Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Location
  1. I read in the article that the fishermen blame the low quotas, "the man" or anybody else. "The quotas are so low that we have to dump fish"... It does not sound to me like a statement made by someone who can be trusted to manage any resource.
  2. I see there are plenty of people here with more knowledge on this topic than me. I also see it stirs up some emotions, which I guess is a good thing. I just want to point out that this particular example does not have anything to do with bycatch. The boat threw out 78% of its catch. It has to do with getting the most cash for your catch. It has less to do with the rules. One might even think these guys would have dumped in a system with no quota just because it makes them more money towards the transport. When it comes to nationality russian and spanish ships don't have a great reputation here either. But in this case a shetlan boat caught fish in Norway, transported it to UK and dumped almost all of it... They think its fine to extract the resources in the Norwegian sector, but don't want to follow the rules those who belong there follow. It is my impression that shetlan fishermen have a positive reputation in Norway, but that could change.
  3. yes it is daft that a beurocrat hasn't banned dumping in the UK, but no beurocrat has told the fishermen to dump the fish. It is possible for people to think for themselves and not wait for a beurocrat to come up with some rule. (We complain about rules, but in examples where we are left without rules stupid things happen) It is the fishermen who decide to dump or not to dump. As an industry it is possible to reach agreements. Norwegian fishermen are not allowed to dump and still compete in the same market as these and still seem to make money... As for beurocrats who tell fishermen how much they can land I believe this example shows that some will stop at nothing for an increase of profit. Left unregulated the sea would soon be empty and my home town and Shetland would be among those who would suffer the most.
  4. I was shocked to see what a Shetland boat was up to on the news here in Norway. It had been fishing cod in the Norwegian sector and then proceeded to the British sector where it dumped 80% of its catch. Aparantly the fish were under 80cm so they wouldn't get a premium price. It is well known that cod is in a voulnerable state right now, but in any case this is just wrong. It is morally wrong and its just pissing in your own bed. This has been illegal in Norway since the eighties and the boat would have been arrested had it done it in the Norwegian sector. It is just calculated environmental criminality. The whole thing is very provocative, dissapointing and shocking. http://www1.nrk.no/nett-tv/nyheter/spill/verdi/66582 http://www.nrk.no/nyheter/distrikt/hordaland/1.6157006
  5. Does Shetland have a sail ship? Is there any ship on Shetland that could potentially represent the islands in the Tall Ship Race? Is there a sailing organisation in Shetland? Have any of the old sail freighters and similar been preserved in the islands?
  6. A similar project has just finished here in Norway where a 1500 year old boat was reconstructed using original methods. It is extraordinary in that the planks are sewn togeather with thread in stead of nails. In the Hardanger region of Hordaland county there is a live and rich boat building culture and one of the veterans there has done most of the work in cooperation with the Hardanger Fartøyvernsenter (Hardanger Ships Preservation Centre). Here are some links with nice pictures and one with some english text. http://www.fartoyvern.no/side.asp?ID=4442&kat=864&sp=1 http://home.online.no/~joeolavl/viking/halsnoybaaten.htm http://www.bt.no/lokalt/hordaland/article569811.ece
  7. The Danish subsidies to Faeroe and Greenland are most fitting as that country has enjoyed revenue from those places for centuries without giving anything back. Resources have been moved to Copenhagen for centuries in stead of being invested in local development. The Danish government has seen the need to right that wrong and assumed the moral responsibility for bringing G and F up to the same level.
  8. The web page www.tallshiprace.no is now preatty good even in English. I would just like to remind anyone planning to take their own boat over that you have to book a berth in the guest marina in advance. See http://www.tallshipsrace.no/artikkel.aspx?AId=132&back=1&MId1=48&MId2=51&sprak=engelsk
  9. Your theory falls down at the very first point, that being that cannabis has been used for thousands of years; quite likely long before alcohol was. . That cannabis is potentially harmful is not in question; smoking anything has got to be bad for you. Whether one can argue that it is more or less harmful than alcohol requires something a bit more solid than something one heard once, somewhere... (vague). Cannabis has not been used in the west for thousands of years. However it has been used in a religious context in many places of the world and in those instances it has been heavily regulated by the religion in question. It has also been used for medicinal purposes. It has not been free for all in those contexts and has not been used as a recreational drug. So to give those instances as a legitimisation for the recreational and habitual use of today is plain wrong. Wine and beer has been consumed as part of the standard diet since prehistoric times. A recent study found cannabis contained more toxic substances than tobacco smoke. It contained 20 times more ammonia, (a carcinogen), five times more hydrogen cyanide (which can cause heart disease) and nitrous oxides, (which can cause lung damage) than tobacco smoke. Cannabis use has been linked to exacerbating the effects of psychosis, schizophrenia, bronchitis, and emphysema by several peer-reviewed studies for those who are vulnerable to such illnesses based on personal or family history. In July 2007, British medical journal The Lancet published a study that indicates that cannabis users have, on average, a 41% greater risk of developing psychosis than non-users. The risk was most pronounced in cases with an existing risk of psychotic disorder, and was said to grow up to 200% for the most-frequent users. While the long term and heavy use of cannabis is not linked to the severe or grossly debilitating cerebral effects associated with chronic heavy alcohol abuse, it has been linked to more subtle impairment associated with memory, attention, and cognitive function. As for being vague I of course concede to that. Its not always easy to remember spesific names you see on TV. I just remeber that the "pro-cannabis" people I have seen or met are alway laymen and give statements such as "people have been smoking cannabis for centuries". While those giving opposing arguments are most often doctors or scientists giving arguments based on health and science. Maybe pro-cannabis scientists are afraid to go on TV, but I think the "burdon of proof" is on those who want to legalise a harmfull substance.
  10. Oh so many conspiracy theories!!! I have heard smoking cannabis might do that to you... I think you have to be very much in love with the stuff to deny that it is harmfull. It is popular to say that alchohol and cigarettes are more harmfull, but I've seen independant health scientists deny that. The bottom line is that if alchohol and cigarettes were to be introduced today they would be banned. Since they were introduced in less enlightened times they managed to become a part of mainstream culture and thus impossible to ban today. We wisened up to cannabis and other drugs in time to ban them and rightfully so.
  11. The pound has decreased by 2,5 % from february to march against the Norwegian krone. The sharpest drop since 1992. It is for the first time since 1996 below 10 NOK. I am not an economist, but I get that this might not be good news for Norwegian buisnesses exporting to the UK. But the bigger picture is perhaps that there might be something wrong with the UK economy.?. The US$ is also very low...Does anyone know more about this?
  12. What are they hoping to transport between Shetland and Kristiansund? Oil related stuff would of course be the first guess, but wouldn't a different port (Bergen for instance) be more viable? I know the point is that its going to be a route with calls in Norway, Shetland, (Scotland?) and the continent, but they have to have something to transport between each port to make it economic dont they? I hope the planners know something we don't here...
  13. Hasn't this been "coming soon" for a long time? And it seems to me that the port of call in Norway could do with some specifying...
  14. A replica of a Shetland house from the 1200s is being built at the UNESCO world heritage site Bryggen in Bergen. I presume it's a temporary construction, but its interseting to see old teckniques being used in the middle of a modern city. http://www.bt.no/webtv/?id=10442
  15. I believe Greeland is the only country to have ever left the EU as it joined as a part of Denmark (if i got it right) they voted agianst joining in the national EU referendum but still had to join at that point. After some years they were given Home Rule and decided to leave the EU while remain united with Denmark.
  • Create New...