South Wales Sea Fisheries Committee  Date: 13 October 2000

Queens Buildings, Cambrian Place, SWANSEA.  SA1 1TW

Contact: Phil Coates and Mark Stafford               Phone:01792 654466 | Fax:01792 645987 | E Mail:SWSFC@aol.com | www.swsfc.org.uk 

1.      Background

1.2     The SWSFC is a joint Committee of local authorities, and entirely funded by them.  Reorganisation to Unitary authorities in April 1996 required a change in composition of the SWSFC funding formula which allocates percentage financial contribution and membership.  In the absence of agreement on a new contribution, Welsh Office put in place an intended temporary formula which arbitrarily apportioned an equal ¹/₈th cost on all eight authorities who had agreed in principle to be members, including landlocked Rhondda.  Neighbouring landlocked Caerphilly and Merthyr were allowed to opt out.

1.3     The emergency Order still runs on in 2000/2001, but Rhondda and Vale have requested to leave.  Cardiff withdrew a previous request to leave provided their contribution was small (of the order of 3%) in any replacement formula.

1.4     Welsh Office (and now National Assembly for Wales) continue to state that the matter is for the joint resolution and agreement of the funding local authorities themselves.

1.5     The stumbling blocks remain: the amount of SWSFC levy when compared the provision of finite resources to other statutory functions of local authorities, the equitable apportionment of this across a variety of local authority areas, and whether government itself should contribute to SFC costs providing, as it does, half its members.

1.         The South Wales Sea Fisheries Committee (SWSFC) - Manages inshore fisheries to six miles from baselines (20 miles plus in Pembrokeshire).   Additional duties since 1996 require a balancing of fisheries and environmental management.  Along with other statutory administrative burdens the work demands have grown in recent years.  Despite this, and in sympathy with local authority needs, the annual levy has decreased from £416,000 (1996/97) to £343,000 (2000/2001), in real terms a reduction of c £125,000 including inflation.

2.1     The continuing inability to set a levy that meets realistic needs of the SWSFC, and the late renewal of the emergency formula each year, has prevented any sort of forward planning by the Committee.

2.2     The purpose built 20 metre Fishery Protection Vessel ‘Cranogwen’ has been kept in service three years beyond anticipated replacement, and staff leaving the organisation have either not been replaced or posts temporarily filled using short term contracts.  The loss of key staff and additional work burdens are not conducive to either good management of resources, nor staff morale.  Not surprisingly, the Committee is now failing to meet some statutory obligations.

2.         Discussion on a Replacement Funding Formula

3.1     Local authorities continue to discuss an alternative funding formula.  In order to facilitate the withdrawal of Rhondda and open avenues for further discussion, coastal Vale have been requested to reconsider their opt out stance.

3.2     Since around 1998 local authorities have focussed discussion on an alternative ‘cash limit’ formula, tied to inflation and latterly with some provision to meet emergency expenditure.  The Committee has been advised that such an Order would be unlawful and open to Judicial Review of the National Assembly (NAW), who would actively put into place the Statutory funding instrument.  Furthermore, such an Order is impractical as it would in effect require NAW to set a budget each year and could also have very serious financial and practical implications for various other joint Committees in England and Wales.

3.3     The SWSFC has recently sent out to local authorities for consideration another compromise funding Order based on the usual percentage basis and a suggested levy for 2001/2002 of £396,000 expenditure which is less than the actual levy in 1995/96.  A commitment has been given to index link future increases, with services being met from reserves.

3.4     NAW officials have indicated that the emergency Order will not run on into 2001/2002 and Rhondda, as a minimum, will be allowed to depart. 

     Whether there remains any sea fisheries coverage at all will depend upon the actions of local authorities and the National Assembly.

3.      Current Status of Sea Fisheries Committee Operations

4.1  The Committee’s biologist and Master of the Protection Vessel left the Committee’s employ in 1998 and 1996 respectively, a shortage of money has prevented their replacement.

4.2  The Committee has recently restructured the sea going operations and regrettably has had to make two staff redundant.  This brings staff losses to date to four or nearly one third of the work force.  Two thirds of the overall Committee costs are employee costs and the percentage loss is in keeping with the reduction in levy.

      As a consequence, the FPV Cranogwen has no dedicated staff, and its future awaits a further decision.

4.3  The Committee has always made good use of EU aid at up to 50% reimbursement.  Its most recent success was in the application for £1 million aid towards the capital cost of a £2 million replacement Fishery Protection Vessel.  Cornwall SFC, the nearest neighbour via sea state, recently commissioned a £2.4 m vessel.

