Publication - Research publication

Management Of The Scottish Inshore Fisheries; Assessing The Options For Change

Published: 7 Jan 2015
Part of:
Marine and fisheries
ISBN:
9781785440427

An analysis of the impacts from different options for the management of the Scottish Inshore fisheries. In particular, the report provides an appraisal of scenarios related to restrictions on the use of mobile fishing gears within one and three nautical m

375 page PDF

8.9 MB

375 page PDF

8.9 MB

Contents
Management Of The Scottish Inshore Fisheries; Assessing The Options For Change
26 APPENDICES

375 page PDF

8.9 MB

26 APPENDICES

26.1 Appendix 1: References

Adam Blake, Susanna Curtin, John Brackstone, Steven Richards, Roger Vaughan, Jon Edwards, John Fletcher (2010) The Economic Impact of Wildlife Tourism in Scotland. Scottish Government Research Findings 1/2010, http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2010/05/12150843/0 (accessed 4/11/2014)

Barreto, E., and N. Bailey. 2013. Fish and shellfish stocks. 2013 edition. 65 pages. Edinburgh The Scottish Government, Edinburgh 2013.

Bergmann, M. , Wieczorek, S. K. , Moore, P. G. and Atkinson, R. J. A. (2002): Discard composition in the Clyde Sea Nephrops fishery , Fisheries Research, 57 , pp. 169-183

Beukers-Stewart, B. D., B. J. Vause, M. W. J. Mosley, H. Rossetti, and A. R. Brand. 2005. Benefits of closed area protection for a population of scallops. Marine Ecology Progress Series 298:189–204.

British Marine federation (2010) Water sports and Leisure Participation Survey 2009

Bryden, D.M., Westbrook, S.R., Burns, B., Taylor, W.A., and Anderson, S. (2010) Assessing the economic impacts of nature based tourism in Scotland Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 398. http://www.snh.gov.uk/docs/B726802.pdf (accessed 4/11/2014)

Cambell, A. (2010). Future of Fisheries Management in Scotland. Report of an Independent Panel. Produced for the Scottish Government by APS Group.

Cappell,R., Robinson,M., Gascoigne, J. and Nimmo, F.A.(2013) Review of the Scottish Scallop Fishery. Poseidon. Report to Marine Scotland, December 2013.

Collie, J. S., J. M. Hall-Spencer, M. J. Kaiser, and I. R. Poiner. (2000). A quantitative analysis of fishing impacts on shelf-sea benthos. Journal of Animal Ecology 69:785–798.

Combes, J. & W. Lart (2007) Clyde Environment and Fisheries Review. Part I of ClydeFisheries Development Project, 69 pp.

Dare, P., D. Key, and P. M. Connor. (1993). The efficiency of spring-loaded dredges used in the Western English channel fishery for scallops, Pecten maximus (L.). ICES Report No. CM 1993/B:15. Copenhagen, Denmark

Denderen, P.D, Kooten, T and Rijnsdorp (2013). When does fishing lead to more fish? Community consequences of bottom trawl fisheries in demersal food webs. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Biological Sciences Vol 280

Dickie, I., Hughes J., & Esteban, A. 2006. Watched like never before… the local

economic benefits of spectacular bird species. The RSPB,Sandy, UK

RSPB(2010) The Local Value of Seabirds: Estimating spending by visitors to RSPB coastal

reserves and associated local economic impact attributable to seabirds. The RSPB,Sandy, UK. http://www.rspb.org.uk/Images/localvalueseabirds_tcm9-258550.pdf (accessed 4/11/2014)

Drew Associates (2004) Research into the Economic Contribution of Sea Angling. A report prepared for DEFRA by Drew Associates.

Fraser of Allender Institute, (2002). Input Output Multiplier Study of the UK and Scottish Fish Catching and Fish processing Sectors. University of Strathclyde. Glasgow.

Homarus Ltd, (2010). Inshore Fisheries Groups in Scotland: Early Review and Policy Appraisal.

