Fishermen Fight for Their Future: The Crawfish Tangle Net Ban Debate

Oireachtas Joint Committee on Fisheries and Maritime Affairs,

The future of Ireland’s Crawfish tangle net fishery was the subject of a charged and at times deeply personal debate at the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Fisheries and Maritime Affairs. Fishermen, scientists, Department officials and conservation experts came together to examine a Marine Institute report raising serious concerns about by-catch of protected and endangered species in the south-west coast Crawfish fishery.

What emerged was a picture of an industry already on its knees, whose members are now being asked to absorb yet another blow  and who came to the committee not with grievances alone, but with a detailed set of proposals they say can solve the problem without destroying their livelihoods.

A Fishery Under the Microscope

Crawfish or Crayfish, also known as spiny lobster, is among the most valuable species caught by the Irish inshore fleet. According to Marine Institute scientist Dr Oliver Tully, it is twice as valuable per unit weight as lobster and fifteen times the value of crab. Landings were estimated at €3 million in 2024, and the number of vessels targeting Crawfish with tangle nets has grown considerably since 2020, particularly as fishermen have lost access to other species.

The fishery is centred on the south-west coast, with significant activity in Tralee Bay and Dingle Bay in north Kerry. Tangle nets, large mesh nets that allow fish to become lightly caught rather than fully meshed, are the dominant gear type. The Marine Institute’s most recent monitoring project, running from 2021 to 2024 and involving direct observation of some 800 fishing trips, found that significant numbers of protected and critically endangered species are being caught as by-catch, including angel shark, flapper skate, grey seal and tope shark.

It was these findings that brought the committee together. But while scientists and conservationists warned of urgent action being needed, the fishermen who participated in the very study that produced those findings arrived with a different message: they already have solutions, they have had them for nearly a year, and they are frustrated that no management plan has yet been put in place.

The Fishermen’s Case: Proactive, Not Reactive

The tone from the fishing representatives was clear from the outset. Michael Desmond of the National Inshore Fisherman’s Association (NIFA) stated bluntly: “Closure is not management; it is what happens when management fails.” Edward Moore a fourth-generation fisherman with over 40 years in the Crawfish fishery, made the point that the management proposals now on the table originated with fishermen themselves, nearly a year before the Marine Institute’s report was published.

“Fishermen have been proactive rather than reactive,” Moore told the committee. “This proposal has come out prior to any reports being launched. Fishermen are looking for management to be brought in here.”

Eamon Dixon of the National Inshore Fisheries Forum (NIFF) confirmed that a management proposal has been circulating among all the regional forums and is close to being finalised. The core of the proposal involves a four-month closed season running from 15 December to 2 April, which fishermen themselves described as “a substantial amount of a season that is actually closed.” Beyond the closed season, the proposals presented to the committee included controlled soak times, reduced overall fishing effort, gear modification, V-notching of berried Crawfish, development of pot fishery options, and continuing onboard monitoring with funding support directed at fishermen.

Moore was emphatic about the significance of soak time, the length of time nets remain in the water before being hauled. “In my opinion, as a person who has been involved in this fishery since its beginning and has been 40-odd years at it, both pot fishery and the net fishery, soak time is key to any solution to any problem with tangle net fisheries,” he said. He added that his own data from the survey showed zero by-catch when soak time was properly controlled, a claim that Dr Tully did not dispute when pressed by Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn.

Challenging the Science: Fishermen Push Back on the Report

While fishermen were willing to engage constructively, they were also sharply critical of how the Marine Institute’s findings were presented and characterised in public. John Menarry of NIFA pointed out that the report uses the word “possibly” or similar qualifying language numerous times and noted that the report itself carries a disclaimer stating the Marine Institute does not accept responsibility for loss occasioned as a result of the publication. “If there are 78 estimates in a report, where are the facts in that? That is not science,” Desmond argued.

Fishermen also took issue with the classification of tope shark as critically endangered. Menarry and Desmond pointed out that tope are not listed as endangered in the north-east Atlantic, the precise area being discussed, a fact acknowledged in the Marine Institute’s own report but, they argued, glossed over in public commentary. Dr Nicholas Payne of Trinity College clarified that the critically endangered classification applies globally, and that Ireland represents one of the last strongholds for such species — an argument the fishermen did not entirely reject but felt was being used selectively.

