Mr. Andrew Kinneen:

I will make some general comments in response to questions put forward by the committee. It is important that inshore fisheries are recognised as having special characteristics. We have referred to their economic importance to coastal communities. The environment on board an inshore fishing vessel is entirely different from that on a larger fishing vessel. It is not the place to be weighing fishermen down with paperwork, electronic gadgets and the devil and all to monitor fishing. We need to keep it simple, low cost and as practical as possible. From that point of view we are looking at low-cost systems which we believe would be good for and well suited to inshore vessels. Larger vessels have vessel position monitoring systems that operate using satellites. We believe a low-cost equivalent could be achieved by using shore-based mobile phone networks, data loggers and so on. This is far more practical and it is an easier option for fishermen.

We need to emphasise the particular management of these vessels in terms of their fishing within special areas of conservation and Natura sites. There is some work to be done in order that people understand that the fishing gear these inshore fishing boats use is not destructive. Some people come to the argument with the view that the use of a small-scale dredge, a string of lobster pots or a small passive fishing net is destructive because they take a protectionist view of special areas of conservation. It is important that the special characteristics of inshore fishing vessels are recognised. It is an entirely different ball game to larger-scale fishing vessels using larger-scale heavyweight fishing gear. There is something of a lack of understanding and it is important that this is dealt with as time goes by.

Dr. Connolly from the Marine Institute commented on scientific assessments and management of out-takes. There is also a need to manage the protection of identified marine organisms, whether a seaweed or a benthic species. For this reason the SFPA is of the view that low-cost, appropriate monitoring systems are valuable because one can mark off a patch to protect a particular species while leaving the fishery active and exploitable.

Another key point to emphasise is the role of marine spatial planning in the future protection of livelihoods of inshore fisheries. We need to ensure that one marine activity does not impinge unnecessarily on another marine activity. Inshore fisheries are particularly vulnerable in this regard. They are also vulnerable to the misbehaviour of larger vessels operating in deep sea areas and we need to pay attention to that aspect of it as well.

The issue of bass was raised, as was the challenge of getting a just quota for Ireland because of the catch-22 situation - no pun intended - and because we have a ban. There may be some value in considering the recorded catches of recreational fishers that have been going on for years and have demonstrated the recovery of the stock. Inland Fisheries Ireland has a long record of reporting catches from recreational fishermen and this may be something that could be extrapolated by scientists. However, it is a tricky question to be worked through.

There are some difficulties from the SFPA perspective in trying to work with the inshore sector. Local consultation is fantastic and is the way forward, but we miss not having a representative body. There are representative bodies for fin-fish aquaculture, shellfish aquaculture and various sectors involving larger fishing boats along the coast. We can exchange messages and understand each other better by being able to talk to individuals. However, we do not have that in the inshore fisheries sector and that is something we may seek to develop.