Howarth, L. M. & Stewart, B. D. (2014) The dredge fishery for scallops in the United Kingdom ( UK): effects on marine ecosystems and proposals for future management. Report to the Sustainable Inshore Fisheries Trust. Marine Ecosystem Management Report no. 5, University of York, 54 pp

Indurot ( 2012) Valuing The Benefits Of Designating A Network Of Scottish Mpas In Territorial And Offshore Waters A Report To Scottish Environment LINK. González-Álvarez, J., García-De-La-Fuente, L and Colina-Vuelta A. Institute Of Natural Resources and Spatial Planning ( INDUROT) University Of Oviedo

Jones, E. (2103) The Impact of Sea Fishing on Social Wellbeing in Scottish Coastal Communities A Report for The Marine Analytical Unit, Marine Scotland.

Kenter, J.O, Bryce, R., Davies, A., Jobstvogt, N., Watson, V., Ranger, S., Solandt, J.L., Duncan, C., Christie, M., Crump, H., Irvine, K.N., Pinard, M., Reed, M.S. (2013). The value of potential marine protected areas in the UK to divers and sea anglers. United Nations Environmental Programme – World Conservation and Monitoring Centre Cambridge, UK.

Leocádio A.M., Whitmarsh, D. and Castro, M. (2012) Comparing Trawl and Creel Fishing for Norway Lobster ( Nephrops norvegicus ): Biological and Economic Considerations. PLoS ONE 7(7): e39567. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0039567

McVittie, A and Moran D (2010) Valuing the non-use benefits of marine conservation zones: An application to the UK Marine Bill. Ecological Economics 70 (2010) 413–424

Pastoors M. (2014) Editor: Draft Discard Atlas of North Seas Fisheries ; Scheveningen Group SDSG 4.5 June 2014 www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0045/00453348.docx

PIEDA Ltd and the Scottish Marine Biological Association (1988) Study of Sea Angling in the Firth of Clyde for Scottish Tourist Board 1988

Radford, Riddington and Gibson (2009), Technical Report: Economic Impact of Recreational

Sea Angling in Scotland. Scottish Government, Edinburgh 2009

Rees, S., Rodwell, L.D., Attril, M.J, Austen, M and Mangi, S.C. (2010) The Value Of Marine Biodiversity To The Leisure And Recreation Industry And Its Application To Marine Spatial Planning. Marine Policy Vol 34, No 5.

Ryan, M.R and Bailey, DM (2012) Trawling and Dredging in the Clyde Sea Area: History, Impacts and Prospects for Recovery. A report to the Sustainable Inshore Fisheries Trust University of Glasgow July 2012

Stratoudakis, Y., Fryer, R.J., Cook, R.M., Pierce, G.J. and Coull, K.A., (2001) Fish bycatch and discarding in Nephrops trawlers in the Firth of Clyde (west of Scotland). Aquat. Living Resour. Vol 14 283−291

Tang, S. F. 1941. The breeding of the scallop (Pecten maximus (L.)) with a note on growth rate. Proceedings and Transactions of the Liverpool Biological Society 54:9–28.

Vause, B., B. D. Beukers-Stewart, and A. R. Brand. 2006. Age composition and growth rates of queen scallops Aequipecten opercularis (L.) around the Isle of Man. Journal of Sea Research 25:310–312.

Vause, B. J., B. D. Beukers-Stewart, and A. Brand. 2007. Fluctuations and forecasts in the fishery for queen scallops (Aequipecten opercularis) around the Isle of Man. ICES Journal of Marine Science 64:1124–1135

Watson, J.M., and Bryson, J.T. (2003). The Clyde Inshore Fishery Study : Securing a Sustainable Future for The Clyde Inshore Fishery, Edinburgh: Seafish

Wieczorek, S. K., S. Campagnuolo, P. G. Moore, C. Froglia, R. J. A. Atkinson, E. M. Gramitto & N. Bailey (1999) The composition and fate of discards from Nephrops trawling in Scottish and Italian waters. Final Report to the European Commission.

