Examination of Witnesses (Questions 220-239)
3 DECEMBER 2003
MR BEN
BRADSHAW, MR
MARTIN CAPSTICK
AND MR
COLIN PENNY
Q220 Mr Mitchell: You said your experiments
were filmed, did you not?
Mr Bradshaw: Yes.
Q221 Mr Mitchell: Linda said they were
not.
Mr Bradshaw: She is wrong on that,
as she is on one or two other things about these trials. You may
like to see the film and I would be happy for you to view the
film of the trials that are being done this season as well.
Alan Simpson: These are different from
the New Zealand trials, are they?
Chairman: Yes, these are our trials.
Q222 Mr Mitchell: It would be exciting.
Mr Bradshaw: It is very exciting.
You will find this as intriguing as I did. For some of the critical
period the underwater camera was not working, but the film shows
how the system works, not in the case of a dolphin but a shark
swims into it and I found this very dramatic and pleasing to watch.
It swims in, touches the grid and floats out through the flap
while the bass continue to go through the grid. The two dolphins
that were killed in the system we believe were actually caught
in the flap. One of the things that we have changed in this season's
experiment is we have changed the grid from metal to some form
of plastic or something that is a bit lighter and we have changed
the mesh size of the flap that allows the sea mammal to escape.
The findings were very encouraging. As I say, we are not quite
sure, to be perfectly honest, why they were so successful. We
are not absolutely sure, because we did not catch this on film,
whether the dolphins actually went in and out through the flap
or whether they just did not enter into the net before because
they were put off by the grid. There are a number of electronic
devices attached to the net that may have operated in the same
way that pingers operate on fixed nets to put off porpoises. That
is one of the reasons we wanted to repeat the experiment this
year, to try and find out why they worked, but work they did.
Q223 Mr Mitchell: Why have we not achieved
the ASCOBANS targets in British catches?
Mr Bradshaw: Because they are
pretty ambitious targets and we are working towards them, but
it is very difficult to know when we will achieve them because
it is quite difficult getting an accurate estimate of the number
of porpoises and dolphins in UK waters let alone the number that
die as a result of any kind of fishery let alone a bass fishery.
Q224 Mr Mitchell: Would implementing
the Defra strategy help us to achieve the target?
Mr Bradshaw: Yes, I think it would.
Q225 Mr Breed: Minister, you will be
aware that we already have certain obligations under the EU Habitats
Directive and one of those is an obligation to ensure that there
is some monitoring of the incidental catches. To what extent do
you think that we have been able to fulfil that obligation?
Mr Bradshaw: I think we have been
able to fulfil it fairly reasonably. During the trials that we
undertook last season there were monitors on the boats all the
time and when the people who are running the trials from St Andrew's
were not there themselves. It is quite a big logistical problem
to monitor every single boat all of the time and we are of a view
that it is still much more sensible to monitor on a spot and voluntary
basis rather than have permanent compulsory monitors all the time
at this stage until we understand more about how the by-catching
can be avoided.
Q226 Mr Breed: Are fishermen actually
required to notify Defra of any cetacean by-catch?
Mr Capstick: I believe not, though
obviously one thing that we do in addition is we do have a contract
to monitor strandings, which we have been conducting since 1990,
and also arranging for a number of post-mortems to be carried
out on dolphins and porpoises to see, where we can, the causes
of death, and that is significant.
Q227 Mr Breed: So you do not believe
there is a requirement for fishermen to notify Defra about any
cetacean by-catch?
Mr Capstick: We do not believe
so.
Q228 Mr Breed: Do you think there ought
to be?
Mr Capstick: I suspect one would
always have a question as to how reliable the data will be and
therefore what you could use the evidence for. I think that would
probably be the biggest question.
Q229 Mr Breed: Nevertheless, it might
not be a bad idea if they were all made aware of the fact that
they had to, even if they did not always do it.
Mr Capstick: I suppose there would
be a question of value in relation to the cost that we were imposing.
Mr Bradshaw: It is something worth
considering in discussing how the EU as a whole can implement
the Commission's proposals.
Q230 Mr Breed: They are required to do
all sorts of notifications. I know this would only be one extra
thing, but in terms of the whole monitoring exercise it would
seem to be quite a good idea. In terms of Defra's strategy, if
it was implemented tomorrow, how far do you think it would go
in helping to meet the current obligations we have got under the
EU Habitats Directive?