Desmond questioned why the report showed an estimate of zero angel sharks in 2021 but 56 in 2022. “How could something go from zero to 56?” he asked. Hennessy, one of the fishermen who participated in the trial and who tagged two angel sharks himself, the first such tagging in Ireland, offered a partial explanation, noting that three-quarters of the angel sharks he ever caught were taken in March, suggesting a seasonal closed period would address much of the problem. Scientists explained the year-to-year variation as natural patchiness typical of rare species, but the exchange illustrated the deep mistrust of raw data being turned into what fishermen felt were alarming headlines.

Fishermen also stressed that the design of tangle nets actively keeps Crawfish alive — a dead Crawfish has no commercial value and that the vast majority of by-catch species are released alive. Desmond stated that approximately 95 per cent of by-catch is released living, a fact he argued is absent from monitoring reports. He also highlighted that the grey seal population in Ireland has increased by around 190 per cent since 2003 according to a 2024 aerial survey, challenging the narrative that the species is under existential threat from fishing activity.

The Bigger Picture: A Fleet With Nowhere Left to Go

Perhaps the most powerful argument made by fishing representatives was contextual. Fishermen explained that the rise in Crawfish tangle net activity since 2020 is a direct consequence of closures and restrictions in other fisheries. When the pollack fishery was closed, vessels moved to Crawfish. When mackerel and herring quotas were cut, inshore fishermen had nowhere else to turn. As Gus O’Donovan put it, “Every other opportunity is gone. Now we have a fishery that does not use pots. It uses another form of low-impact gear with a big mesh. It does not kill any juvenile fish, is soft on the seabed and does not cause any damage to the seafloor, yet that method of fishing is being demonised. If it is banned, the result will be that more operators will be pushed into crab, lobster and shrimp and move effort from one place to another. It will not fix anything.”

Dixon made the same point from a different angle, noting that the entire inshore sector has effectively been squeezed into competing for a shrinking pool of shellfish. Menarry called on the committee to consider a practical alternative to fisheries restrictions: “If people here want to take pressure off the Crawfish, it can be done at the stroke of a pen. We have lost access to fisheries and national quota. Give us back what we had and that will immediately take pressure off fisheries.”

Moore highlighted that the Crawfish fishery was never in difficulty when fishermen had access to a broad range of species. The intensive year-round use of tangle nets is a symptom, he argued, not a cause. Several fishermen noted that inshore communities have already accepted significant voluntary reductions in recent months, including a proposed 10mm increase in the minimum landing size for brown crab that would cut their landings by 20 per cent. “At the moment, we cannot take any more cuts,” Menarry said.

Trial by Social Media and the Human Cost

One of the most striking contributions of the session came from Moore, who described the social media campaign that has surrounded the Marine Institute report. On the same day he and his son spent over four hours in freezing water up to their chests helping return stranded dolphins to the sea, a post appeared on Facebook accusing fishermen of killing dolphins and calling for a ban on tangle nets. “This is not fair on fishermen. We would not be having this discussion if fishermen were not in this room,” he told the committee.

Moore also drew attention to the young fishermen present in the public gallery, ranging in age from 21 to 30. “I am not here fighting or arguing for myself and nor is anyone else. Members can see the age of the people who are here. It is for these young people here that we are trying to create a future.”

The Path Forward: A Provisional Agreement

Despite the tensions, the session ended with some cautious optimism. Deputy David Maxwell proposed that both sides be given time to work through the eight fishermen’s proposals, with the committee reconvening in approximately four months, provisionally set for July, to assess progress. Department official Carol Forrest confirmed her team had not yet seen the full set of proposals but was open to reviewing them through the established process involving the inshore marine group, the Marine Institute and the Sea-Fisheries Protection Authority.

Dr Payne, whose initial contributions had emphasised urgency around critically endangered species, struck a notably constructive tone in closing, acknowledging that “fishermen are not the problem here” and expressing support for income stabilisation measures, broader quota equity and the opening up of species such as bluefin tuna to Irish fishing communities. “Our frustration is not with the fishing community, because it is not the problem; it is over the lack of progress by the Government, particularly in supporting a transition to more sustainable practices,” he said.

For the fishermen, the message leaving the committee room was consistent: they are willing to manage, willing to restrict, willing to change — but they cannot be asked to disappear. As Moore put it in his closing remarks: “I believe this whole issue can be resolved quite quickly if people are prepared to sit down in a room or wherever they want to go and discuss this. They will find that fishermen will not be found wanting.”