Sail Powered Fishing Boats A feasibility study · The study was aimed at looking at the feasibility...

Sail Powered Fishing Boats A feasibility study

Rowlands

Stamp

Sail powered fishing boat feasibility study The initial idea The approach taken The overall boat requirement The performance model The cost model The most effective boat characteristics The outline design Conclusions Appendix 1 The porthscatho experience

Appendix 2 The fishermen’s requirement – weight and space

Appendix 3 Porthscatho comments on the requirement

The initial idea The study was aimed at looking at the feasibility of using modern advances in sail boat technology to reduce the cost of fishing (no licence no fuel), and thereby extend the species that can be economically marketed. Small (20 ft) modern sailing boats can easily achieve 6 knots and more, are close winded and easily managed with modern rigs and materials The case is made under the following headings

� Fish stocks to be targeted � Comparison with the past � Likely areas for application

The Local Fisheries Development Strategy points out that less than 10% of the catch are wet fish the vast majority being high value shellfish and crustaceans. It also points out that Welsh products service less than 1% of the Welsh market Local fish catch therefore seems important, but the means of obtaining the catch is not obvious as the economics do not seem to support conventional means of catching fish largely through the cost (and difficulty) of obtaining a licence and more importantly in the long run the cost of diesel fuel. The species available in Cardigan Bay are :-

Common Name Latin Name Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec

Lobster Homarus gammarus-Lobster Brown Crab Cancer pagurus-Brown Crab Velvet Crab Necora puber-Velvet Crab Spider Crab Maja squinado-Spider Crab

Prawn Palaemon serratus-C. B. Prawn Whelk Buccinum undatum-Whelk Winkle Littorina littorea-Periwinkle

Mussel Mytilus edulis-Mussel Cockle Cerastaderma edule -Cockle

Scallop (king) Pecten maximus-King Scallop

Dogfish (lesser spotted)

Scyliorhinus canicula-Ls Sopt Dogfish

Dab Limanda limanda-Dab Pollack Pollachius pollachius-Pollock

Dover Sole Solea solea-Dover Sole Bass Dicentrarchus labrax -Sea Bass Cod Gadus morhua-Cod

Mullet (grey) Chelon labrosus-Grey Mullet Huss (aka rock

salmon) Scyliorhinus stellaris-Huss Flounder Platichthys flesus-Flounder

Plaice Pleuronectes platessa-Plaice Skate/Ray Raja spp-Skate Mackerel Scomber scombrus-Mackerel

Black Sea Bream Spondyliosoma cantharus-Black

Bream Red Mullet Mullus barbatu-Red Mullet

Sprat Sprattus sprattus-Sprats Whiting Merlangius merlangus-Whiting Herring Clupea harengus-Herring

Brill Scophthalmus rhombus-Brill Triggerfish Balistes capriscus-Triggerfish

Turbot Psetta maxima-Turbot

Coley (aka saithe) Pollachius virens-Coal Fish

AVAILABILITY Locally targeted good availability medium availability poor/no availability The cost of fuel is surprising – 2011 data from Seafish for example gave the average cost of fuel as a percentage of the total fishing costs for small vessels (below 10m length) as:-

� Pots and traps below 10m 30% � Hooks 16% � Drift nets 21%

A low cost sailboat solution might completely change the economics of catching some species and re-establish a local market for wet fish In the past sailboats did catch fish as these pictures testify. Despite their poor windward performance they earned a living even from place like St Dogmaels where a long beat out to sea was inherent in their location

The big changes to sailing boats have been

� Fitting foils (centerboards) to the boats – this has enabled them to go far, far, better to windward � Sails – the application of modern materials and aeronautical knowledge has also transformed the performance of sailing boats

particularly to windward � Handling the sails – modern techniques bring all the controls back to a single point making control easy and safe as there is no need to

move about in the boat to trim the sails � Self righting – the boats below were open boats and liable to capsize or fill in rough conditions - modern boats are self righting � Weather forecasting – hugely improved from 100 years ago

All in all a modern sailing vessel is safe, very eco friendly, and certainly worth trying to emulate our forefathers in using them for fishing

Fishing Boats at St Dogmaels

The Teifi estuary is not the best place for such vessels due to the long hike down river before the fishing grounds can be reached, and the bar is no place for amateurs. However it is surprising to find in the old pictures that all the boats were sail powered so even then (with all the handicaps of poor performance) they used sail on the Teifi It should be expected that Aberporth and similar beaches would be where such boats were best deployed avoiding the long tack down to the sea and the retrictions on draught imposed by the shallow estuary Coincidentally an article in Watercraft Magazine highlighted a couple in Porthscatho who were attempting to earn a living from a sailing boat. Their experience has been an invaluable real world source of advice and encouragement. The articles are appended to this report appendix 1 and their comments on the requirement on appendix 3

The approach taken There were 5 phases to the study

� Define the requirement from fishing aspect – how much space and weight were needed for the gear to potentially provide a viable means of earning a living for a one man crew. One man was chosen as it seemed that a much larger vessel would be needed to earn two people a living

� Combine this data with data from the geography of the area and knowledge of the fishing grounds to give an overall boat requirement

including speed, draught restrictions, etc

� Use this data to define a matrix of boat sizes to be studied, starting with a minimum size and covering the likely limits of one man operation. This matrix was then analysed to give performance predictions for each combination