Ziegler, F (2006). Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of Norway lobster (Nephrops norvegicus) fished by creels, conventional and species-selective trawls along the Swedish west coast. Swedish Institute for Food and Biotechnology, Report 746

26.2 Appendix 2: Table: Deprivation of Coastal Communities

HOME_PORT DRIVE_TIME PUBLIC_TRA ACCESS_RAN CRIME_RAN EDUCATION_ EMPLOYMENT HEALTH_RAN HOUSING_RA INCOME_RAN MULTIPLE_D OVER10 UNDER10 ALL
ABERDEEN well provide well provided well provided very depriv deprived average deprived very deprived average average 3 41 44
ANSTRUTHER average well provided well provided average average well provided well provided average well provided well provided 3 9 12
ARBROATH very well pro well provided very well provid deprived deprived deprived deprived average deprived deprived 1 9 10
ARISAIG very deprive very deprived very deprived very well pr very well provided well provided well provided very deprived average average 0 5 5
AYR well provide well provided well provided deprived average deprived deprived average deprived deprived 39 30 69
BALLANTRAE very deprive very deprived very deprived very well pr deprived deprived average well provided average deprived 2 3 5
BENBECULA very deprive very deprived very deprived deprived well provided average deprived well provided well provided average 1 4 5
BERNERA very deprive very deprived very deprived very well pr well provided average average well provided deprived deprived 1 9 10
BROADFORD very deprive very deprived very deprived average average average deprived deprived average deprived 0 8 8
BUCKIE well provide average well provided deprived average average average well provided average average 23 37 60
BUTE well provide well provided well provided deprived average deprived average deprived deprived deprived 2 6 8
CAMPBELTOWN well provide well provided well provided deprived average deprived deprived average deprived deprived 27 38 65
CARRADALE very deprive very deprived very deprived very well pr well provided deprived well provided deprived average average 8 2 10
CASTLEBAY very deprive very deprived very deprived well provid average average deprived very deprived average deprived 4 19 23
CENTRAL MAINLAND (SHETLAND) very deprive very deprived very deprived well provid average very well provided well provided very well prov very well prov well provided 1 5 6
CRAIL deprived average deprived very well pr very well provided well provided very well prov very well prov well provided very well provid 0 6 6
DRUMMORE very deprive very deprived very deprived very well pr average deprived well provided deprived deprived deprived 0 5 5
DUNROSSNESS FAIR ISL very deprive very deprived very deprived very well pr well provided very well provided very well prov very well prov very well prov well provided 0 8 8
DUNVEGAN very deprive very deprived very deprived very well pr average well provided well provided deprived well provided average 0 10 10
EYEMOUTH very well pro well provided very well provid deprived deprived deprived deprived average deprived deprived 9 6 15
FORT WILLIAM deprived deprived deprived deprived deprived average deprived average average deprived 1 6 7
FRASERBURGH very well pro well provided well provided deprived deprived deprived deprived well provided deprived deprived 75 75 150
GARDENSTOWN very deprive well provided deprived average average well provided well provided well provided deprived average 8 3 11
GIRVAN very well pro well provided well provided deprived deprived deprived deprived average deprived deprived 0 5 5
GOURDON very deprive average deprived well provid well provided well provided well provided very well prov well provided well provided 2 7 9
GRIMSAY very deprive very deprived very deprived very well pr well provided very well provided average deprived average average 4 8 12
HOY very deprive very deprived very deprived very well pr average average well provided very deprived well provided deprived 1 5 6
ISLAY very well pro very well provided very well provid well provid deprived average deprived deprived average average 3 12 15
JOHN O'GROATS very deprive very deprived very deprived very well pr well provided well provided average well provided well provided average 1 9 10
JOHNSHAVEN very deprive very deprived very deprived well provid average well provided average average well provided average 0 8 8
KINLOCHBERVIE very deprive very deprived very deprived very well pr well provided well provided well provided well provided average average 6 9 15
KIRKCUDBRIGHT well provide average well provided well provid very well provided average well provided well provided well provided well provided 17 5 22
KIRKWALL well provide deprived average deprived well provided well provided average average well provided well provided 20 46 66
KYLE very well pro very well provided very well provid deprived average deprived deprived well provided deprived deprived 3 14 17
LERWICK average average average deprived well provided well provided deprived average well provided well provided 20 53 73
