Letter: Fishy business on the east coast

Mr Richard Banks
Thursday 03 September 1992 23:02 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Sir: Traditional fishermen, as might be expected, take a rather different view from the Salmon and Trout Association (Letters, 31 August) regarding the Government's invitation to the National Rivers Authority to phase out the North-east drift-net fishery.

The Government's own review of the east coast drift-net fishery provided no evidence that this traditional small-scale fishery offered any kind of a threat to salmon stocks. The minister's craven decision to seek to phase out the drift-net fishery lies entirely with the influence of the angling lobby in the higher reaches of society, not least in the upper echelons of the governing party. This is not a conservation issue. It is about increasing the rentals of the salmon fisheries on the Scottish estates, at the expense of the livelihoods of commercial fishermen.

The NRA proposes to phase out the fishery by natural wastage 'in order to minimise hardship on existing fishermen'. Disregarding the knock-on effect this transference of effort will have on other coastal fisheries, and the inevitable upsurge of poaching that will ensue, it remains the fact that what is being proposed is the callous closure of a 200-year-old fishery, the destruction of jobs in a high unemployment area, not on any justifiable conservation grounds, but to benefit leisure anglers and the sporting estates. Your readers may wish to ponder the respective moralities involved.

Yours faithfully,

RICHARD BANKS

Chief Executive

National Federation of Fishermen's Organisations

Grimsby

2 September

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in