Official Report search · Parliament Workbench

Committee

Environment and Rural Development Committee, 31 Jan 2007

31 Jan 2007 · S2 · Environment and Rural Development Committee

Item of business

Aquaculture and Fisheries (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Boyack, Sarah Lab Edinburgh Central Watch on SPTV

As colleagues will recall, section 25 contains an enabling provision that allows ministers to make subordinate legislation to"prohibit the use of specified baits and lures",such as live vertebrates, in fishing for freshwater fish. However, after many stakeholders voiced concern about the risk of adverse effects on biodiversity in our inland waters as a result of unused live bait, we decided to include the provision in the bill, to make the policy clear. The committee endorsed such an approach during its discussions and in its report at stage 1.Amendment 9A would amend amendment 9 to provide for the making of regulations to permit the use of live vertebrates as bait in certain circumstances. I am surprised that Richard Lochhead lodged amendment 9A, given the tenor of the committee's debates at stage 1. However, I acknowledge that pike anglers in particular, who represent a minority of anglers, have passionately expressed the view that the use of live vertebrates as bait should continue.I want to scotch a few myths that have arisen. The first is that this is a late Executive amendment, which we are trying to sneak through. It is not. The genesis of the proposal that is contained in the amendment was in the Executive's green paper, "Scotland's freshwater fish and fisheries: Securing their future", which was published in August 2001. The proposal was subsequently debated thoroughly at the freshwater fisheries forum. As a result of the forum's enthusiasm for the proposal, a question on the subject was included in the Executive's consultation document, which was issued in December 2005—it was question 44, for those who are really interested. The response to the question was four to one in favour of a ban—79 per cent to 19 per cent.The second myth is that the ban is a welfare issue and that perhaps the next step would be to ban maggots or worms, if not fishing itself. I want to make our position clear and put it on the record. The Executive has been consistent on the issue from day one. The issue here is one of biodiversity. Introduced fish can compete with, predate on, give parasites to and spread disease among native fish. The Executive is totally supportive of angling as a sport and a recreation. That needs to be said, given some of the rumours that have been flying around.The third myth is that using live vertebrates as bait is not a problem. We do not agree with that view. The use of live vertebrates as bait has resulted in the translocation of live fish. That can happen when live fish used as bait are brought in from other sources and at the end of the day are discarded into the water being fished if they are not used. We need only consider the example of Loch Lomond to illustrate that point. Loch Lomond now supports a number of fish species that are new to the loch. One of those species, the ruff, is now the most common in the loch and is thought to pose a major threat to the loch's indigenous powan, which is an internationally renowned species of freshwater fish found in Loch Lomond and Loch Eck. The powan is listed in annex V of the habitats directive, so it is a fish that we want to protect.It is the Executive's strong view that the use of lures and dead fish, often marine species such as sprat or mackerel, gives anglers a range of different methods that provide a perfectly acceptable alternative to the use of live fish. There is no need to put biodiversity at risk. I remind the committee that support for the use of live vertebrates is a minority view. It is a powerful view and it is held with passion, but support for a ban was and continues to be widespread. I believe that the case for prohibition is compelling. Support for prohibition is clearly the view of the substantial majority of anglers and it was certainly the view of the committee at stage 1.As I have given a full explanation, I hope that members will feel informed about why we are doing this, the background to the proposal and the support for it that we have received from the angling community. I hope that, on that basis, amendment 9A will not be moved. I am happy to answer questions in the debate if members would like to raise other issues with me this morning.I move amendment 9.