LOCH SCRIDAIN very deprive very deprived very deprived very well pr average very well provided very well prov very deprived well provided well provided 2 6 8
LOCHINVER very deprive very deprived very deprived very well pr well provided average well provided deprived well provided average 2 8 10
LUING very deprive very deprived very deprived very well pr very well p3ro5v1ided well provided very well prov deprived well provided well provided 2 6 8
LYBSTER very deprive very deprived very deprived very depriv very deprived deprived deprived average deprived very deprived 1 4 5
MACDUFF well provide well provided well provided deprived deprived deprived average well provided average average 13 5 18
MALLAIG deprived well provided average average very well provided well provided average deprived well provided well provided 19 17 36
METHIL very well pro well provided very well provid very depriv very deprived very deprived deprived average very deprived very deprived 0 6 6
MONTROSE well provide average well provided deprived average average average well provided deprived average 0 9 9
OBAN well provide well provided well provided deprived average average deprived deprived average average 21 45 66
PETERHEAD well provide average well provided deprived deprived average average average average deprived 49 43 92
PITTENWEEM well provide well provided well provided well provid well provided well provided very well prov average well provided well provided 7 56 63
PORTREE well provide average well provided deprived average deprived very deprived well provided average deprived 13 48 61
PORTSOY deprived well provided average average deprived average average well provided average average 1 4 5
ROSEHEARTY very deprive very deprived very deprived deprived average average well provided average average average 0 6 6
SANDAY very deprive very deprived very deprived very well pr average average very well prov very deprived average deprived 1 6 7
SCALLOWAY well provide very well provided well provided very well pr average average deprived deprived well provided well provided 4 18 22
SCALPAY very deprive very deprived very deprived very well pr well provided well provided average deprived deprived deprived 0 10 10
SCRABSTER well provide average well provided deprived average well provided well provided very well prov well provided well provided 2 50 52
SOUTH HARRIS very deprive very deprived very deprived very well pr well provided average well provided deprived average deprived 1 11 12
SOUTH LOCHS very deprive very deprived very deprived very well pr average average very deprived deprived well provided deprived 0 9 9
SOUTH RONALDSAY very deprive very deprived very deprived very well pr average well provided average deprived well provided average 2 4 6
SOUTH UIST/ERISKAY very deprive very deprived very deprived very well pr well provided well provided well provided deprived average average 3 18 21
ST ANDREWS well provide well provided well provided well provid well provided very well provided very well prov deprived very well prov very well provid 0 10 10
STORNOWAY deprived deprived deprived deprived average average deprived well provided deprived deprived 23 53 76
STROMNESS well provide average well provided well provid well provided well provided well provided deprived well provided well provided 4 1 5
TARBERT well provide very well provided very well provid average average average well provided average well provided well provided 5 9 14
TINGWALL very deprive very deprived very deprived very well pr well provided very well provided well provided well provided very well prov well provided 4 6 10
TOBERMORY very deprive deprived very deprived very well pr well provided well provided very well prov average well provided well provided 3 6 9
TORRIDON very deprive very deprived very deprived very well pr well provided very well provided very well prov deprived very well prov well provided 3 11 14
TROON well provide well provided well provided average well provided average deprived well provided average average 10 0 10
ULLAPOOL very well pro well provided very well provid average well provided well provided well provided average average well provided 24 8 32
WEST MAINLAND very deprive very deprived very deprived very well pr very well provided very well provided very well prov average very well prov well provided 1 10 11
WESTRAY very deprive very deprived very deprived very well pr average well provided very well prov very deprived well provided average 3 17 20
WHALSAY very deprive very deprived very deprived very well pr average very well provided very well prov very well prov well provided well provided 13 14 27
WHITEHILLS very deprive deprived very deprived well provid average average well provided very well prov average average 4 2 6
WICK well provide average well provided deprived deprived deprived very deprived well provided deprived deprived 3 7 10
YELL very deprive very deprived very deprived very well pr well provided very well provided very well prov average well provided average 1 6 7

