Congratulations to Seal Scotland (Stop Scotland's Seals from being Killed), whose Face Book page has just passed the 12,000 Likes!

We understand that the traffic through the site exceeds several million, all in all getting the word out about Scotland's dirty secrets; the shooting of seals as a matter of "FIRST RESORT", not last resort as stated by Scottish Government officials and Scottish politicians.

To view Seal Scotland please follow the link below, -

1/2/12 14.15hrs PRESS RELEASE BY E-MAIL FROM:

John F. Robins, Campaigns Consultant, Animal Concern, http://www.animalconcern.com/

Scottish Government Minister accused of “telling fishy stories”.

Scottish Environment Secretary Richard Lochhead issued a statement today claiming that before being given a license to shoot seals; “Marine Scotland assess all applicants before granting a licence to ensure appropriate alternative deterrents are in place first.”. He went on to state “Appropriate non-lethal alternatives must be considered first, which may include tensioned and (sic) predator nets, acoustic deterrents and seal blinds, or a combination of these.”

John Robins, Campaigns Consultant to the pressure group Animal Concern and Secretary of the charity Save Our Seals Fund, states:
“Mr. Lochhead says that ‘Marine Scotland assess all applicants before granting a licence (to shoot seals)’. As far as I know Marine Scotland has visited few if any fish farms to see what seal deterrent measures are in place.”

“The Government still claim that shooting seals is a last resort despite it being revealed last year that only 20% of salmon farms have anti-predator nets in place, the vast majority failing to install this most basic method of protecting their salmon from the attention of seals. This is a breach of the Animal Health & Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006 which places a legal obligation on farmers to keep predators away from their stock.

Mr. Lochhead also claimed that in 2011, “For the first time it was made illegal to shoot a seal unless a licence has been granted under very strict conditions.” Mr. Robins says this statement is inaccurate. He states; “From 1970 until 2010 angling bodies needed a special license under the Conservation of Seals Act to shoot seals during the breeding seasons. That one sliver of protection which at least saved some seal pups from being orphaned and left to starve to death was removed under the new legislation brought in by the current government. Now the breeding seasons are ignored and mother seals can be killed leaving their babies to suffer a slow, cruel death.”

John Robins also casts doubts on the accuracy of figures given for the number of seals shot. Seals are shot by people employed by the fish farms, not by Government appointed marksmen. The shootings take place in very remote areas with no witnesses to verify the numbers shot. The Government relies on figures submitted by the shooters themselves to collate figures for the number of seals killed.

John Robins’ solution to the problem, which is also shared by many marine environmentalists; “Salmon farmers should be legally required to install and maintain high strength, tensioned external anti-predator nets to exclude seals from their farms. If a farmer claims that their farm site is not suitable for the use of anti-predator nets then that means the site is not suitable for a salmon farm. That would put an end to the fishy stories being spouted by Government Ministers who should not be defending seal-shooting fish farmers.”

More at:

ADRIFT! 12 X 30 metre cages stocked with salmon! (Estimated at £3 Million)

This story would be hard to make up, all at a time when the Scottish government appears to be “hell-bent” on expanding an industry that hardly meets the “sustainable” criteria!

Follow the timeline (details and links below):
24th Dec 12 X 30 metre cage structures adrift in the North Sea full of mature farmed salmon.
31st Dec HM Coastguard, “Call for Help”!
5th Jan Still Missing; “search and rescue helicopter covered up to 500 square miles”!
Date unknown: Being towed?
13th Jan (Friday) Tow Broken THREE TIMES; LOST for the SECOND TIME!

Apart from the danger imposed at sea and the raft of environment questions that normally accompany salmon farming, one HUGE question is, WHO will pick up the BILL for the Search And Rescue (SAR)? Scottish/British Tax-payers, the Company or its Norwegian Owners?

The cages belong to the Lakeland Group of Salmon Farms which hold the coveted; Label Rouge Award, adheres to the code of Good Practice for Scottish Finfish Aquaculture, laid down by the industries SSFO, RSPCA’s Freedom Food the farm assurance and food labelling scheme, and accredited by Certipaq, the French standard for smokers. Marine Farms ASA is listed on the Norwegian Stock Market.

As well as the time and safety for the crew and equipment of the helicopter SAR services in adverse weather conditions; the company is hoping that the Scottish government’s fish patrol aircraft will be able to find the cages. A Company spokesman stated, “The problem is these cages are not made for towing, they have no points to attach a towline.” In fact they are not made for a variety of things including keeping predators at bay nor escapes from the encaged fish.

Environmentalists have been calling for the cages to be fitted with double skinned anti predator nets for some time, with the second net mesh size of the same size as the holding net or one that is suitable not to kill additional wildlife: this has two major benefits; predators can’t get in and the fish can’t get out. This would make shooting of seals for example redundant and escaped farmed fish from potentially weakening wild salmon stocks.

These calls for “common sense” have fallen on deaf ears; the Scottish Government appears to be lead by the mainly Norwegian owned Salmon farm companies; excuses are mainly profit based.

LINKS:
31st  Dec

Salmon cages cause hazard for boats:"It is drifting around there so it is a threat to navigation."

5th Jan

Salmon cages still missing: A helicopter is now contributing to the search for the missing dozen large aquaculture cages full of salmon

Friday the 13th

THE HUGE salmon cages being towed to safety after being washed out to sea by the strong Christmas gales across Shetland have disappeared again.

The all new Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 is fast approaching its first full year of being “in-force”. Part Six of the Act covers seals in Scotland and the new license system for shooting them.

The Scottish Government states that Part Six of the Act “seeks to balance seal conservation with sustainable fisheries and aquaculture”, and states that, “an offence to kill or injure a seal except under licence or for welfare reasons”.

The Scottish Government on their website (see external link below) state, “A new seal licensing system, providing well regulated and monitored context for seal management (that term generally relies on shooting in Scotland) in Scotland”.