Mr Bradshaw: One of the problems
about quantifying any of the likely impacts of what we do is we
still do not know enough about what is causing the deaths, which
sort of fisheries and why. We know that we can take measures like
putting pingers on fish nets and that does work and will make
a contribution, but it is really very difficult and I would be
reluctant to put in numerical terms what percentage difference
that would make. Dolphin mortality can vary enormously from year
to year and I do not think our understanding is yet scientifically
rigid enough for us to be able to quantify the improvements that
we might hope to see. As long as we are moving in the right direction
and as quickly as possible and using what pressure we can to encourage
others to do so as well, that is the best way forward at the moment.
Q231 Mr Breed: But the best available
evidence at the moment is that the pair sea bass fishery is likely
to be the most responsible for these by-catches?
Mr Bradshaw: In our part of the
world, yes, but there are fisheries in the rest of the United
Kingdom that also cause cetacean by-catch.
Q232 Mr Lazarowicz: We were told by Linda
that she believed there was some European legislation which required
notification of instances of cetacean by-catch. Are you aware
of any such legislation?
Mr Bradshaw: I am not.
Mr Capstick: I am not personally
aware of any but we can check.
Q233 Chairman: And you will let the Committee
know?
Mr Capstick: Certainly.
Q234 Mr Mitchell: There seems to be some
difference of opinion between Defra and the European Commission
about pingers inside and outside the six mile limit because you
are proposing that they be used outside the six mile limit. Why
is that? There is an argument over porpoises and whether they
will be threatened within the six mile limit if you do not have
pingers. Why does Defra say they should be compulsory only on
vessels operating at least six nautical miles from the coast?
Is that for practical reasons of enforcement or is it on environmental
grounds?
Mr Bradshaw: I suspect it is for
both. In terms of the practicality of it, what we would be concerned
to do is to get something that is achievable. When you have major
European Union countries like France, for example, resisting the
need to have pingers even outside the six mile limit then I think
we would be very keen to achieve what we think can be achieved.
Q235 Mr Mitchell: We can achieve the
six miles because we control it.
Mr Bradshaw: Absolutely, but I
mean in terms of if the European Commission is going to make rules
on this. The other reason is that, in terms of enforceability,
the problem that is caused within the six mile limit is far less
and if we want to make a start on this, let us start where the
problem is greatest and see what impact we have there before we
move into something that (a) might not be achievable politically
within the EU and (b) is not such a big problem.
Mr Capstick: There are porpoises
within the six mile limit but I would echo what the Minister says.
I think in framing the strategy the concern was to approach things
in a measured and sensible way so that we were tackling, first
of all, the fisheries that give rise to the biggest problems relative
to the number of boats that would be affected.
Q236 Mr Mitchell: The threat to the bottle
nosed dolphin as well as porpoises is mainly within the six mile
limit, is it not?
Mr Capstick: It is certainly the
case that there are dolphins and porpoises in there, yes.
Q237 Mr Mitchell: And we can control
what goes on in the six mile zone whereas outside that we cannot.
Mr Capstick: Yes, we can, but
I think we have taken the view in forming the strategy that the
main beneficiary, certainly in relation to the number of boats
affected would be that the main area we would hit is the area
outside the six mile zone. But coming inside the six miles raises
a number of issues in relation to small craft fishing in smaller
areas and therefore that has not been our priority bearing in
mind the fact that at the moment we have no obligations at all
on this issue.
Q238 Mr Mitchell: It could be well worth
having a European draft regulation on this issue. Is it going
to be modified when that comes into place?
Mr Penny: In terms of the response
to the European proposals, they have obviously seen our strategy
and they know what our position is and we have raised these same
points with the Commission, the fact that we would wish a stepwise
approach to be adopted outside the six mile limit and not within
certain areas.
Q239 Mr Mitchell: I honestly do not see
that because here we can make a start, here are waters we control
and yet we are insisting on pingers only outside it.
Mr Penny: It is a step-wise approach
and we think the most effective use would be to stay outside the
six mile limit and then observe what happens and then we will
be having more observers and more testing and we will see if there
is an issue we need to address.
| 