26.3 Appendix 3: Deprivation Scores for Each Fishing Port

Summary Deprivation Scores for Each Fishing Port

HOME PORT Transport & Access Education Employment & Income Health & Housing Crime Multiple Deprivation Boats
ABERDEEN 2.0 4.0 3.0 4.5 5.0 3.0 44
ANSTRUTHER 2.3 3.0 2.0 2.5 3.0 2.0 12
ARBROATH 1.3 4.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0 10
ARISAIG 5.0 1.0 2.5 3.5 1.0 3.0 5
AYR 2.0 3.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0 69
BALLANTRAE 5.0 4.0 3.5 2.5 1.0 4.0 5
BENBECULA 5.0 2.0 2.5 3.0 4.0 3.0 5
BERNERA 5.0 2.0 3.5 2.5 1.0 4.0 10
BROADFORD 5.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 8
BUCKIE 2.3 3.0 3.0 2.5 4.0 3.0 60
BUTE 2.0 3.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0 8
CAMPBELTOWN 2.0 3.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0 65
CARRADALE 5.0 2.0 3.5 3.0 1.0 3.0 10
CASTLEBAY 5.0 3.0 3.0 4.5 2.0 4.0 23
CENTRAL MAINLAND (SHETLAND) 5.0 3.0 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.0 6
CRAIL 3.7 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 6
DRUMMORE 5.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 1.0 4.0 5
DUNROSSNESS FAIR ISLE 5.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 8
DUNVEGAN 5.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 1.0 3.0 10
EYEMOUTH 1.3 4.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0 15
FORT WILLIAM 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.0 7
FRASERBURGH 1.7 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 150
GARDENSTOWN 3.7 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 11
GIRVAN 1.7 4.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0 5
GOURDON 4.0 2.0 2.0 1.5 2.0 2.0 9
GRIMSAY 5.0 2.0 2.0 3.5 1.0 3.0 12
HOY 5.0 3.0 2.5 3.5 1.0 4.0 6
ISLAY 1.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 2.0 3.0 15
JOHN O'GROATS 5.0 2.0 2.0 2.5 1.0 3.0 10
JOHNSHAVEN 5.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 8
KINLOCHBERVIE 5.0 2.0 2.5 2.0 1.0 3.0 15
KIRKCUDBRIGHT 2.3 1.0 2.5 2.0 2.0 2.0 22
KIRKWALL 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 2.0 66
KYLE 1.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 17
LERWICK 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.5 4.0 2.0 73
LOCH SCRIDAIN 5.0 3.0 1.5 3.0 1.0 2.0 8
LOCHINVER 5.0 2.0 2.5 3.0 1.0 3.0 10
LUING 5.0 1.0 2.0 2.5 1.0 2.0 8
LYBSTER 5.0 5.0 4.0 3.5 5.0 5.0 5
MACDUFF 2.0 4.0 3.5 2.5 4.0 3.0 18
MALLAIG 3.0 1.0 2.0 3.5 3.0 2.0 36
METHIL 1.3 5.0 5.0 3.5 5.0 5.0 6
MONTROSE 2.3 3.0 3.5 2.5 4.0 3.0 9
OBAN 2.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 66
PETERHEAD 2.3 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 92
PITTENWEEM 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 63
PORTREE 2.3 3.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 4.0 61
PORTSOY 3.0 4.0 3.0 2.5 3.0 3.0 5
ROSEHEARTY 5.0 3.0 3.0 2.5 4.0 3.0 6
SANDAY 5.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 1.0 4.0 7
SCALLOWAY 1.7 3.0 2.5 4.0 1.0 2.0 22
SCALPAY 5.0 2.0 3.0 3.5 1.0 4.0 10
SCRABSTER 2.3 3.0 2.0 1.5 4.0 2.0 52
SOUTH HARRIS 5.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 1.0 4.0 12
SOUTH LOCHS 5.0 3.0 2.5 4.5 1.0 4.0 9
SOUTH RONALDSAY 5.0 3.0 2.0 3.5 1.0 3.0 6
SOUTH UIST/ERISKAY 5.0 2.0 2.5 3.0 1.0 3.0 21
ST ANDREWS 2.0 2.0 1.0 2.5 2.0 1.0 10
STORNOWAY 4.0 3.0 3.5 3.0 4.0 4.0 76
STROMNESS 2.3 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 5
TARBERT 1.3 3.0 2.5 2.5 3.0 2.0 14
TINGWALL 5.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 10
TOBERMORY 4.7 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 9
TORRIDON 5.0 2.0 1.0 2.5 1.0 2.0 14
TROON 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 10
ULLAPOOL 1.3 2.0 2.5 2.5 3.0 2.0 32
WEST MAINLAND 5.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 11
WESTRAY 5.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 1.0 3.0 20
WHALSAY 5.0 3.0 1.5 1.0 1.0 2.0 27
WHITEHILLS 4.7 3.0 3.0 1.5 2.0 3.0 6
WICK 2.3 4.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0 10
YELL 5.0 2.0 1.5 2.0 1.0 3.0 7

 