� A cost model was constructed so that the cost could be given to each option thereby attempting to give some guidance as to what

represented good value to go forward into the concept design

� Produce a concept design to meet the requirements to see whether a sail powered fishing boat could actually be envisaged to meet the requirements

The overall boat requirement Introduction An un-powered new vessel design has to incorporate sufficient deck space to allow the fisherman to work his gear manually, efficiently and safely and be of an overall size that is operable by one person and be capable of carrying a varying load. It also has to be capable of reaching fishing grounds some distance from its home port in a reasonable time, taking due account of likely wind directions and tides Each individual area is discussed below and then integrated into an overall requirement at the end

Carrying capacity

The size of the vessel will depend on its displacement and therefore its ability to carry the fishing gear safely. Virtually all inshore vessels are within the ‘under 10m’ category with the smallest practical commercial size starting from approximately 4.5m loa x 2m beam

As a basis for a design, a maximum capacity for four pots, three nets, two rods and two handlines has been proposed as an example of what might be practical to carry at any one time in a small sailing boat. The quantity of pots and nets worked is only limited to physical endurance, as any number and combination of fishing gear can be taken to the grounds over a few days and left to soak, thus increasing fishing effort without the need for a burdensome vessel.

Hauling pots is hard work and for future study an electric pot hauler should be looked at powered by a solar panel in combination with a solar buoy perhaps

This initial amount of fishing gear to be carried would have a combined approximate weight of 404Kg (4x30kg pots+3x90kg nets+2x2kg rods+2x5kg lines). Other equipment, such as fish boxes, ice, etc., could be rounded up to 25kg with an allocation of 25kg for the catch. An allowance of 100kg for a fully equipped fisherman brings the total load to 554kg as a minimum8.

Space required

The space requirements I have interpreted as below – need to add another ice box according to our lead fisherman

Draft requirements

Cardigan is a bit of a special case as the need to transit the channel between the mooring at Patch and the bar imposes limitations on the draft near the perch. If access to the town is a requirement (it might in the future) there is second shallow area near Bryn Du

In a sailing boat it pays very much to work the tide. So it seems likely that the boat would leave on a good ebb- say 2 hrs after high water and return of a flood say 2 hrs before high water giving an 8 hour cycle

The draft restriction with the above assumption is about 1.3 metres, deeper would be possible but would increasingly restrict access times particularly on the bigger tides

Distance to fishing grounds – speed requirement

In discussion with fishermen local to Cardigan distances to the fishing grounds are shown below. Distances are from the home mooring

assumed to be Patch

The likely maximum distance is about 8 miles which covers the offshore areas and Ceibwr to the West and Aberporth to the East

The likely time out of port is 8 hours because of the draft restrictions above – assuming 4 hours fishing and 2 hours transit each way implies a speed made good of something like 4 knots

Environment - Wind and Tide

Wind speed and direction are important considerations. In sailing terms a force 4 wind would be described as a good sailing breeze. Above force 4 sail area needs to be adjustable to the conditions

The average wind strengths in the area are shown below

Direction is also important. This is the wind rose for Valley – it is assumed that that for Aberporth will be similar in view of their almost identical wind speeds

Some conclusions from the wind speed and direction data

� The boat will have to cope with force 4 from almost any direction � The predominant direction for strong winds is south westerly � North Easterly is a significant factor � There is a long period in the summer when wind speeds are below 10 knots

Tides

The pilot suggests currents in the region of Cemaes head are of the order of 1.5 knots

Cemaes Head (52°07'N., 4°44'W.), 187m high, is located 6.5 miles NE of Pen-y-bal. It is formed by a bold cape which rises steeply above the cliffs. Foul ground, with depths of 11 to 13m, extends up to about 1 mile N of this head and should be given a wide berth. Between Newport Bay and Cemaes Head, the tidal currents set NE and SW at rates of 1.5 knots at springs with indrafts running into the bays.

Current is not as significant as wind since the fishermen will work the tides to their advantage – see appendix 2 but in the case of Cardigan there is a need to be aware of the strong currents in the outer estuary which need to be used to advantage

Design Standards

In addition, all sorts of extra gear, tools, etc., and basic safety equipment as stipulated by the MCA also has to be carried. SeaFish, the UK fishing governing body, has its own vessel construction standards to which any new registered fishing vessel has to comply. Other existing European construction standards are in place for all new vessels (leisure Vessel full of all sorts of gear and commercial); therefore, compliance with either design standard is obligatory.

The most difficult to meet is the Recreational Craft Directive which specifies stability requirements and many others such as recovery from a capsize

This is the directive to which the boat is designed

General

A clear internal space is a big help in the clean up operation after fishing. Ideally this requires a self draining cockpit, though other solutions might also be appropriate.

