'It will be the beginning of the end' - Boston fishing fleet voice concern over planned changes to how their work is regulated as 30-year-old Government order comes to an end

The Boston Fishermen’s Association fears the proposals, once implemented, will be ‘the beginning of the end’ of the industry locally.

Since 1992, cockle and mussel fisheries in The Wash have been managed by the Wash Fishery Order (WFO). The order carried a 30-year lifespan and on Wednesday it expired.

The Eastern Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authority (IFCA) – one of 10 regulators that seek to protect the marine inshore environment around the coasts of England – has been planning to replace the order with a byelaw. This, it argues will: be capable of managing fisheries in a similar way as a regulating order; enable it to be more responsive in managing the fisheries over time; and provide a flexible management tool that will sustain in the long-term.

The Boston Fishermen’s Association is opposed to the introduction of a byelaw, however, saying it does not offer the ‘stabilty and continuity’ of an order, which comes with a lengthy fixed term and ministerial oversight to any changes that are made to it.

“How can fishers invest in their businesses if they don’t know if they will be able to work the following year?” a spokesman said.

“The fishers have told Eastern IFCA for more than two years that they not only want but need a new regulating order, not a byelaw,” they continued. “The majority of fishers truly believe when the new byelaw is in it will be the beginning of the end for the fishing industry in The Wash.”

The association is also critical that a replacement to the order has not been put in place before it expired, saying it has ‘left an industry hanging’.

In lieu of a replacement, the Eastern IFCA has temporarily closed The Wash cockle and mussel fisheries, but is allowing relevant parties to continue to operate as before, for now.

A spokesman said: “In simple terms, under these arrangements the authority is continuing to manage the cockle and mussel fisheries as it did under the WFO until the new management arrangements come into effect. From the fishing industry’s perspective this has been seamless as written authorisations were issued proactively to existing ‘entitlement’ holders with a current licence and to lay lease holders as the closure came into effect.”

They said ‘every effort’ was made to get the byelaw in place in time, but a ‘multitude of factors’, such as extended consultations with industry and their professional representatives, led to delays.

In relation to the byelaw, they said: “From the authority’s perspective, the WFO was outdated and flawed and so a like-for-like replacement was not desirable. Because the byelaw-making powers for IFCAs are wider than those of the previous Eastern Sea Fisheries Joint Committee, which introduced the WFO, it was apparent that a byelaw could achieve the same as a regulating order.

“Overall, a byelaw was considered as the most appropriate means of managing the fisheries as it can better reflect the duties and obligations of the authority as well as the evolving needs of the fisheries, the environment and those who rely on them.”

It noted that consultation with the industry would form part of any byelaw change.