HOME PORT Transport ◘10m <10m Total
ABERDEEN 3 41 44
ANNAN 4 0 4
ANSTRUTHER 3 9 12
ARBROATH 1 9 10
ARDNAMURCHAN 0 1 1
ARDRISHAIG 0 4 4
ARISAIG 0 5 5
AYR 39 30 69
BALLANTRAE 2 3 5
BARRA 0 2 2
BENBECULA 1 4 5
BERNERA (LEWIS) 1 9 10
BODDAM 0 2 2
BRACADALE 1 1 2
BROADFORD 0 8 8
BUCKIE 23 37 60
BURGHEAD 0 1 1
BURNTISLAND 0 2 2
BUTE 2 6 8
CAMPBELTOWN 27 38 65
CARRADALE 8 2 10
CASTLEBAY 4 19 23
CENTRAL MAINLAND (SHETLAND) 1 5 6
COLL 1 1 2
CRAIL 0 6 6
DRUMMORE 0 5 5
DUNBAR 3 0 3
DUNBEATH 0 2 2
DUNROSSNESS AND FAIR ISLE 0 8 8
DUNURE 1 3 4
DUNVEGAN 0 10 10
ERRIBOL 0 2 2
EYEMOUTH 9 6 15
FORT WILLIAM 1 6 7
FRASERBURGH 75 75 150
GAIRLOCH 2 0 2
GARDENSTOWN 8 3 11
GIGHA 0 2 2
GIRVAN 0 5 5
GOURDON 2 7 9
GRANTON 2 0 2
GREENOCK 0 4 4
GRIMSAY 4 8 12
GRUINARD-AULTBEA 1 0 1
HELMSDALE 0 3 3
HOLY ISLAND 1 1 2
HOPEMAN 2 0 2
HOY 1 5 6
INVERNESS 0 1 1
ISLAY 3 12 15
ISLE OF WHITHORN 0 4 4
JOHN O GROATS 1 9 10
JOHNSHAVEN 0 8 8
JURA 0 1 1
KEISS 0 4 4
KINLOCHBERVIE 6 9 15
KIRKCUDBRIGHT 17 5 22
KIRKWALL 20 46 66
KYLE 3 14 17
KYLESKU 0 1 1
LARGS 0 1 1
LERWICK 20 53 73
LOCH BUIE (MULL) 1 1 2
LOCH GLENDCOUL-CULKEIN 0 1 1
LOCH SCRIDAIN (ISLE MULL) 2 6 8
LOCHINVER 2 8 10
LOSSIEMOUTH 3 1 4
LUING 2 6 8
LYBSTER 1 4 5
MACDUFF 13 5 18
MALLAIG 19 17 36
METHIL AND LEVEN 0 6 6
MONTROSE 0 9 9
NORTH ARRAN 0 2 2
NORTH BERWICK 0 1 1
NORTH HARRIS 0 2 2
NORTH UIST 3 12 15
NORTHMAVINE 1 2 3
OBAN 21 45 66
PETERHEAD 49 43 92
PITTENWEEM 7 56 63
PORT ELLEN 1 1 2
PORT ERROLL 0 2 2
PORT SETON 4 0 4
PORTAVOGIE 2 2 4
PORTKNOCKIE 0 3 3
PORTNAGURAN 0 2 2
PORTPATRICK 0 2 2
PORTREE 13 48 61
PORTSKERRA 0 1 1
PORTSOY 1 4 5
ROSEHEARTY 0 6 6
ROUSAY TO SHAPINSAY 0 2 2
SALEN 0 1 1
SANDAY 1 6 7
SANDHAVEN AND PITULLIE 0 1 1
SCALLOWAY AND ISLES 4 18 22
SCALPAY 0 10 10
SCOURIE 0 2 2
SCRABSTER 2 50 52
SHETLAND 0 1 1
SLEAT 0 2 2
SNIZORT 2 1 3
SOUTH HARRIS 1 11 12
SOUTH LOCHS 0 9 9
SOUTH RONALDSAY 2 4 6
SOUTH UIST & ERISKAY 3 18 21
ST ABBS 1 0 1
ST ANDREWS 0 10 10
ST MONANCE 0 3 3
STONEHAVEN 1 2 3
STORNOWAY 23 53 76
STRANRAER 0 3 3
STRATHAIRD 1 4 5
STROMNESS 4 1 5
STRONSAY 2 3 5
TARBERT 5 9 14
TAYINLOAN 0 3 3
TAYVALLICH 1 2 3
TINGWALL 4 6 10
TIREE 0 2 2
TOBERMORY (ISLE OF MULL) 3 6 9
TORRIDON 3 11 14
TROON 10 0 10
ULLAPOOL 24 8 32
UNSPECIFIED SCOTTISH PORT 0 1 1
WEST LOCH TARBERT 0 1 1
WEST MAINLAND (SHETLAND) 1 10 11
WESTRAY 3 17 20
WHALSAY AND SKERRIES 13 14 27
WHITEHILLS 4 2 6
WICK 3 7 10
YELL AND FETLAR 1 6 7
TOTAL 570 1186 1756