The Overall Requirement

Putting all the above together an ideal high level requirement might be

Boat capacity 554 kg

Draft 1.3 meters ideally

Space required at least 1.5 meters clear

Speed Able to make good 4 knots to windward in force 4 of wind

Wind conditions Ability to be safe in force 6 and sail in force 5

Design standards Recreational Craft Directive

Daily Maintenance Self draining cockpit + Clean interior = clean up after fishing

Able to be rowed by one man – speed to be more than 2 knots

The performance model Using the space model gave a set of minimum dimensions to meet the need The approach is to look at the boat over a range of dimensions of length, beam and weight and calculate the power needed to drive the boat as a result The boat details are then fed into a simple model to determine what sail area would be appropriate and hence the likely speed using the known performance of Bay Raiders as a cross check on the calculations The dimension matrix looked like this

Beam 5.5 6.5 7.5 8.5 Length

18 20 22 24

The boat weight was derived from the 20 ft Bay Raider weights with 50% added to the hull weight to allow for thicker plywood skins. Boat weight was scaled by length. The thicker skin allowance is probably very pessimistic as much of the boat internals will be similar to the bay raider 20 in terms of thickness

Weight variation Length 18 20 22 24 Hull 0.453 0.503 0.553 0.604 Load 0.554 0.554 0.554 0.554 Ballast 0.302 0.317 0.332 0.347

TOTAL 1.309 1.374 1.440 1.505 Note - 30% ballast ration was assumed necessary The sail area is derived from calculating an upsetting force from the sails and comparing it to the righting force of the hull and ballast. The latter is calculated by the overall dimensions and weight using simple metrics for KB BM and KG whilst the sail moment is calculated assuming a 2:1 aspect ration to the sails. By dividing the righting force by the upsetting force a number is derived which can be compared with vessels of similar shape and rig to the Bay Raiders The method is hardly exact but with the widely different Bay Raider 17 and 20 gave sail area within 15% of those used. The power from the sails is calculated from Dave Gerr’s (US designer) figures for Horsepower per sq ft below which in a force 4 gave a power of 0.02 Horsepower per square foot None of the above is particularly accurate but a cross check on the performance of the Swallow Boats Bay Raider’s known performance suggested that the model is accurate enough for the study predicting a speed of about 8 knots in a force 4 with the wind on the beam. This is about a knot faster than is usually experienced but in a flat sea it is probably a reasonable estimate The requirement to make good 4 knots in force 4 was interpreted as a tack angle of 55 degrees with a boat speed therefore of 7 knots at least. To allow for less than calm conditions a speed of around 8 knots is probably desirable The overall results are appended to this section. The conclusions were as follows

� None of the boats would row much better than 3 knots in a flat calm. Power assumption was one man delivering 0.25 HP with a propulsive efficiency of 50%

� The smaller boat would not meet the speed requirements to windward � The 20 footer with 8.5 feet beam could meet the speed requirement � Beam was critical 7.5 ft was the minimum beam to carry enough sail to meet the speed criteria in the 22 and 24 ft boats

The purpose of all the modelling is to set up a target area around which to build the boat design. .No set of data at this level can adequately describe the necessary features, so many parameters are not included eg seaworthiness – but in moving away from what the numbers suggest it helps to know what the overall numbers reflect. It is for example doubtful that the 20 footer with 8.5 ft beam will be a good choice in the end because her dimensions look extreme and would lead to at least very uncomfortable motion at sea The results of this calculation frenzy are shown below – units are feet tons and knots Length 18 ft weight 1.3 tons Length 20 weight 1.37 beam 5.5000 6.5000 7.5 8.5000 5.5 6.5 7.5 8.5 speed/knots Power HP Power Power Power Power HP Power Power Power

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 2.00 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.04 3.00 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.11 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.11 4.00 0.31 0.32 0.33 0.35 0.28 0.30 0.31 0.33 5.00 0.89 0.91 0.93 0.96 0.75 0.77 0.80 0.83 6.00 2.98 3.02 3.06 3.11 2.45 2.49 2.54 2.59 7.00 4.86 4.92 4.98 5.05 4.70 4.77 4.83 4.91 8.00 6.09 6.17 6.26 6.38 6.12 6.21 6.31 6.43

Sail area 120.00 180.00 240.00 300.00 130.00 180.00 250.00 320.00

Horsepower in force 4 Horsepower in force 4

2.40 3.60 4.80 6.00 2.60 3.60 5.00 6.40

Speed 5.72 6.31 6.91 7.72 6.06 6.49 7.12 7.98

And again here Length 22 weight 1.44 Length 24 weight 1.5 5.5 6.5 7.5 8.5 5.5 6.5 7.5 8.5 speed/knots Power HP Power Power Power Power HP Power Power Power

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 2.00 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04 3.00 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.12 4.00 0.26 0.28 0.29 0.30 0.24 0.26 0.28 0.29 5.00 0.67 0.69 0.72 0.75 0.61 0.63 0.67 0.71 6.00 1.94 1.98 2.02 2.06 1.51 1.55 1.61 1.67 7.00 4.08 4.15 4.22 4.28 3.37 3.44 3.54 3.63 8.00 5.87 5.96 6.06 6.16 5.28 5.38 5.52 5.65

Sail area 140.00 200.00 270.00 350.00 140.00 210.00 280.00 370.00

Horsepower in force 4 Horsepower in force 4

2.80 4.00 5.40 7.00 2.80 4.20 5.60 7.40

Speed 6.40 6.93 7.64 8.45 6.69 7.39 8.04 8.86

The cost model The cost model was derived from Swallow Boats data on open boats in production principally the Bay Raiders 17 and 20. There is a comprehensive listing of all the bought in items and these were grouped under 4 headings

