Aljezur "demands" the Government to review the closure of sea bream fishing

Sea bream fishing season started on February 1st and ends on March 15th

The City Council of Aljezur “requires” that the ordinance defining the closure of sea bream fishing in Costa Vicentina and Southwest Alentejo be revised. To this end, the Municipality sent a communication to the Secretary of State for Nature Conservation, Forestry and Spatial Planning and to the Secretary of State for Fisheries «demanding the assessment of the ordinance».

The closed season for sea bream, which started on February 1st and ends on March 15th, is repeated every year since 2014.

In this communication sent to the secretaries of State responsible for the matter, the Chamber of Aljezur “recalls meetings and positions taken in the past, namely in a meeting held in Aljezur, with several responsible for these Secretariats of State, where the mayors of the councils of the Natural Park of Southwest Alentejo and Costa Vicentina and a group of recreational fishermen's representatives».

In the letter sent, the City Council asks "some questions about the ordinance in question and its effects, as well as the areas of prohibition to fishing, namely in the Rogil area".

The municipality wants to know, after six years, “how is the situation of the bream resource, what monitoring has been carried out and what results and data have been achieved?”.

The council, which considers that the bans "are maintained without, apparently, any scientific study to support and monitor them", also asks the secretaries of State "when will the ordinance be revoked?" and asks about the status of the «Project MarSW that could help to “conclude the need for a review of these boundaries and/or the creation of new no-go areas”».

In the communication, the Municipality of Aljezur emphasizes that “the feeling of injustice continues and worsens with the moment the country is passing through”, in particular “when fishing is an activity that is rooted in the culture of the people of these municipalities”. For all these reasons, it demands the reassessment and repeal of the ordinance.

 



Comments

Ads