Talk:Haaf net fishing

No mention of the impact on salmon populations?
This seems like pretty crucial information for this article. Is this data simply not available? I think without this information, this article's DYK (which at the time of writing read: "[did you know]that salmon conservation measures are threatening the survival of a fishing technique first brought to Britain a thousand years ago by the Vikings?")reads as pretty biased in favor of haaf fishing over salmon conservation legislation. You could just as easily say "did you know that haaf fishing threatens several local populations of salmon?" which is also, of course, incredibly biased. If the haaf fishing didn't have a large impact on salmon population I would understand it getting an exemption from conservation laws but for all we know this practice is harmful toward a vulnerable population of animals. There is a bit regarding the Solway Firth's status as a "mixed stock fishery" but this is not accompanied with any mention of which rivers with low salmon levels connect to the Solway Firth or how many salmon haaf fishermen are removing from the population.

I also think that the timing of this DYK coinciding with the failed attempt from local fisherman to request an exemption (around nine days ago) to be in bad faith.

If anyone knows more about this, please respond.

FioFiorello (talk) 16:08, 7 February 2020 (UTC)


 * I wrote this article. What an earth do you mean “I also think that the timing of this DYK coinciding with the failed attempt from local fisherman to request an exemption (around nine days ago) to be in bad faith“. Can you explain your bizarre comment please. I wrote this article because I saw the BBC news item on it around 2 weeks ago: “The Solway Firth haaf netters fighting to save a fishing tradition”. The DYK “hook” reflects the theme of the BBC News item (and many others actually). So I reject your accusation about the hook: an internationally renowned reliable source’s summation of the topic is a perfectly good basis for a hook. Wikipedia just reflects what reliable sources say on a topic not make up our own priorities or right great wrongs.
 * As far as the rest of it is concerned, I’ve explained in the article Marine Scotland’s position on why they’ve restricted haaf net fishing. I haven’t found in a reliable source any more detailed explanation of why they’ve done it than that. If you don’t think it’s enough go ahead and put some effort into some research find a more detailed explanation and add it to the article (providing it’s reliably sourced). That’s how Wikipedia works. Knock yourself out - it’s not for me do do it for you. DeCausa (talk) 18:58, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Fair! I was able to find a document outlining the plan for salmon conservation put out by the Environmental Agency -- I will try to add some relevant additional info when I have the time. FioFiorello (talk) 21:44, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
 * OK. You may need to consider two policies when using the source you found: (1) WP:SYNTH: what you find needs to directly discuss haaf net fishing. (2) WP:PRIMARY: it’s likely that what the EA say is a primary source with the limitations that has for WP. DeCausa (talk) 21:58, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks! FioFiorello (talk) 23:10, 7 February 2020 (UTC)