� Hull � Outfit � Rig � Sails

The cost model is based on achieving a rough set of costs based on some simple dimensions which would be available at an early stage. The dimensions which gave reasonable correlation were

� Length L feet � Beam B feet � Depth of hull D feet � Sail Area square feet � Weight Lbs

The best fit to the data were calculated and the resulting algorithm checked against the actuals for the Bay Raiders 17 and 20 and gave an accuracy of better than 4% Having said that the cost model is highly constrained by the type of vessel which is fundamentally an open boat with a two mast rig in the size range up to 24 feet at best – it is not a universal cost model All the costs relate to a boat made from wood in limited production – there would be a considerable reduction in cost if the demand justified the expense of building a mould of the order of 25%

Hull Paint costs Sqrt(L x L x B x D) x 4.6 Plywood L X B X D X 2.4 Epoxy mostly L X B X D X 2.1 Timber L x B X D x 0.75 Miscellaneous Outfit Piping oarlocks Slot seals etc etc L x D x 4.5 Steel cutting and Mike Pearce Rig Blocks etc Sail Area x 1.7 Ropes mast etc sqrt Sail area x 43 Sails From plot sail area v cost cost =70 + sail area x 2.3

Man hours were calculated using the following simple formula which gave reasonable agreement with the data for Bay Raiders Man hours = 80 + 0.55 x dry weight in pounds and were interpreted into costs at the rate of £40 per hour

The result of the cost modelling gave a matrix as below

Beam-- 5.500 6.5 7.5 8.500 feet Length feet

18 £18,539 £19,180 £19,802 £20,412 20 £20,572 £21,204 £21,930 £22,641 22 £22,627 £23,366 £24,141 £24,954 24 £24,678 £25,529 £26,360 £27,279

Only the boats shaded in green above met the speed requirement of at least 7 knots

The most effective boat characteristics Putting the performance and cost data together it was hoped that a cost effective minima would emerge – it did not but it did indicate where to look for a solution

Boat cost speed 20x8.5 22600 7.98 22x7.5 24100 7.64 22x8.5 25000 8.45 24x6.5 25500 7.39 24x7.5 26400 8.04 24x8.5 27300 8.86

On a cost basis the 20 x 8.5 was the best by some distance followed by the 22 x 7.5 . The dominant effect of beam on speed is clear (more beam = more stability = more sail = more speed) but beam’s affect on cost is probably under called in the cost model. The fact is that a boat with 8.5 feet beam on a 20 or even a 22 foot boat does not look very seaworthy when sketched out. Such a boat will ride the sea like a cork and have a rapid response to sea conditions and it was felt that a more reasonable boat resulted from the 7.5 foot beam. Even with this beam the oars to row the boat will end up being over 13 feet long ideally (longer than a rowing eights). Stowing such long oars will require some thought For these reason the 22 x 7.5 boat was chosen to develop the concept design with a sail area of 270 square feet

The outline design Before going into the design it might be worth a diversion to define the design process as a whole and to what stage a feasibility study has to arrive at. There are numerous ways to define the whole life cycle of a design and much has been written to codify what each phase means. For the purposes of this study this is the definition set that is used

� Concept design - establishes that there is a viable solution to the specification possible for an economical price � Baseline design – looks at different variations of the design to determine which the customer wishes to take forward � Final design - Establishes all the necessary sizes and systems and their interfaces to produce a contractual specification � Building Drawings – these are derived from the final design – this is by far the most manpower intensive of the design cost

In this study the design is somewhere between the Concept phase and the Baseline phase. It establishes that a solution is possible, but raises all sorts of questions about the detail that should be answered in the subsequent Baseline design Looking at the design in the following ways

� The hull � The rig � The foils (important for going to windward) � The fishing layout

The hull This is the shape of the boat – made from 3 off 9mm plywood panels a side joined at their edges by glass tape and epoxy resin inside and out. This is both a strong and durable construction particularly when all the panels inside and out are coated with epoxy. Note that the hull has not been faired

The hull looks like this – A very strong egg box structure with a false floor below which is likely to be some water ballast

The deck completes the closed surface to make the whole thing torsionally stiff

In section the boat looks like this

The box section gunwales provide buoyancy and torsional stiffness whilst the false floor is above the waterline enabling quick and easy wash down as well as self draining at sea. The rise of floor of 7.5 degrees is reasonable and could be reduced if thought necessary. A substantial keel 3 inches deep is drawn to give some sailing capability when the centreboard is fully up The transom has been given some rake for looks but is probably better in the upright position as it would make operation of the rudder geometry easier and is cheating wrt cost ( it increase the overall length and thus the cost) The rig The rig has been chosen to largely imitate the historical boats that were in use locally in terms of its masting. Historically the boats could have been fitted with a single sail (a lug for instance) but they were not - possibly because the two masted arrangement has many pluses

� It creates space in the middle of the boat when the mainsail is brailed up, � It is very flexible enabling sail to be shortened in a trice but still giving good performance under jib and mizzen

In this version of the old rig � The mizzen and jib are both boomed to make them totally self tacking and ease sheeting positions � The mizzen is in carbon fibre and is unstayed to keep the aft quarters clear � The mizzen has to have a sprit boom to stand properly – probably it would be sheeted to a boomkin on the centreline – again keeping

the aft quarters clear for lines etc � A sprit boom is shown on the main as well – it stands well with no kicking strap to get in the way � The jib has roller furling probably on a short bowsprit

However there are a huge number of potential rigs and this is merely one of a large number that could have been drawn.