      Regrettably, the inability to find match funding (even taking into consideration reserves) means that the Commission have been informed that the aid will not be taken up.

      Furthermore, ongoing staff shortages mean that PESCA aid of £30,000 gained towards the Committee’s well respected lobster V-notching stock enhancement scheme totalling £60,000, is likely to fall short of expectations.  The Committee had previously declined to receive a further £30,000 EU aid towards the release of hatchery reared lobsters because of an inability to match fund the application.  This would also have supported the new National Lobster Hatchery in Cornwall.

      The above represented a highly significant opportunity to boost fisheries off South West Wales, and a net loss to those that depend upon them.

4.4  The ongoing funding problems, and inability of the Committee to meet the demands and opportunities expected of it, has led the NAW appointed fishery members who sit and advise the Committee, to tender their resignations.  Committee’s officers have thus far persuaded the postponement of any action in order to keep services going.

4.      Importance of the Work of Sea Fisheries Committees and Conservation of the Marine Environment

5.1  Ironically, the above developments have come at a time when marine matters are more prominent than ever before.  Hardly a day passes without reference to declining fish stocks, marine environmental degradation, and the plight of fishermen who are forced to work longer hours for lessening returns.

5.2  Various Non Governmental Organisations (NGOs) supported by a growing ‘green’ vote increasingly focus on the need for effective management of marine waters both to sustain the fine ecological balance and to provide for sustainable development of fisheries to support coastal communities.  Debate on the integrated use of all coastal users is topical at local, National and European levels.

5.3  It has been widely recognised that the work of Sea Fisheries Committees since their establishment in the 1890s has helped maintain the viability of rich coastal waters which form sensitive nursery areas upon which a myriad of invertebrates and commercial fish species depend.  These waters also support a wide range of public, commercial and recreational activities.

5.4  Despite the well publicised failings offshore, wide ranging or multi-species fisheries worldwide, coastal fisheries in England and Wales remain viable.   Nevertheless they are under continual threat and, in the views of managers and others, dramatically under perform their true potential.

5.5  A recent independent study into Inland and Sea Fisheries in Wales by Nautilus Consultants (1) and commissioned by the NAW, details for the first time the economic benefits of fisheries in Wales.  It suggests an annual contribution of £105 million per year to the economy, supporting around 1660 jobs - the scale of which has previously been overlooked.

      The report widely commends the work of the two Welsh Sea Fisheries Committees and recommends the need to urgently secure future funding.  It suggests their expansion to some estuarine areas may be appropriate and the strengthening of their contribution to Welsh fisheries and coastal policy.

      They identify the main threat to the fishing industry as the failure to address the current funding of Sea Fisheries Committees.

5.6  Other reports (2 to 8)  have in recent years recognised the important role played by Sea Fisheries Committees and the need for the strengthening of their role.

5.7  A recent consultation document released by the Association of Sea Fisheries Committees (9) calls for better legislation, further secure funding, and extension of their responsibility to twelve miles and to estuarine areas not already covered.  The suggested alternative funding model is one by which Central Government and local authorities make a joint contribution as they do for National Parks Authorities.  Much of the above would require primary legislation and a new Act is called for to replace the existing legislation, most of which dates to the late 1880s.

5.      References

1.      Nautilus Consultants (August 2000), ‘Study into Inland and Sea Fisheries in Wales’ for the National Assembly for Wales.

2.      Coffey, C and Dwyer, J (2000) ‘Managing EC Inshore Fisheries: Time for Change’ RSPB/Birdlife Report.

3.      Agriculture Committee (July 1999) ‘Inquiry into Sea Fishing’ HMSO.

4.      Symes, D and Phillipson, S (1997) ‘Inshore fisheries management in the UK: Sea Fisheries Committees and the challenge of marine environmental management’ Marine Policy, vol 21, No 3 pp 207-224).

5.      Welsh Affairs Committee (May 1996) ‘Current Problems facing the Sea Fishing Industry in Wales’.  HMSO.

6.      Anon (1996) ‘Funding Arrangement for Sea Fisheries Committees in England and Wales’.RSPB.

7.      Hugget, D (1994) ‘Fisheries Management and the Marine Environment’. RSPB.

8.      Harrison, N (1993) RSPB Submission to the Agriculture Committee on the UK Sea Fish Study.

9.      Association of Sea Fisheries Committees (June 2000) ‘1888 to 2000 and beyond - A report on the role of Sea Fisheries Committees with management and regulation of coastal waters of England and Wales’.  ASFC

  October 2000

FISH MAIN MENU