The Scottish Government website also states that, “Licensees are following the principle that seals only be shot as a ‘last resort’”. Marine Concern would suggest that the failure to fit double skinned anti predator nets, fully encompassing the holding nets (the vast majority do not), using a mesh size not to entrap other wildlife means that shooting is a FIRST RESORT, furthermore asks the question; who is checking?

Part of this new licensing system is that the numbers of seals being shot should be returned on a quarterly basis. The up to date figure listed on the Scottish Government website states, “information correct as the 31 July 2011”, in its first year it is already two quarters behind! (Thanks to Seal Scotland).

With the Scottish Common Seal population still in decline why is shooting taking place at all?

Please take the time to contact (details follow, including a copy and paste section) the Scottish government asking them why this legal requirement is so far behind?

Copy point:

I am informed that the new Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 under Part Six requires for quarterly returns on the numbers of seals being shot under licence in Scotland. Please could you explain why in Act’s first year these returns already appear to be six months behind?

With the Scottish Common Seal population still in decline why is shooting taking place at all?

Additionally, the Scottish Government website states, “seals are only shot as a last resort”, please could you provide evidence of the numbers of salmon farms that are utilising double skinned anti predator nets, those that fully encompass the holding nets, using a mesh size that will not entrap and prevent killing additional wildlife.

And Paste.

Please forward any replies to Marine Concern.

Please send the above or your own version to;
To:  Marine Scotland at
ceu@scotland.gsi.gov.uk
and a copy to the Minister at
scottish.ministers@scotland.gsi.gov.uk

Twelve large salmon cages, full of mature salmon have broken free in the North Sea. If these cages were stocked to their potential maximum more than half a million farmed salmon are now free to potentially contaminate wild stocks.

Responsible aquaculture? I think not, “A first”? I know not; I have watched two cages float happily along past my house, unaccompanied!
The Scottish Government appear to give the salmon industry just about everything they want; including, “presumption in favour of salmon farming”, in many areas during planning, it is my own opinion that SNH (advisors on the environment to government) appear to be “slow to nonexistent” in highlighting environmental issues of this kind.
According to recent press articles many of the people of Scotland do not want indiscriminate placing of salmon farms, especially when they are to end up in their backyard.

Potentially this could be a huge environmental problem, as well as a navigational one: one suggestion is to mark the cages so that their position is known to shipping and leave them to make their own way back to Norway; “Let Norway clean its own mess up”!
 

Gone in 60 seconds?

OBAN becomes infamous!

Now for something completely different; Oban hit the World's media by storm on Nov. 5th Bonfire Night...for all the wrong reasons: the entire firework display went up in a flash lasting almost one munite!

Computers were blamed!

BUT Not This Time!

Three weeks later and here is the proof that Oban CAN DO fireworks!! With just about every guest house booked and judging by the traffic around town afterwards the gaff paid off.

And just to prove that this was actually in Oban; Northern Lighthouse Board Pier hosting the extravaganza, in Oban Bay, even the rain kept away for the show, just!

Maybe they will write a book about it in the future, how a town became famous or infamous, so long as they don't call it "Gone in Sixty Seconds"!

More pictures please follow the link

The One Show (follow the link below, about 20 mins in) on BBC1, had great seal footage from Oban, and an interesting insight as to why common seals may be receiving horrendous “cork-screw” injuries.

Marine Concern reported here that the injuries resemble an Archimedes Screw type injury and again on For Argyll about one year ago, the same type of propeller system that is found in today’s large commercial ships, in bow thrusters, and Azimuth propulsion pods.

Very interesting development if proved to be true, that these ducted propellers sound similar to “sex-in-the-sea” for seals!

If it is ALIVE; STAY AWAY, for several reasons;
1, If it is a pup, its mother may be close by, out of sight but close by! Your intervention may result in the mother leaving the seal pup to die a long drawn out death of de-hydration and emaciation.
2, It might just bite you!
3, It is possible that it may have a disease, or other un-wanted hosts.
4, Be especially careful with dogs, both for the welfare of the seal and your dog!

If you can return within 24 hours, and it is still in the same position with no sign of mum, and looking disturbed, not well, thin and unable to fend for itself; please call the following:
• Scottish Marine Animal Stranding Hotline (SAC) 01463 243030
• Scottish Society for the Protection of Cruelty to Animals (SSPCA) 03000 999 999
• British Divers Marine Life Rescue (BDMLR) 01825 765 546 (out of hours: 07787 433412)

If it is dead
1, Does it have any sign of injury, bullet holes, smashed skull or gaping wounds?
Call the police
2, Does it have signs of mucus/bodily fluids discharging from its mouth and/or eyes?
Call the Scottish Agricultural Centre (Veterinary Investigation) on 01463 243 030
stranding@sac.co.uk

Provide Information: (take pictures on your phone or camera)
If you can please provide the following information:
What it is (if you know), and
how big it is,
Its location (add a GPS or Grid position if you can)
How fresh it is; very fresh could be mistaken for sleeping to decomposed, which could be air bloated, and smelly to a pile of bones.

REMEMBER: Seals, Cetaceans (whales, dolphins and porpoise) and Otters are WILD ANIMALS; when alive they can bite, when dead and partly decomposed they have been known to explode!

Marine Mammals may carry diseases which ARE TRANSFERABLE to HUMANS & DOGS!

They can be very heavy and may require experts to move them.
If you have handled any marine mammal dead or alive: WASH THOROUGHLY!

If it is not urgent you may prefer to contact Marine Concern who would be happy to pass on your information to the relevant authorities, and/or give you the information that you need. If you encounter problems whilst trying to report a dead marine animal or an animal in distress please contact Marine Concern.
Marine Concern is also interested to hear about any emergency issues on mobile 07768 924 841 or online at www.marineconcern.com where the website LINKS page has all of the contacts that you will need!                        

Thank you for taking the time to care!

With most global fisheries overfished or outside safe biological limits the idea of catching more live fish in order to feed caged salmon, beggar’s belief, especially when you consider the massive increases set to rise in Scotland’s salmon farming industry, to meet the new Chinese market.

