The Senate has taken a decisive stance against the use of purse seine nets with mesh sizes smaller than 2.5cm during night fishing, which has led them to send the Lower House’s fisheries bill back for further discussion. Following the careful evaluation by the Senate committee, the Upper House met to review the amendment bill for the Royal Ordinance on Fisheries 2015. Comprising 71 sections, this bill underwent meticulous scrutiny by the Senate, with the spotlight notably on Section 28.
The proposed changes in Section 28 aimed at altering Section 69 of the 2015 law caused quite the stir, especially concerning the technicalities of the purse seine nets. The Senate made it clear that they were not in favor of the amendment passed by the House of Representatives, opting instead for a broader prohibition on all purse seine nets with mesh sizes under 2.5cm for nighttime fishing. In a decisive vote, 128 senators threw their support behind the ban, while eight opposed it and three chose to abstain.
Senator Thewarit Maneechai made his point crystal clear, arguing that using fine-meshed nets to catch aquatic creatures beyond the 12 nautical mile mark at night could wreak havoc on the marine ecosystem. The worry isn’t just about the immediate impact but about long-term sustainability. Tawat Suraban, chair of the Senate’s sub-committee studying the bill, also underscored the potential harm posed by using lights to attract anchovies, which might inadvertently lead to the capture of younger and more vulnerable marine life.
Amidst this lively discussion, the Senate approved the overall bill with a majority of 141 votes for, three against, and four abstentions. However, their disagreement with Section 28 means that the bill must now return to the House for further deliberation. The House now faces a pivotal decision: if it aligns with the Senate’s position, the bill will progress without changes to Section 28. Should the House disagree, a new scene unfolds where a joint committee from both Houses must be formed for a more in-depth review, as detailed by Tawat. Ultimately, the ball is in the Lower House’s court to make the final call.
In related developments, the Department of Fisheries reassured the public that Thai seafood exports to the United States will remain unaffected by changes to Section 66 of the Fisheries Executive Decree. This comes after murmurs of concern were raised about the potential for a US ban on imports of Thai seafood linked to fishing gear deemed harmful to marine mammals, as flagged by US authorities.
The ever-vibrant landscape of Thai politics and regulations continues to evolve, reflecting a nation deeply engaged in balancing its rich maritime traditions with contemporary environmental concerns. And with the day’s latest newslines unfolding at lightning pace, from opposition calls for probing asset cases to cobras stirring dreams of lottery fortune, there’s no shortage of drama and intrigue in Thailand’s daily chronicles.
I think it’s absolutely essential to ban smaller mesh nets during nighttime fishing. It’s critical for the sustainability of marine life.
Totally agree! If we don’t protect younger fish, we could be looking at depleted fish populations in no time.
Yes, but it’s not just about sustainability. Nighttime fishing with lights disturbs the marine habitat considerably.
But what about the livelihood of small-scale fishermen? Not everyone can afford to replace their gear overnight.
I understand their concerns, but the long-term health of the oceans is at stake, which could affect their livelihoods in the future too.
It’s absurd to think such a minor change could impact Thai seafood exports to the US. Fear mongering at its finest.
Concern over bycatch is real, but banning these nets could harm the local economy more than it helps the environment.
That’s a valid point, but how much is a thriving economy worth if the ecosystem collapses?
I just hope they find a balance; protecting marine life should not disadvantage local communities.
Measures like this are long overdue. We must put nature first. It’s not just about fish, it’s about the whole marine food chain.
What about the lights used during night fishing? Shouldn’t they be banned as well?
I’m skeptical. How enforceable are these rules? Many might just ignore them, especially in more remote areas.
Enforcement is always challenging with regulations like this. It requires a robust monitoring and penalty system.
The impacts of overfishing cannot be overstated. I hope the Lower House stands firm on this issue!
It’s not just about overfishing. It’s about controlling every single aspect of fishing now. Ridiculous!
I’d rather have my kids see a thriving ocean than have luxurious seafood on my plate.
This just shows the government’s disconnect from the real issues faced by local fishermen.
Any law that can help in conserving the environment should be welcomed. This long-term thinking is what drives real change.
Agreed, but let’s hope the measures are scientifically grounded.
Imagine how this affects our beloved local seafood delicacies. Catching small fish is critical for some dishes.
There are sustainable ways to catch those fish, though. It’s just more expensive, unfortunately.
I stand by the Senate and their decision. It’s about time lawmakers prioritize environmental sustainability!
Why not just have seasons or quotas? Bans don’t make practical sense.
When you think about it, protecting marine life is also about protecting our future food security.
Exactly! If we don’t act now, there won’t be any fish left for future generations.
They should look at more innovative fishing tech, not just imposing bans. Science can solve a lot of these problems.
Right! There are nets that allow smaller, non-target fish to escape, but dissemination is important.
Let’s watch how international markets react. This could set a global precedent.
We gotta save the fish! My dad says if we don’t, my kids won’t see any fishies in the ocean.