The foils As important as the rig are the foils. They have been sized to meet best modern practice as a percentage of sail area The draught restriction on the Teifi eliminates the large single foil shown in the rig drawing. To meet the requirement it is proposed that two foils are used as below

Though not as efficient as a single foil they are nevertheless of good aspect ratio and have advantages in their own right

They are almost buried in the floor of the boat when raised Give clear access to the mast area Form a barrier to keep fishboxes etc in place (see next section)

Fishing layout Without trying hard to optimise the layout there appears to be plenty of room to work the boat and the fishing gear carrying the specified loads

Hand lines

Fish box

Insulated fish box

Tangle nets 5 Pots

Bulkhead could be moved aft to create more space

One aspect does give concern and that is safety. A fisherman has of necessity to lift items over the side (pots for instance) as opposed to the leisure sailor who generally speaking does not As the height of the gunwale is at about knee height this represents a considerable risk and a set of rails is proposed to support the fisherman at about waist height

Clearly there is much to be done here – the rails make handling safer but increase the height which the pots have to be lifted – experience will be a great teacher The gallow rail has been fitted aft to make a sheeting point for the mainsail thus keeping the work area clear of ropes and blocks that are not only a trip hazard but are also dirt traps for fish waste etc

Gallow Rail

The whole boat Putting all the aspects together the boat looks something like these pictures

Comments on the concept design Where to begin. There is a huge amount of work to do to take this proof of concept into a full blown design. The concept design could probably be reduced in cost by attending to detail, For example the hull could be constructed of only two panels a side – it would not look as pretty, and it would impact on performance somewhat but it might be a trade worth having The first cost is high at about £24,000 compared to engine alternatives on the second hand market. This could be reduced by kitting the parts for “home” assembly but even so a 22 ft boat is going to cost in parts alone £6,000 and by the time all the panels have been machined to shape probably the best part of £10,000 Steering arrangements need some thought – the standard Swallow Boats arrangement would work bringing the tiller in low enough to give the unstayed mizzen sufficient bury but no doubt other more cost effective solutions could be arrived at with some thought to the different requirements of the fishing boat. Fitting an upright transom possibly help allowing the use of lines for steering as in the old Naval Whaler with the tiller pivoted about the mizzen Much more thought is needed re the Centreboard arrangements – an obvious move is to introduce long bilge keels and incorporate the boards into the bilge keels lowering them even further (possibly enabling them to be below the false floor). The bilge keels could be used structurally to split the large bottom panel width. The single Centreboard might be liveable with in many scenarios. Ballast has not been deeply considered – the stability and resulting sail area are based on Bay raider experience using water ballast for trailer ability but this boat is unlikely to be trailed as a matter of course so more effective ballast arrangement (built into the external keel for example) could be adopted with benefits in the ability to carry sail The rig needs lots of thought with many options possible using lazy jacks to drop the main into a sail bag on the boom for example. This makes reefing quick and easy but leaves the boom pretty well horizontal and very much in the way of fishing – it is a good arrangement however and with some thought could be made to work by hinging the boom up to clear the fishing area. Man powered propulsion will normally be oars but they need to be very long (13feet for 7.5 ft beam) for easy rowing. Stowing such a length of oar is a problem though they could easily be hung in straps from the rail. Other solutions might be a long sculling oar over the quarter (the

Chinese Yuloh is specialist scull oar and used to move very large vessels in China ) but a more modern and compact alternative might be something like the SeaCycle unit which is designed to be dropped through a centreboard type slot – see images below.

Conclusions The study demonstrates that an effective design for a sail powered boat for local fishing use is possible. The cost is not low at £24,000 but its operating cost is hugely reduced and could reduce fishing costs by as much as 30% in the case of potting. Whether such a first cost is worth it is debateable. The Porthscatho developing experience will be important in assessing the real economic viability of the idea and it is intended to keep in touch with them over the next year to see how things develop

15www.watercraft-magazine.com

on time - despite the logistical difficulties of doing so while living on a boat in a foreign country - and he won third prize.

Throughout their Mediterranean adventure Simon and Cat knew that they wanted to do something different on their return and really wanted to live and work in their home village. Much of their time away was spent in Greece where they saw many small fishing boats plying their trade and it was there that the idea of fishing commercially under sail took hold. The fact that registration and licensing regulations are considerably less stringent for unpowered fishing vessels under 10 metres (33') was a further incentive.

In September 2009, Simon and Cat Holman set off from their home in Portscatho in south Cornwall on their Heard 28 gaff cutter for a two-year trip. Having left their respective

teaching jobs – he in Small Craft Design at Falmouth Marine School; she giving private lessons in Spanish – they took Planet through the French canals and into the Mediterranean. While in the south of France, they saw an invitation for entries in a design competition for an 'eco fishing boat under 10 metres' in Classic Boat magazine. The issue was almost 4 months old, the deadline just 3 weeks away but Simon managed to submit a design for a 23'10” (7.3m) round-bilged two-masted lugger

Not all those who sail for a living have to learn how the owner likes his Martini. Nigel Sharp finds Simon and Cat Holman doing it the ethical way.With photographs by the author.