With current conditions salmon farming in its present form cannot be sustainable. This is made worse by the “closed shop” nature of those within the industry, self regulating and effectively self policing. With a highly successful marketing method, pressures on government and politicians, change is unlikely anytime soon.

This is extremely worrying, especially when to you consider the massive increase in salmon production to satisfy the Chinese. New farms and an increase in production are likely to occur throughout the west coast of Scotland. This increase is likely to occur in areas where tourism is already a stronghold; an industry that relies upon Scotland’s natural beauty and varied wildlife.

For these reasons it is vitally important that new and/or increased production of salmon is done sympathetically with the local environment: the salmon farming industry is notorious for shooting seals; 1298 licensed to be shot this year, disturbing cetaceans’ acoustically, these are important feeding grounds for dolphin and porpoise, causing genetic problems to wild salmon and trout and treatments that can cause havoc to the food chain.

Irony: Eleven million pounds of tax payer’s money has been spent recently on upgrading the local sewage system (Seil Island), for around 150 houses, in order to improve water quality in local shellfish waters. Estimates suggest that the proposed increase in the salmon farm will produce an equivalent of 50,000 people’s worth of untreated sewage; that’s more than five times the amount produced by the nearest and largest town; Oban!

Up to 80% of migratory wild salmon and sea trout could potentially be killed by sea lice infestations. Declines in rod caught salmon already exceed 40% on Scotland’s west coast, where salmon farms are plentiful. Along Scotland’s east coast however, an area without salmon farms, has seen rod caught salmon increase by nearly a quarter.
Some of the pollution produced by salmon farms falls straight to the seabed; known as the "footprint", it should only be a small area around the cages. Unfortunately this is not always the case, and new legal requirements make lay-observations more difficult, you can view a seabed under a salmon farm here.

It doesn’t have to be this way; with profits around one million pounds per thousand tonnes of salmon per quarter, the industry can afford to be more environmentally sympathetic. With new technology farms can be positioned further out to sea, away from causing many of their associated problems, even inshore with correct spatial planning, away from know cetacean hot spots, away from known seal haul outs the problems can be reduced.

All public bodies have a statutory duty towards biodiversity and conservation. The onus is reversed here the “Polluter Pays Principle”, is in force, enshrined in the Precautionary Principle and the Habitats Directive. It is the responsibility of the appropriate authorities to ensure the future of protected habitats and species; currently this much needed protection has been in short supply.

The Ardmaddy site change is not an environmentally responsible application, and in order to counterbalance the indiscriminate placing of what will be countless salmon farms we must address these problems in all current planning applications, until that is relevant authorities pay proper attention to environmental concerns: please copy the text below the line, follow the external link (below) and paste on the Planning Department online form, or give your own comments to the Argyll and Bute Council Planning Department (link below), thank you!

 Deadline is close

Please copy from below this line and click on the "EXTERNAL LINK" below, just a few fields to complete, paste and send.

(N.B. The online form only allows 1000 characters) ------------------------------------------------------------

Ardmaddy Salmon Fish Farm Objections
Visual Impairment, outstanding natural area.
Proximity to Special Areas of Conservation combined with strong tidal flows, potential to cause an adverse effect; especially on wild salmonids, common and grey seals, and cetaceans.
Correct spatial planning reduces the need for anti-predator control measures.
Increased pollution from a massive increase in size.
“Medical” & lice treatments, causing adverse effect on the ecosystem.
Danger to navigation, a difficult passage constrained by numerous hazards and very strong tides.
Effects on local tourism.
Light & sound pollution.

If permission should be granted; Conditions to include:
Double-skinned anti-predator nets; with same mesh size, in order to avoid by-catch, act as “safety” net to escapees, and prevent predator problems.
No acoustic deterrents.
No seal shooting.
Reduced capacity & density.
Low visibility equipment.
Strict conditions on keeping site “clean”.

The Facebook page: Save Scotland’s Seals from being Killed has passed the 9000 “likes”. A terrific achievement in such a short time scale!

People being alerted to Scotland’s licensed killing of seals is growing as is their disgust of the treatment of one of Scotland’s iconic species, and an increasingly rarer species. People are also becoming aware of the misleading information being sent out by the Scottish Government much under the name of the Cabinet Secretary for the Environment.

Scotland’s main tourist industry body; Visit Scotland remains silent on the issue, letting down many of its members, yet still pictures of seals fill many pages in glossy tourist brochures.

People are more aware of this legalised atrocity than ever, more and more people are becoming increasingly angry with both the official responses and the act of needless killing of Scotland’s seals; especially as non-lethal anti-predation methods exist.

The Facebook page has already topped 9100 “likes”, and is still growing, although the term “like” is probably misleading in this context, why not check it out for yourself?
 

Once upon a time journalism was considered akin to investigative work not unlike that conducted by the police or private investigators; no longer so it appears following an article in the Scotsman on the 2nd July (link below).
On first reading or those more gullible amongst us will be left with the idea that Scotland’s grey seal population is growing as a result of “tighter rules on culling”.
Firstly on a scientific basis, receipt of the first quarter returns for licensed seal shooting is nowhere near enough time or evidence to base any report.
Secondly the grey seal population figures for the first quarter for 2011 are unlikely to be produced/available until next year, so please let’s have some real investigative journalism here; not just the latest government spin or what “they” would like you to believe is the case concerning seals in Scotland.

While we are on the subject; the Scottish Government is adamant that what is currently occurring in Scotland, the licensed shooting of 1298 seals during 2011 is not a “cull”. It appears that the word “cull” is seen as abhorrent to the tourist industry, and many people just won’t visit a Country known to be involved in animal “culls”, and good on them, the tide of public opinion is changing, not that Visit Scotland has had anything to do with it.