26.6 Appendix 5: Gear Conflict Questionnaire: Fishermen

Introduction

Your vessel and gear

Where you fished in 2012

Your gear conflict in scottish waters 2012 - part 1

Your gear conflict in scottish waters 2012 - part 2

Location and number of gear conflict

Gear types in conflict - part 1

Gear types in conflict - part 2

26.8 Appendix 6: Gear Conflict Questionnaire: Fishery Officers

FISHERY OFFICE QUESTIONNAIRE

For the purposes of our analysis, gear conflict is where there has been physical contact between fishing gear. We are collecting data for 2012 (1st Jan to 31 December). If you cannot provide a definitive answer please provide the best estimate that you can.

1. Name the IFG area you are providing information for.

2. Name of your Fishery Office.

3. With respect to your Office's territory within the IFG, what was the total number of all known gear conflicts during 2012
(including those not formally reported, but known to have occurred)?

4. What percentage of the total in Q3 was formally reported to Marine Scotland Compliance or others agencies within Marine Scotland?
(Marine Scotland gear conflict intelligence data is appended to assist you answering this questionnaire) %

5. Please try and estimate the percentage of the total known gear conflicts in Q3 occurring in each of the following distance zones.

0-1 nautical mile from shore %

1-3 nautical miles from shore %

3-6 nautical miles from shore %

6. Please try and estimate the total known gear conflicts in 2012 occurring immediately outside your territory but within 6-12 nautical miles from the shore.

7. To your knowledge, how does the number of gear conflicts in your territory in 2012 compare with previous years? Please tick the appropriate box.

Substantially more
Slightly more
About the same
Slightly less
Substantially less
Don't know

8. How do you think the number of gear conflicts in your territory this year (2013) will compare with the total for 2012? Please tick the appropriate box.

Substantially more than 2012
Slightly more than 2012
About the same as 2012
Slightly less than 2012
Substantially less than 2012
Don't know

9. We need to know the types of gears that are in conflict within your Office's territory. Each of the cells in the table below implies a conflict between two gears types. Only a few will be relevant to your territory. Please tick any cells that describe a gear conflict that occurred in your territory during 2012. Even if there was only one incidence of that gear conflict, please tick the relevant cell.

Nephrop Trawls Other Trawls Dredges Nephrop Pots/Creels Other Shellfish Pots / Creels Lines Hand Diving Other
(Please Specify)
Nephrop Trawls
Other Trawls
Dredges
Nephrop Pots/Creels
Other Shellfish Pots / Creels
Lines
Hand Diving
Other (Please Specify)

10. We need to know the relative importance of the gear conflicts you identified above. Using the table below, as best you can, please estimate the percentage of total known conflicts (see Q3 above) accounted for by each of the conflicts you identified above.

Nephrop Trawls Other Trawls Dredges Nephrop Pots/Creels Other Shellfish Pots / Creels Lines Hand Diving Other
(Please Specify)
Nephrop Trawls % % % % % % % %
Other Trawls % % % % % % % %
Dredges % % % % % % % %
Nephrop Pots/Creels % % % % % % % %
Other Shellfish Pots / Creels % % % % % % % %
Lines % % % % % % % %
Hand Diving % % % % % % % %
Other (Please Specify) % % % % % % % %

Thank you very much for your time and effort.

Alan Radford
Economist, Grid Economics
Radfordalan@sky.com 01475 632268

We would be very grateful for your contact details
Name:
Email:
Telephone:


Contact