Fishing Under Sail

www.watercraft-magazine.com16

On their return, they discussed their idea with local fishermen. “If anyone had said it was a really bad idea, we would have changed our minds,” said Cat, “but the general feedback was that although there are easier and quicker ways to make a living, it was do-able.”

The Lugger Re-VisitedSo, now they needed a boat. “We did some fairly exhaustive research into existing designs and what could be done to convert them,” said Cat, “but there was really nothing on the market that was suitable, so we decided to design and build our own.” Simon revisited his lugger design and modified it to suit their purposes, mainly shortening it to 18'6” (5.7m) and modifying the underwater shape so that it could be moored in Portscatho’s drying harbour. Using CAD, he was able to create files for all the internal components – the centreline, three transverse bulkheads, seven frames, one ring frame, the inner layer of the laminated transom and some additional fore and aft structure – which were all CNC-cut in 15mm (5/8") Robbins Elite plywood by Fibrefusion in Falmouth.

In March 2012, Simon and Cat brought the parts back to a workshop in Portscatho – they all fitted in the back of their Ford Focus estate car – and just two days later, they had assembled them upside down and epoxy filleted them together. Robbins' 'bead and cove' 15mm (5/8") yellow cedar strip planking was then fitted over this framework: starting at the sheer and the centreline with 45mm (1¾") wide planks,

using 33mm (1¼") planks at the turn of the bilge and with the ends of the final 'shutter' planks shaped to fit.

The planks were fastened to the plywood framework with plastic nails while the adhesives cured: Collano Semparoc polyurethane between the strips and WEST SYSTEM epoxy at their ends. Simon was disappointed that this part of the build took so long and he thinks that if they were to do it again they would build a plywood chine boat even though “it wouldn’t be as pretty”.

The outer layer of the transom was fitted at this stage to seal the ends of the planks and the whole hull was then

sheathed in epoxy and 900gsm biaxial glass cloth. After the two 45mm (1¾”) thick Opepe bilge keels were bolted on and the whole hull was faired and painted, four friends came to help turn it over.

All the joints where the plywood skeleton met the inside of the planking were epoxy filleted and the whole of the interior was then epoxy coated. With the upper edges of the bulkheads and frames acting as deck beams and sole bearers, all that was needed was to fit the Douglas

fir carline into the notches already there to accept it, before laying the 9mm (3/8") plywood deck and 19mm cockpit sole.

Simon and Cat grabbed every opportunity to make – rather than purchase – the boat’s various fittings, particularly when recycling was possible – part of a galvanised handrail leading down to their home is now the mainsheet horse and some surplus oak shelves from their local pub were fashioned into cleats by a sculptor friend.

“We had done a lot of sailing on boats with traditional rigs but

this is ‘boat dressage’; it’s very different. But it’s getting easier all

the time.”


KENSA SPECIFICATIONLOA: 18'6” (5.7m)LWL: 17'9" (5.4m)

Beam: 7'1" (2.16m)Draft light: 2'4" (0.7m)

Standard load displ: 3527 lbs (1600kg)Sail area: 242 sq.ft (22.47m²)


Sailing for a livingI had the opportunity to sail on Kensa early this summer, just as the Holmans were preparing for their second season. Simon told me that they had chosen a traditional two-masted standing lug rig “for very strong practical reasons: you can handle it on your own and there are no massive loads in it”. Although the loose-footed mainsail allows safe easy working

in the large open cockpit, much of the time it is taken out of the way completely with the brail line which goes up the mast to a block and then through an eye half way up the leach. By pulling on the brail, the whole sail is gathered into the mast where it can be further tidied up with a sail tie and by hooking the sheet tackle under a cleat just aft of the mast. This technique is frequently used to allow the

boat to drift at a controlled slow speed, when manoeuvring up to pots or when picking up a mooring.

The new boat was launched from the beach in Portscatho in August 2012 and christened Kensa, a Cornish girl’s name and also Cornish for 'first', as she is the first boat built by the Holmans and the first fishing boat built in Portscatho for nearly half a century.

There was still work to do on her rig. The spars are, as Simon put it, “a bit cobbled together”. The only new one is the hollow Douglas fir main yard; others were donated from various sources. Magpie, a local 18-Footer from 1898, had lost her mast and remnants of it were used to extend a carbon tube to form the main mast. The three mizzen spars had seen service on various craft: the spruce mast on a Falmouth Bass Boat, the carbon yard as a windsurfer mast and the outrigger was Magpie’s bowsprit. Local sailmaker Nick Collins allowed the Holmans to use his loft to make the sails, giving them a great deal of advice and assistance.

Kensa has a large open working boat cockpit except for a 220 litre (48 gallon) container filled with ice to keep the catch fresh for longer.

"Kensa was essentially designed as a general

purpose tractor of a boat because we

hadn’t really decided what type of fishing

we would do.”


during that first season. “We had done a lot of sailing on boats with traditional rigs,” says Cat, “but this is sometimes like ‘boat dressage’ and it’s very different. But it’s getting easier all the time.”

Kensa was out fishing from May to October during 2013, very often six days a week. She has yet to be allocated a space inside Portscatho’s small harbour and so she is mostly kept on a swinging mooring just outside it. Although this is sheltered from prevailing south-westerlies, when strong easterlies are forecast she is taken a few miles down the coast, past St Mawes into the shelter of the Percuil River.