Now for some facts of what was purported in the Scotsman:
“FEWER seals are being shot in Scotland after the government introduced tighter rules.
Figures out yesterday show 80 shootings for the first three months of this year”.
“Fewer”, fewer than what, we simply don’t know what the previous numbers of seals being shot in either Scotland or the UK was, therefore we just can’t comment. What we do know is that in remote rural marine locations much can be done with few ever finding out; hearsay reports just in suggest that 100 seals were shot under license in the Tarbert area, possibly too recent to be included within the first quarter’s figures; we will be watching the second quarter with great interest!

Seal population figures can be found on the Sea Mammal Research Unit’s website; the numbers for the common seals is drastic, while the slowdown in grey seal pup production had slowed so much that the modelling methods used have had to be altered to account for the change. Incidentally this caused a virtual jump in numbers by some 40,000 “virtual” seals over night, not an actual increase!

“Seals can have an impact on important fishing areas and fish farms, but shooting the animals is a seen as a final resort”.
This is “old-hat” a view put forward time and time again, in an attempt to cover-up the years of our fisheries; overfishing, with little evidence to back it up. Seals eat fish, yes, but most of what they eat just isn’t on our menu, or on targeted fishing lists. A miniscule percent of seals actually target fish farms, and this number could be reduced further if only farms were positioned away from know seal colonies. If these farms were fitted with double skinned anti-predator nets of the same mesh size as the holding nets, seals would not be able to damage stocks, plus avoiding additional by-catch.

“Final resort” or “last resort” or even “absolute last resort”; this is the term used before a licence to shoot is supposedly granted...utter bunkum! Firstly if last resort meant what it says on the tin; why have the term absolute last resort? Secondly with fewer than 1 in 5 fish farms actually employing double skinned anti predator nets and positioning farms away from seal haul outs shooting cannot be or will ever be seen as “final resort”!

And as for the Cabinet Secretary Richard Lochhead’s numerous recent comments regarding seals, which have clearly been fed to him by government officials; please obtain the facts first; your government officials are making you a laughing stock! We would welcome the opportunity to present the facts, and give account of what is actually going on around our coast.
 

For the Scotsman article please follow the link below,-

The seal group set up on Facebook just a few months ago has already reached 8,500, fantasic effort by everyone!

Check it out for yourself, follow the link below,-

The following statements have been lifted recently from press releases, government sites and emails; can you spot the discrepancy?

* “This consultation ( the Scottish Government’s identification of seal hauls outs) continues the work of Scotland's first Marine Act, which we have put in place to protect and sustain Scotland's varied, unique and irreplaceable marine environment."

* “Harbour seals are declining around Scotland as a whole, for unknown reasons”

* “The current situation in Scotland is that 65 licences have been issued permitting the killing of 1,298 seals with no close season. This means that pregnant females as well as nursing mums can - and almost certainly have and will be shot”.

* “The sites for consultation covers at least 50 per cent of the common and grey seal populations in most areas”.

* “The sites cover around 3% of the Scottish coast and present an optimum balance between maximising protection of seals and minimising impact on other activities”.

Here we have a drastic situation where, in one case with the European sub-species of common seals face a drastic decline in numbers, and such a marked alteration in the reproduction rates of Globally important grey seals that the modelling/counting methods have had to be changed to account for the decline; and yet we still allow for the shooting and harassment of Scottish seals, why? 
 

The statements go on:
“The geographic spread of sites reflects the natural range of the two species of seal present in Scottish waters”.

Why then have the majority of seal haul out sites close to the west coast mainland been excluded? It is these sites that are vitally important for Scotland’s lucrative wildlife tourist industry, not forgetting the important seal colonies themselves.
 

“The sites being considered for designation will also include the 14 designated Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) for seals”.

This sounds far more powerful than it actually is; this government allows for and has now even licensed the shooting of 60 seals in and around one of these “protected” areas.
 

The Scottish Government states that it wants a “balance that does not impact other sustainable activities”, this would be greatly welcomed by environmental groups, but with this definition the government includes salmon farming: currently salmon farming under UK conditions is far from sustainable.
 

Elaine Murray, Member of the Scottish Parliament (MSP) for Dumfriesshire, stated that, “it seems to me to be contrary to the intention of the Act to protect only 50% of the common seal haul-out sites - especially when it's the population of common seals which is a cause for concern," We believe the figure of 50% to be greatly exaggerated, the actual protection is expected to be much lower.
 

Many NGO’s would agree with her comment, "We have no recollection, no discussion on limiting the number of haul-out sites covered by the harassment offence when this was being discussed during the passage of the Act."
 

The government state that, "A large number of the haul-out sites already sit within the existing Seal Conservation Areas and we intend to provide additional protection to these specific areas, so that seal colonies are not harassed”, again strong words, but don’t be fooled, the locations are few, and “Conservation Orders can be removed leaving vast areas with no protection at all.

As the Act implied at the start, if a seal is “hauled-out” (and they only have limited suitable haul-outs), then it should be protected from harassment; simple and a far cheaper method then is currently being consulted upon!
 

Although the consultation deadline looms, lobbying and asking the Scottish Ministers to review this absurd consultation is still valid, stating that;
 

“Seals need many and varied haul outs as part of their life cycle, depending upon their age, sex and pupping and moulting periods. The idea that “any rock”; just won’t do, many seals are very particular and from our observations return to the same haul out, even the same reef year in, year out. Seals even move between rocks, reefs and beaches according to the weather conditions, and suitable haul outs are in relative short supply”.
 

The consultation seeks stakeholder views on the overall list of sites and on individual sites on the list and the closing date is 21 June 2011.

Scottish Ministers will consider consultation responses before deciding on a final list for incorporation in an order to be presented to the Scottish Parliament later in 2011.

More details can be found at
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2011/03/22110341
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2011/03/22093944/0
 

A useful link follows:

 Support for seals in Scotland and the growing resentment in the way in which seals are treated, shot and harassed is now almost at 7000.

For a brief summary please follow the link below...

