Jersey Unreported Judgments

 2002/81

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

 

19^th April 2002

 

 

The Attorney General

-v-

Marc Grandmougin

Dominique Pascal Ferrantim

 

Marc Grandmougin

 

1 Count of	contravening Article 6(1) of the Sea Fisheries (Jersey) Law 1994, by retaining in his possession spider crabs of a smaller size than prescribed, whilst the master of a fishing boat in Jersey territorial waters (count 1);
1 count of:	contravening Regulation 5(3) of the Sea Fisheries (Trawling, Netting and Dredging) (Jersey) Regulations 2001, by retaining on board sea fish, other than bi-valve molluscs, exceeding 5% of the total weight of sea fish whilst using dredges and whilst master of a fishing boat in Jersey territorial waters (Count 2).

 

 

Age:

29        

 

Plea:    Facts admitted.

 

Details of Offence:

The Agriculture and Fisheries' patrol vessel, Norman Le Brocq, was conducting a routine patrol of Island waters when it came across the St Malo registered stern trawler, Jade II, which was in the course of dredging.  Officers boarded Jade II to make a routine inspection of their catch.

On deck were a large number of sacks containing scallops and a large tank containing a quantity of spider crabs. The Fisheries Officers formed the opinion that if these were the only fish on board the vessel and it was using dredges, then it was likely to be in breach of the Regulation stipulating that if dredges are being used, it is prohibited to retain onboard sea fish, not being bi-valve molluscs, exceeding 5% of the total weight of sea fish on board. On examination of the spider crabs in the tank, some were found to be smaller that the minimum legal size.

The Master of Jade II, GRANDMOUGIN, was asked to produce and complete the vessel's fishing log-book. This confirmed that the vessel was operating 12 dredges and had on board 19 kg of fish, 450 kg of scallops and 600 kg of spider crab. GRANDMOUGIN was cautioned that he was in breach of the 5% by-catch rule. Although he made no reply, he appeared surprised at the 5% by-catch regulation. GRANDMOUGIN was requested to accompany the Norman Le Brocq to St Helier.

The Log book also recorded that Jade II had been fishing in a similar area (although not necessarily in Jersey waters) for the previous two weeks and that excessive by-catches had also been recorded on these occasions. The owner of the vessel was recorded as FERRANTIM.

On arrival at St Helier, GRANDMOUGIN was served with a detention notice in relation to Jade II. An inspection of the catch revealed 127 undersize spider crabs. The total catch weighed 1195 kg, and consisted 659.93 kg of correctly sized spider crab, 62.6 kg of undersized spider crab (some 8% of the total crab catch), 448.75 kg of scallops and 24.2 kg of mixed fish. The by-catch of fish (including shell fish) other than bivalves on board was 62.46%. The allowable by-catch should have been in the region of 22 kg. GRANDMOUGIN accepted that the spider crab were undersize.

GRANDMOUGIN was then taken to Police Headquarters to be interviewed. He spoke to the Honorary French Consul and the duty legal advisor. During interview he claimed to be unaware of the 5% by-catch regulation but did know the minimum size for retention of spider crabs. He stated that the Jade II did not have a gauge onboard for spider crabs and that his crew measured them by eye. He was then charged, pleading guilty to both counts. Bail was set at £1000.00. GRANDMOUGIN was unable to raise bail and was detained overnight. The following day he was presented before the Magistrate and, after being remanded on bail, was served with a release form from the detention notice served on him for Jade II.

In view of the large quantities of spider crab involved and the indication from the logbook on Jade II that this had been occurring for some time, the Solicitor General wrote to FERRANTIM, the owner of Jade II, and confirmed that, in light of the two infractions with which GRANDMOUGIN had been charged, he too would also be prosecuted, this in accordance with Article 3(1) of the Sea Fisheries (Jersey) Law, 1994.

 

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty plea. Co-operative. Voluntarily returned to Jersey for Royal Court sentencing. Was unaware of very recent change in local legislation concerning 5% by-catch. Had been kept in custody overnight when arrested.

 

Previous Convictions:

None.

 

Conclusions:

 

Count 1:	£1,000 fine or 2 months' imprisonment, in default of payment.
Count 2:	£1,000 fine or 2 months' imprisonment, in default of payment, consecutive.

 

 

Sentence and Observations of Court:

 

Count 1:	£1,000 fine or 2 months' imprisonment, in default of payment.
Count 2:	£250 fine or 2 weeks' imprisonment, in default of payment.