Simon and Cat told me that their research into the project had been limited because there are very few people alive in the UK who have any experience of commercial fishing under sail. “So Kensa was essentially designed as a general purpose tractor of a boat,” said Simon, “as we hadn’t really decided what type of fishing we would do.” Last year they were mostly hand-lining for mackerel, pollack and bass. They also did some netting and plan to do more in future, as well as more with pots and long lines, all in the hope of bigger catches. All the time they are learning about the best places to fish, how long it will take to get there and – more crucially for selling their catch – how long it will take to get back.

They recognise that although they are unable to compete with the big trawlers in terms of reliability of supply, their strength is their ability to provide very fresh fish to pubs, restaurants and individuals in their immediate locality. Minimising the food mileage was always part of the plan and their most distant market is St Mawes: just 5 miles away by road, although sometimes they are able to land fish there direct from Kensa. “We certainly didn’t struggle to find people to buy our fish last year which was great,” said Cat. “People obviously like the ethics of what we are doing.”

CONTACTSFresh fish for locals: www.portscathofish.co.ukTimber: www.robbins.co.ukEpoxies: www.westsystem.co.ukAdhesive: www.melcobonding.co.ukSails: www.collinssailmakers.co.uk

Kensa showed herself to be a capable and enjoyable sailing boat. Her tacking angle is about 100˚ and she managed up to 5 knots on a close reach in a Force 3. Under full sail she has a little weather helm and Simon demonstrated his rudimentary self-steering system: a shockcord loop from each side of the boat which can be adjusted simply by putting an extra turn around the tiller one side or the other. This leaves Simon and Cat free to go about their work, albeit with "an occasional nudge" on the tiller, as Simon put it. When the mainsail is brailed up, the boat is normally steered by adjusting the mizzen sheet.

Kensa’s sailing performance might have been marginally better if she had a centreboard. Simon told me that they "debated for ages" whether to fit one but the need for a spacious working area got the better of that particular discussion. In the middle of the cockpit there is a 220 litre (48 gallon) container with slush ice in the bottom, to keep the catch fresher for longer. This was part-funded by a grant from the South West Handline Fishermen’s Association, along with a smaller box for transferring fish to the shore and some safety equipment.

Kensa has a 500 litre (110 gallon) water ballast tank and 250kg (550 lbs) of trimming ballast in her bilges. The water ballast can be drained into the main part of the bilge and pumped out to make her more easily transportable ashore or to help her get home faster when the wind drops. Clearly this is an essential part of Kensa’s modus operandi: there is no point in catching fish if they can’t get ashore to sell them and their aim is always to do so the same day. “There is nothing wrong with a day-old fish,” says Cat, “but people like to be able to say that it was caught that day and many do notice the difference.” With this in mind Simon deliberately gave the lugger a generous sail plan and he is pleased that “she sails a lot better in light conditions than we expected”. Although the original intention was to row her when the wind is really light, Simon says: “We didn’t really consider the ergonomics of rowing a big boat like this; she's much easier to scull.”

Simon and Cat are clearly experienced sailors, but they admit that it was a steep learning curve finding out the differences between sailing a 'normal yacht' and a fishing boat


Getting to know our boatNaturally, the more familiar we became with Kensa the easier she was to sail. We managed to overcome the initial teething problems of a new boat and a new design by making small modifications to her ballast and rig. Adjustments to the mainsail sheeting and brail arrangement made all the difference towards reducing the effort required to handle her. By now, steering her with minimal input is straightforward in anything other than very windy conditions. Most of the time we adopt the ‘hands free’ approach and steer with our backs or with the help of a handy bungee which acts as a crude tiller rope.. This allows us to move around and get on with fishing,

gutting, drinking coffee and checking Facebook. The last is - at least ostensibly - for business reasons; we can we notify our customers of our catches via social media updates as well as text messages.

Understanding that sailing had to take a back seat in order to allow us to focus on fishing was not always easy. Fishing seemed to go against all the golden rules of sailing. Ordinarily we make

every effort to ensure we have no lines trailing in the water on a boat. Clearly this is not the case with fishing. Avoiding rocks is a fairly basic aim of sailing, whereas for us fishing is all about finding shoal water, not moving away from it. It took a while for us to get used to the sound of flogging canvas when drifting under a brailed up main in fresh winds; it’s just second nature to wince.

With the right priorities and a streamlined boat, we began to expand our fishing techniques and grounds. Our expectations grew as quickly as our catches and it seemed reasonable to

It didn’t take long after launching Kensa for us to realise that we would have our work cut out to be able to fish from her without an engine. We had always prepared for

a steep learning curve but it’s fair to say we underestimated just how precipitous it would at times prove to be. Optimistic first forays confirmed our suspicions that sadly, fishing is not just a question of aimlessly moving around until you catch enough to head home. By the same token sailing, as we well knew, is rarely about getting somewhere by the most direct route possible. With both sailing and fishing subject to highly variable and capricious influences, it began to seem that combining the two had been an utterly ludicrous idea.