Unlike many other marine animals seals do not have a dedicated NGO or governing body for their protection, at Marine Concern we feel that this has had a detrimental effect on their wellbeing, welfare and whereabouts (including numbers).

The Scottish Seals Forum started with a three to one membership in favour of commercial industries, although now better, it is still at two to one: that's almost two members in favour of shooting and harassment rather than utilising non-lethal methods of anti-predation.
 

The Scottish Seals Forum has been involved with Moray Firth Special Area of Conservations, and instrumental in forging the Moray Firth Seal Management Scheme, which is now held as a countrywide scheme for adoption on how to deal with seals,- i.e. shooting.
 

The Scottish Government states shooting is as a "last resort", if this requirement meant what it said, why does do salmon farming and fishing industries use the term, "absolute last resort"? In short a term used to appease worried tourists.
 

The International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW), started from humble beginnings, and they helped us in fighting the EC ban on seal product imports. As you can see, by following the link below; Russia and Europe have altered their stance on killing seals, why not Canada and Scotland?
 

The supermarkets did so well with the plastic bag issue, why not the seals, especially when non-lethal methods exist?

The Scottish tourist industry has been non-existent during this seal "cull" debate, and don't let them kid you otherwise, this is a cull under licence!

For the latest seals issue in the Herald please follow the link:

Potentially, one of the most worrying acts of this Parliament:

Environmental campaigners have condemned the coalition's inclusion of all of Britain's 278 environmental laws in a list of "red tape" regulations considered by the public for the axe.

For the full report please follow the link, -
 

 Thanks to Ben Burville 

www.youtube.com/bburville  www.2020v.org  

The link below takes you to some great swimming with seals footage. This footage shows just how interactive and trusting seals can be. Watch carefully how the seals swim and move their flippers. By watching them closely I've noticed just how dexterous they can be, using individual digits with great precision.

Jodie Kidd heads out to the Farne Islands, off the Northumberland Coast, in search of grey seals. She is in luck. Plunging into the clear waters of the North Sea, Jodie enjoys some very close encounters with these beautiful animals.

 The following link and Facebook page has only been running for around 6 weeks and it has already attracted over 5000 "likes". Please check it out!

If you are a potential MSP please think about this in your election pledge; people love seals, and the anti killing movement is growing by the hour. what's more seals don't need to be killed, non-lethal anti-predator methods exist.

Seal Scotland is about to launch their website, details as soon as it goes live...

http://www.facebook.com/SealScotland

According to Marine Scotland’s website under the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010; with its new licensing system, fishermen, salmon farms, and salmon anglers are allowed to shoot between 1% to 3% of Scottish seals.

Seals by nature do not surround the entire coast, equi-distant apart; they tend to congregate in regular areas and haul-outs. Therefore it is misleading and inaccurate to use total national population figures against licences issued, convenient as it may be for the Scottish Government. It could be argued that the seals were here long before humans, and as the more intelligent species it is us who should position aquaculture installations away from known seal hot-spots, avoiding most conflicts.

Could this be an April Fool’s day prank on behalf of the Scottish Government? If you look into the figures provided by government sources and additional information supplied under the Freedom of Information Act combined with seal numbers, their location and where the licenses to shoot seals have been given; the actual figures are nearer 15% to 22% in some locations.

In fact matters get much worse; due to the way in which the licenses are worded around 60 or 70 seals could be shot in one area, having the potential to wiping out an entire colony. All this is under “self” regulation, who is going to know what is actually occurring in wild, remote marine areas?

The seal population in the Oban area simply can’t survive such a lethal onslaught, year in, year out. Repetitive requests by NGOs, and individuals are often meet with apparent complacency and little action. Even under the latest move of affording seals protection at their haul-outs has been watered down to “designated” (see news item 22nd March below) or previously listed haul-outs and to date many of these are well away from the important tourist locations.

There are over 20 tour boat operators covering the area, many yachtsmen, sea-kayakists and people who just love to watch the wildlife from the shore, and that includes watching the seals. Oban even boasts a Seal Sanctuary; but if nothing is done to stem this current licensing madness the only seals to be seen will be in the confines of the centre, or dead, washed up on local beaches.

By Request; to relist the following consultation, full details can be found in the story below headed:

Scottish Consultation: Where are Seal Haul-outs?
22 March 2011 (Full story, and links below).

Please send your information about seal haul-outs to Marine Concern via the "Enquiries & Contacts" page.

Scottish government consultation on identifying/designating seal haul-outs for added protection against harassment.

The press release coving this has gone live, it has just been covered on BBC Radio Shetland and an article can be found on the ForArgyll website by clicking on the link below.

The British people have long been recognised worldwide as “animal lovers”, even the World’s leaders in animal welfare. Why then has so little been done in the waters around our coast? Real protection in British waters is well under one percent, and well overdue.

John Muir is generally regarded as “The Father of our National Parks," he was born in Scotland, an environmentalist, but had to immigrate to America to achieve his goal; a forward thinking man as Scotland lags well behind the World in marine protection, even now.

More than one hundred years later, could things be changing? Scotland now has a Marine Act, still weak, but a Marine Act. Part of the Act enables Marine Protected Areas, not National Parks but they have the potential to be even better.

Scottish Environment LINK commissioned this scientific report (click link below) to inform and shape our position on the management of nature conservation MPAs. ‘Making the case for sound management of Marine Protected Areas’ has been independently produced by the Scottish Association of Marine Science (SAMS).

The next stage is down to government, politicians, and the people of Scotland; Many of Scotland’s unique ecosystems, and the animals that they hold may not be able to survive another hundred years!

A great study into Marine Reserves:

The following extracts make for some interesting reading the full online booklet can be found by clicking the link below:

Oceans around the world are heavily used. Human activities are altering ocean ecosystems beyond their natural range of variability. According to numerous scientific studies, habitats, fish, shellfish and other species are declining in many places. The changes are impairing the ocean’s capacity to provide food, protect livelihoods, maintain water quality and recover from environmental stress. These and other benefits, collectively called ecosystem services, depend on healthy ecosystems.