 

Dominique Pascal Ferrantim

 

1 Count of	contravening Article 6(1) of the Sea Fisheries (Jersey) Law 1994, by retaining in his possession spider crabs of a smaller size than prescribed, whilst the owner of a fishing boat in Jersey territorial waters (Count 1);
1 count of:	contravening Regulation 5(3) of the Sea Fisheries (Trawling, Netting and Dredging) (Jersey) Regulations 2001, by retaining on board sea fish, other than bi-valve molluscs, exceeding 5% of the total weight of sea fish whilst using dredges and whilst owner of a fishing boat in Jersey territorial waters (Count 2).

 

 

Age:

49        

 

Plea:    Facts admitted.

 

Details of Offence:

See Grandmougin, above.

 

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty plea. Co-operative. Voluntarily returned to Jersey to face charges and Royal Court appearance. Was unaware of very recent change in local legislation concerning 5% by-catch / claimed lack of communication between both the Island and French authorities with French fishermen in this regard.

 

Previous Convictions:

None.

 

Conclusions:

 

Count 1:	£1,000 fine or 2 months' imprisonment, in default of payment.
Count 2:	£1,000 fine or 2 months' imprisonment, in default of payment, consecutive.

 

 

Sentence and Observations of Court:

 

Count 1:	£1,000 fine or 2 months' imprisonment, in default of payment.
Count 2:	£250 fine or 2 weeks' imprisonment, in default of payment.

 

The Solicitor General

Advocate C.J. Scholefield for both Defendants.

 

 

JUDGMENT

 

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        Yes Madam interpreter, if you would translate what I say so that the accused can understand it.

2.        On the 4^th March, 2002, the "Jade II" was found to have 127 undersized spider crabs on board comprising some 8% of the total catch of spider crabs.  Mr Grandmougin as master admitted that he was aware of the size limit, but he did not even have a measuring gauge on board.  He said that his crew measured them by eye.  In our judgment this indicates the low importance which he attached to complying with the law. 

3.        The "Jade II" was dredging for scallops.  In these circumstances, there is a limit of 5% of the by-catch which is allowed to be kept.  This limit is laid down by EU Regulations which are given effect in Jersey by Jersey legislation.  The by-catch found by the inspectors was 62% and most of the by-catch consisted of spider crabs.  Mr Grandmougin stated at the time that he did not know of the 5% limit.

4.        Mr Ferrantim has been charged as the owner of the vessel.  He was not on board at the time, but it is the responsibility of the owner to ensure that his master is familiar with the fishing regulations and abides by them.

5.        The fishing conservation rules are made so as to ensure that the fishing stocks survive and are preserved for future generations.  It is the height of selfishness for today's fishermen to put their own financial interests above those of fishermen to come in future generations.

6.        The Court must ensure that the level of fines which it we imposes is such that that it is understood by fishermen that it is not financially worthwhile to break the fishing conservation regulations.  In relation to the charge of catching undersized crabs, we consider that the conclusions of the Solicitor General are on the low side.  We note that the Solicitor General has indicated that in future the Crown will seek higher fines.  We would also invite the Magistrates to review whether the level of fines which they have been imposing in recent cases is not too low to act as a deterrent.

7.        However, in the light of the co-operation of the defendants, and the other matters which Mr Scholefield has urged most persuasively on their behalf, we do not propose to increase the fine for the undersized fishing charge on this occasion.  But the case should not be taken as a precedent for future breaches. 

8.        Quite different considerations apply for the charge in respect of the by-catch.  We have received evidence from the Regional Fisheries Committee of Brittany, the local Committee of St Malo and the captain of three vessels which were fishing near the "Jade II" on this occasion, that they were not aware that Jersey law had been changed on 1^st January, 2002, in order to introduce a by-catch limit for dredging.  Before then there had been no restriction under Jersey law in respect of dredging although there had been a limit for trawling.  We accept the evidence which we have been given. It is true that legislation which conforms with E.U. law does not have to be agreed with France prior to its introduction under the new Bay of Granville Agreement.  Nevertheless, we think it highly desirable that the Jersey authorities should inform the Regional Fishery Committees of Normandy and Brittany, of any changes to Jersey law intended to bring in E.U. measures not previously applicable in Jersey waters.  We trust that procedures will be introduced in order to ensure that this occurs in future. 

9.        In all the circumstances, we accept that the defendants in this case were not aware of the new legislation.  We propose therefore, in the exceptional circumstances of this case, to reduce the conclusions on the by-catch charge.

10.      Would you stand up please Mr Grandmougin. On count 1 we impose a fine of £1,000 or 2 months' imprisonment in default.  On count 2 we impose a fine of £250 or 2 weeks imprisonment in default, consecutive.

11.      Mr Ferrantim in your case on the first count we impose a fine of £1,000 or 2 months' imprisonment in default, and on count 2 we impose a fine of £250 or 2 weeks imprisonment consecutive, in default.

Authorities

A.G.-v-Bertot (2^nd August, 1996) Jersey Unreported.