anyway but that's an argument for another thread. Its not the much maligned commercial fishermen's fault. Look at the science and the politics, that's where the blame lays not with the commercial fishermen; they just do their job as instructed within the rules imposed on them. It was bad politics and bad science that ruined the Newfoundland Banks and our own waters.The problem with that argument is -
# we sell what we catch , primarily to EU nations
#but we import what we eat , primarily from EU nations and Norway
# almost all commercial fisherman don't know when to stop(Newfoundland Grand Banks are proof of that )
# 'every other country looks after their fish'. Check out China's fishing activities ..
# and , how can I put it, fish move around . 'Our' fish sometimes fly a Union Jack (or perhaps Red Ensign ) but in a month or so they are flying the tricouleur and singing the Marseillaise .
Quotas were first brought in the 60's to try and and protect diminishing cod stocks and other species since then. It was obvious at the time that cod stocks were falling and as an important food fish worth trying to protect. I think it goes beyond a simple 1% of GDP, that ignores the thousands of people that rely on it for jobs and their livelihoods not to mention the proper conservation of an important food chain. The value of something is not always just down to GDP and comparing it to the whole of the big GDP number belies its value overall to a nation like ours; its just a number. It is important to maintain a healthy thriving fishing industry in this country for all sorts of reasons. Even more so as world fish stocks are for ever diminishing and the value of those stocks will rise considerably as time goes on. We should manage it as effectively as we can, even more so as it will become a British asset and responsibility..Quotas - wonder why they were thought necessary in the first place ? The odd commercial fisherman I have spoken to tend to disbelieve all and any science, and insist there's plenty of fish .
Fishing has a hold on the British public , and an influence in our politics out of all proportion to its monetary worth - 0.1% of GDP . And who can be surprised - we don't actually eat much fish ,and what we do eat is mainly the usual -yaawn - cod or haddock . Try getting a decent plate of shellfish in Scarborough ....
I don't know of any near where I live but a search shows many in N.Y.Worldwide, the most important fish species used in fish farming are, in order, carp, salmon, tilapia, and catfish. It involves raising fish commercially in tanks, fish ponds, or ocean enclosures, usually for food. A facility that releases juvenile fish into the wild for recreational fishing or to supplement a species' natural numbers is generally referred to as a fish hatchery.
I think there is some hatchery of sea fish going on in the UK that are released in the wild, sure I have read that somewhere but fish farming for food has its problems. I think the whole area of sea fish hatchery is good though, very few of the eggs fish lay ever make it to the first year so rearing them through this first critical stage and releasing them has got to help. We are here to solve the problems we make.Fish farming - a form of aquaculture - may be the long-term answer to the decline in wild fish populations. Certainly not regulatory agencies.
I don't know of any near where I live but a search shows many in N.Y.
A little more research , with ONS , reveals fisheries being worth 0.03% of GDP in 2020. 61% of that was made up of Scottish catches. Total value pa less than £500m . Less than Harrods , apparently . But it certainly punches well above its weight when it comes to its political heft.Quotas were first brought in the 60's to try and and protect diminishing cod stocks and other species since then. It was obvious at the time that cod stocks were falling and as an important food fish worth trying to protect. I think it goes beyond a simple 1% of GDP, that ignores the thousands of people that rely on it for jobs and their livelihoods not to mention the proper conservation of an important food chain. The value of something is not always just down to GDP and comparing it to the whole of the big GDP number belies its value overall to a nation like ours; its just a number. It is important to maintain a healthy thriving fishing industry in this country for all sorts of reasons. Even more so as world fish stocks are for ever diminishing and the value of those stocks will rise considerably as time goes on. We should manage it as effectively as we can, even more so as it will become a British asset and responsibility..