Marine reserves are defined as ocean or intertidal areas that are fully protected from activities that remove animals and seaweeds or alter habitats—such as fishing, aquaculture, dredging and mining—except as needed for scientific monitoring.

As of 2010, scientists have identified at least 5,800 marine protected areas (MPAs) globally. They cover some 4.2 million square kilometres, or approximately 1.2% of the ocean. However, only a small proportion of these MPAs are marine reserves, covering approximately 0.1% of the ocean.

Some Marine Reserves found that;
Biomass, or the total weight of animals and seaweeds, increased an average of 251%.
Density, or the number of seaweeds or animals in a given area, increased an average of 121%.
Body size of animals increased an average of 13%.
Species diversity, or the number of species, increased an average of 19% in the sample area.
Heavily fished species often showed the most dramatic increases. Some fished species had more
than 10 times higher biomass or density inside marine reserves.

Most European reserves are quite small. Half of the reserves in Europe cover less than 1.8 square kilometres.

Lessons Learned
• Lobsters are 5 times more abundant and 9% larger within Lundy marine reserve compared to fished areas.
• Increases in lobster numbers and sizes occurred at a rapid rate.
• Over time, more lobsters of larger sizes inside a reserve may lead to increased lobster catches in surrounding fished areas, as they did in a Spanish marine reserve.

Lessons Learned
• MPAs that prohibit trawling and dredging can have positive effects on target species and habitats.
• After 14 years of protection, scallop density was 8 times greater and biomass was 11 times higher
inside a fishing closure than in nearby fished areas.

Much More than just Ecosystems; More Money to the Local Economy!
An example, a survey of 12 southern European reserves found that 54 jobs were created per reserve and that commercial fishing around reserves generated €720,000 to local economies per year, on average. Alternative income opportunities can result from increases in local tourism. Some marine reserves draw sightseers, kayakers, scuba divers and other tourists, who add money to the local economy.

This taster is cited from, - Partnership for Interdisciplinary Studies of Coastal Oceans. 2011. The Science of Marine Reserves (2nd Edition, Europe). www.piscoweb.org. 22 pages

To find out more the full report can be acccessed by following the link
 

This and the following two news items cover important issues for Scottish Seals; please read on and if you can a few seconds of your time could just help Scottish seals, please pass this on!

With modern technology why shoot seals at all?
Cetaceans (whales, dolphins and porpoise) are afforded protection under many International and domestic laws; why not seals?

British seal populations are currently either stable or in decline; so massive in some areas the decline is 67%! So why do we still allow for the shooting of seals, especially when they are an important part of the Scottish wildlife tourist industry.

Politicians and Scottish Ministers, repeatedly told us that seals WOULD BE PROVIDED WITH MORE PROTECTION under the new Marine (Scotland) Act 2010; was this nothing more than “Political Jiggery” with words? Or simply bowing down to immense pressure from the fishing associations, salmon farming industry and salmon anglers?

Scottish Government have licensed the unnecessary killing of 1300 seals, the Act states “effectiveness of non-lethal methods of preventing seal damage”; the use of double skinned (the second net being of the same mesh size to that of the first), will all but eliminate the problem, in addition it will reduce the possibility of fish farm escapees, not entrap any further animals: a win-win-win situation! But so few of Scottish salmon farms use double skinned anti-predator nets while it remains cheaper to kill and/or harass the seals.

Once again Scottish seals face a growing problem; the industry has just gained a Chinese contract to supply salmon to China; great for the Scottish economy but not so good under current situation for Scottish seals and the Scottish tourist industry. It can be good for both industries and the seals with just a little forethought; double skinned anti-predator nets with salmon farms situated away from known seal haul-outs.

The government guidelines are specific, “BEFORE GRANTING A LICENCE”; MUST HAVE REGARD TO PREVIOUS DAMAGE, AND EFFECTIVENESS OF NON-LETHAL METHODS”, if methods are ineffective they should try the next level or simply install double skinned nets from the outset! We feel that the government has failed to follow its own guidelines, we don’t know why; but we must act to try to get these licenses rescinded and the cull stopped, and YES this is a CULL of Scottish seals, it’s just that it is licensed.

A suggested text for an email can be found below, please copy that or use your own words.

2. Ask for “Seal Friendly Salmon”, where seals have not been shot during its production, and tell the supermarkets why.
3. Please forward this to all your friends who may be interested.

This is a simple problem with a simple solution one which will not damage the industry but will protect our wildlife and will create jobs in eco-tourism.

Suggested Text for email to MSP

Dear..................

I am very concerned about the unnecessary killing of seals mainly by salmon farmers. Licenses have been issued to shoot 1300 seals, in addition to this number, seal pups will also starve to death as shooting maybe allowed in the breeding season. More than three quarters of the farms which have been licensed to shoot seals do not have double nets and are therefore not following the Marine Act guidelines of only shooting seals as "a last resort". Please ask the government to rescind licenses to farms which do not have double nets. Double nets would keep seals and salmon separated, stop farmed salmon escaping and save many seals which are an iconic Scottish species and are important to the tourism industry.
Please support the seal cull motion *S3M-8027 Robin Harper:Seal Culls.

yours........

If you live outside of Scotland, why not write to your MP or your nearest British Embassy, The First Minister, and/or the Prime Minster, sending a copy to the Minsters for the Environment; telling them politely what you think of this Scottish/British policy. Depending on how you feel you could suggest boycotting Scotland as a holiday destination or that you will consider not buying Scottish exports while this “cull of seals”, behind authorised legislation continues; currently, in just about all sales; if you buy Scottish farmed salmon you are paying for bullets to kill Scottish seals. 

Contact details for your MSPs can be found here:

Scottish government consultation on identifying/designating seal haul-outs for added protection against harassment.

Marine Scotland has sent out details for a new consultation coving the designation of seal haul–outs (an important part of a seals life-cycle, for resting, pupping, moulting and seal interaction), details below. Marine Concern and others feel that it is important to respond to this consultation as information “on the ground” is vital to the future protection of these important seal haul-out sites.

If you have any information regarding seal haul-outs please respond both to Marine Scotland and to Marine Concern how are coordinating a collective response to the Scottish government (Marine Scotland). Some people have already commented, “Keep them secrete or them will become targets”; a good point, but in reality most sites are already well known to those that want to shoot, club and kill and harass by any methods possible, it is hoped that this new Act may, give further protection to Scotland’s seals.

DETAILS: Consultation on Seal Haul-Out Sites 25/3/11 to 21/06/11
The Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 (the Act) provides for Scottish Ministers, after consulting the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC), to designate haul-out sites, which are considered suitable to protect seals from harassment, through an order in the Scottish Parliament. The full report can be downloaded here.

Contact: Andrew Kent; please copy to Marine Concern
Address: Marine Scotland 1A(S) Victoria Quay Edinburgh, EH6 6QQ
Email: andrew.kent@scotland.gsi.gov.uk
Telephone: 01312447929

SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT MOTION: SEAL CULLS

The Scottish government (Marine Scotland) has just authorised the shooting of 1300 seals in Scotland for 2011 under license, we feel that current conditions of these licenses go against the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 wording; a, “damage which seals have already done”, and “effectiveness of non-lethal alternative methods of preventing seal damage” (Marine (Scotland) Act 2010. Section 110(2)-(a) & (b)

*S3M-8027 Robin Harper: Seal Culls—That the Parliament notes that the Scottish Government has just issued licences to shoot up to 1,300 seals in 2011 where it is considered that they present a threat to fish farms; recalls that, under the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010, culling to control seals is a solution of last resort; considers that 80% of fish farms have not complied with guidance to the effect that non-lethal methods of controlling seals, including acoustic warnings, precautionary siting and double netting, should be employed if there is a danger of seal predation, and urges the Scottish Government to include current advice in regulation in order to reduce the perceived requirement for shooting licences and to consider producing a long-term plan to introduce closed containment for all fish farming activities in Scotland, whether land or sea based.

Business Bulletin No. 33/2011: Tuesday 1 March 2011
http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/businessBulletin/bb-11/bb-03-01f.htm
If you live in Scotland please email your MSPs (you can find them by clicking on this link) http://www.writetothem.com/ Ask them to bring pressure on the government to rescind these licenses. Also please ask them to support the Scottish motion put forward by Robin Harper MSP, one last thing; please pass this on!

Contact details for Parliamentary Members, -

The latest squirm by the Scottish/UK Authorities, in order to get out of trouble with the EC:

Hebridean Partnership has long been stating that the Lismore Special Area of Conservation (SAC), designated for seals is being adversely effected by the practices of Scottish Sea Farms, a Norwegian owned company.

The Lismore seal SAC, even has its own “Working Group” where the numbers of seal shooting are discussed with Scottish Natural Heritage, further more the name seal has been removed from its title and environmental groups like this one are refused access. The EC has informed us that during the time of the first complaint 50 seals were shot; this is only one of three protected areas for common seals throughout the entire Scottish west coast. Now they only shoot between 10 to 20 seals, or so we are told!

The Northwest Part of the Lismore SAC

Not happy, not even given the reasons stated by the Scottish/UK Authorities for the case closure of our original complaint to the EC, Hebridean Partnership still witnessing the low numbers and close proximity of the floating fish farm structures within the Lismore SAC submitted a further complaint.

How have the Scottish/UK Authorities wriggled out of it this time...by stating that the fish farm is not within the SAC...Have a look at the following pictures; you decide!

A Protected Islet for Seals + The Salmon Farm

These pictures have already been sent to the EC, they have now been sent direct to the Commissioner for the Environment...Let’s see how the Scottish/UK Authorities get out of this one!

Close-up of the Protected Islet NW Lismore SAC 

The closest floating structure (a diesel generator) is approx. 20 meters from the protected seal haul-out. The delineated section shown in the map provided by the Scottish Ministers in 2005 places the boundary of this part of the SAC at approx: 250-300 meters from the lslet!

For a scale comparison the lslet is about 150 meters wide, 450 meters long.

We will let you know what the EC thinks of this blatant fudging of facts by the Scottish/UK Authorities, as soon as we hear back from them.

Fish discards is probably one of the biggest scandals in modern day history; while much of the World is starving or living on the poverty line countries of the European Union are throwing away good edible fish, and lots of it.

The latest news from the EC is that they are setting out ideas which will end fish discards. The EC Commissioner Maria Damanaki said, "We cannot go on with business as usual. This is something we could afford when we had healthy stocks; but now, when stocks are declining, nobody can justify that we take fish and because of our policy we force people to throw it back. This is unacceptable, and we have to abandon discarding."

A good step forward but still somewhat worrying with the inclusion of, “something (discards) we could afford when we had healthy stocks”; when should killing, and throwing away of any good resource ever be accounted as “could afford”?

The Scottish Fishing Federation has responded with, “A discards ban amounts to a draconian step too far”. Fishing association representatives appear to like this word “Draconian”, it was used in a meeting trying to protect a vulnerable biogenic reef in a small west coast loch from scallop dredgers...” How draconian to attempt to close a tiny area in order to protect something or indeed anything it seems.

Celebrity chef Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall, raised the issues followed by a week long coverage on Channel Four TV.  A petition against discards, wanting to; "stop this unacceptable and shameful practice" attracted over 650,000 signatures. Again the fishing associations insisted on their input and Bertie Armstrong, of the Scottish Fishermen's Federation, said the petition and the associated Fish Fight TV campaign had over-simplified the issue.

Fisheries quotas, discards, black catch is a highly complex subject; the weeks TV coverage was portrayed in such a way that the general masses could understand them and it appeared to work and it most certainly got the message across, with a change in peoples buying of fish; an increase in the more unusual and a decline in the big three; cod, salmon and tuna.

Commissioner Damanaki suggests:

• controlling "fishing effort", by limiting the amount of time boats can spend at sea and the places where they can fish
• counting all fish landed against quotas
• closing "mixed fisheries" when the maximum quota of one species in it has been caught
• expanding the use of CCTV, observers, electronic logbooks and monitoring of ports

Another worrying comment was, "The long-term aim is to enable fishermen to land more fish, not less." A somewhat more precautionary approach may have been preferable, and without the introduction of “No-Take-Zones” it is unlikely to be achieved in our lifetime. Even now with all of the media attention some politicians appear to be in denial.

The facts remain, Global fisheries in general are in a poor state, past attempts by governments and fishermen’s associations have failed; it’s now up to the people to vote with what they buy and the supermarkets to provide truly sustainable products, with information on how, and where fish were caught.

Until then; EU boats in the North Sea will still have to throw away up to half of what they catch to stay within their quotas!

The following link will take you to the BBC's article: 

Scotland now has a Marine Act in place, Scottish Ministers and government officials stated that seals would have far better protection than before (not difficult under the Conservation of Seals Act only one prosecution was made in 40 years; it effectively allowed open season on seals); it is now emerging that the maximum number of seals granted permission to be shot is 984 grey and 314 common seals, a far greater number than the Scottish Salmon Organisation stated that its members shot every year.

This raises various points: marine wildlife is a public resource, why does this government take it on itself to make this imposition on us? Especially when even the government figures for common seal population of 19,800 is at a low, and with grey seal population of 186,000, which represents around 40% of the World total, in addition to this species identification is difficult whilst at sea, especially when young and females of both species are together. Previously it was understood that around 300 people were engaged in shooting seals, licences granted at present is 65; in remote and rural marine areas who and how is anyone going to know different?

What is worse government and its agencies appear to endorse the use of acoustic deterrents even though their success rates is doubtful and rarely if at all does the Scottish government insist upon the use of full tensioned double skinned anti-predator nets which when the mesh size is the same as the containment net would account for no more by-catch than the original net. As the new requirement with oil tankers which now need to be “double skinned” a salmon farm fitted with a “double skin” would reduce escapees, thereby reducing the associated genetic modification of wild salmon, reduce stress on fish from predators (a requirement under the Welfare Act) and just about eliminate seal predation.

Some of the NGOs campaigning for the protection of seals during the Marine Act stated that the new act would effectively legitimise the killing of seals around our coastline; what is particularly worrying is that some of the new licences allow for the killing of pregnant and lactating seals. The next most worrying aspect of the new licensing scheme is that figures are derived from what is called PBR; Permitted Biological Removal. The PBR is derived from figures given by a scientific body funded by government sources...it’s all too close for comfort; if we witnessed this in a distant Country we would be thinking corrupt and unaccountable.

While my personal view is that this is not corrupt in this country; I strongly feel that this government and at least one of its agencies work a little too closely to the related industries for the bigger objective to be taken into account; that of true sustainability across the board, industries and environment.

Matters will only get worse now that the Norwegian owned Scottish salmon industry is to expand into the Chinese markets; ironic considering China pulled out of Norway over a political spat! Or anotherway of looking at it; 1,300 seals to be shot in return for two pandas, hardly a balanced equation.

The report states that any members of the public seeing anyone shooting or killing seals should contact the local police who can investigate the circumstances. This is going to be difficult as the conditions state that the shooter should not kill any seals when the public are present, hardly an open admission of a rightful process.

For the first time each seal licence will specify that carcases should be recovered, wherever possible, and reported to the Scottish Strandings Scheme, this should mean that we will no longer have the bodies washed up upon our beaches for visitor and children to witness...we’ll see.

The report can be seen on the Scottish government website:
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/marine/Licensing/SealLicensing/FAQs

Or simply click on the link below.

Lismore is a small island just northwest of the town of Oban of the Scottish west coast. It is one of just three Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) for Common Seals on the west coast of Scotland; a colossal sea area. Despite a massive decline in the Common Seal population in the UK over the last ten years the government and its agencies appear to be highly reluctant to address the underlying problems.

The Lismore Seal Special Area of Conservation is afforded protection under the European Commission’s Habitats Directive. The Hebridean Partnership submitted a successful complaint regarding several SACs in the past including the Lismore SAC, the EC issued a Letter of Formal Notice to the UK government for its failure to fulfil its obligations under the Habitats Directive.

The problems facing the Lismore SAC and the seals still exist; a salmon farm with floating structures approximately 20m from the protected seal haul-out, debris on the shore and continuous harassment. The farm state that they have not shot any seals over a two year period, it will be interesting to see if Norwegian owned Scottish Sea Farms apply for licences to shoot seals under the new Marine (Scotland) Act 2010.

As a result of “no change” and apparently “no requirement” from Scottish Relevant Authorities to protect the seals in the Lismore Seal SAC, Hebridean Partnership has submitted a further complaint to Janez Potočnik, European Commissioner for the Environment.

The Sea Mammal Research Unit (SMRU) undertakes annual counts on behalf of the government funded National Environment Research Council; the published decline in the population of Common Seals is “dramatic”, nearly one third of the population between 2002 -2008. The latest figures produced by SMRU for 2009 show a significant increase in the Lismore seal population; a time when the salmon farm was left “fallow” or dormant.

Hebridean Partnerhip put this fact forward as unequivocal proof that the salmon farm has an adverse affect on the seals, the requirement within the Habitats Directive states: “No Adverse Affect”. The Scottish government however, stated possible causes of Orca or competition from Grey Seals for the decline. Observations locally suggest that Orca sightings in this inner protected area are just about nonexistent and there are very few Grey Seals to offer any “competition”.
 

 Have you tried out the all new

Weather & Tides

portal?

Why not add a short cut to Marine Concern on your computer,

for easy and quick updates. Please pass it on!

Please ensure that you have the up-to-date information.

Marine Concern cannot be held responsible for any errors.

Return to the Home page.