Our maiden voyages had the same alarming and exhilarating qualities of early driving lessons. There seemed to be too much to remember, control and focus on at once; countless times we found ourselves tangling lines, inadvertently tacking or getting caught on a pot buoy. The excitement of our first decent catches was all too often tempered by a long slog home as we found ourselves becalmed or heading against the tide or wind. Two years down the line we’re happy to say these situations are now the exception rather than the norm. There is still much for us to learn but we have discovered that with a combination of careful planning around the variables which affect us and practical handling of Kensa under sail and oar using custom techniques, we can make our lives much easier. In this article we’ll focus on the theory; the decisions we can make before we leave the mooring that significantly improve the odds of getting back with some fish in time to sell it, with us and the boat happy and in one piece.

In W108, that was how Cat and Simon Holman described fishing under sail. In the first of a two-

part series, they explain their techniques.With diagrams by the authors and photograph by Nigel Sharp.

Dressage for Boats

27

assume it wouldn’t be long before we’d mastered it. Needless to say, this was not the case!

We quickly found there was a whole host of other factors we hadn’t taken into account – or at least not the extent to which they would affect us and dictate our activity. Having no engine means there’s no get out clause. Although we’ve always tried to sail as much as possible when cruising on our gaff cutter, inevitably there comes a point after we’ve been making painfully slow progress for some time when we look at each other and realise we’ve both had enough. That look usually leads to firing up the engine to speed us home. We’ve found it’s best to avoid being in this situation on Kensa; that look invariably means being very, very late.

As with any kind of sailing, no two days are the same but we’ve learned that generous allowances for the key variables of wind, tide and the human factor gives us the best chance of success. Clearly we cannot control the wind or tide but with proper forethought we can ensure that as far as possible we harness them rather than fighting them. People on the other hand are a law unto themselves.

The windOur primary concern is always the direction of the wind. In the first place, this is a question of shelter. The harbour and anchorage at Portscatho on the south coast of Cornwall is open to the east, so strong winds from that sector mean we may have to move Kensa into the Percuil River upstream from St Mawes out of harm’s way. Fortunately easterlies are rare in the

summer months but it’s crucial we check weather forecasts regularly and monitor conditions to avoid getting caught out, particularly at the start and the end of the season.

Up-to-date forecast information also means we can plan ahead for our fishing activities over the course of a few days. Laying fixed fishing gear like pots, nets and lines is all very well, but if conditions have changed by the time we go to recover them we might find ourselves in a very different situation. As is the case with anchoring, what is a sheltered stretch of water one day can easily become a lee shore the next.

Wind strength is our next consideration. We tend to avoid going out in any conditions of Force 5 or above, even in west sector winds which give largely flat water in Gerrans Bay. Kensa can handle fresh winds but having hands free to fish and controlling speeds in those conditions is often unfeasible and handling gear can become unmanageable. Conversely, totally calm conditions affect us too. We find sculling Kensa works

better than rowing and is often necessary at the beginning or end of the day near our mooring which is frequently becalmed at these times in the summer months. However, it’s a very slow and labour intensive way of moving around so we aim not to commit to an entire day fishing under oar.

Assuming the wind is favourable for us to go out, we then start planning where to go based on the direction it’s blowing from. We establish an upwind sector of roughly 60˚ either side of the forecast wind direction in which we can reasonably fish without travelling too far downwind over the course of the day. Taking a ‘bread first, cake later’ approach means we go upwind at the start of the day in order to ensure we can get back as fast as possible with our catch at the end of the day. This also means that should the wind strengthen unexpectedly, it’s always easy and quick to bail out and head for home. Observing the day-to-day weather patterns is also key; we always bear in mind that unpredicted land or sea breezes may set up during the day and catch us out.

The tideHelpfully tide has predictability on its side. Tidal heights don’t trouble us too much from the point of view of navigation; Kensa has a deep water mooring at Portscatho which is accessible at all states of the tide. However, the times we fish are affected by the height of tide. For example, predatory fish like bass tend to feed on the incoming tide so aiming to fish around the flood may be beneficial.


The human elementHaving established the interplay between wind and tide, we can start to make a rough plan for the day. Of course there are other variables which affect fishing too. Factors like quality of light, water clarity, the type of bait or lures we are using all make a difference to fishing but ultimately these are irrelevant if the effects of wind and tide mean we can’t get from A to B. Equally, capitalizing on wind and tide does not solve everything; there are still Kensa’s crew and customers to think of. Finding a large mackerel shoal can be a mixed blessing; if we spend too long fishing it and arrive home too late, our Catch of the Day market may have disappeared by the time we’re able to land it. The fact that the boat will perform nicely in the fresh breeze with a couple of reefs is irrelevant if one of us can’t make it out that day and the other person won’t be able to leave the helm for long enough to fish efficiently.

Learning how to sell our fish has been a challenge in its own right. Having worked out which species the wind, tide and other changing factors will allow us to target on any given day, we then need to establish our likely market. With this in

Tide also dictates how we fish. Broadly speaking, we plan to net around neap tides and use lines around springs. Fish feed more strongly at spring tides, while the weaker flow at neaps means static nets can be laid more effectively without becoming so clogged with seaweed. Daily tidal streams have a huge effect on our fishing too. Mackerel shoals frequently gather around confluences in tide, where a strong stream hits a weaker flowing body of water, while trolling for bass and pollock works best down tide. Tidal stream atlases are not detailed enough to show localised effects, so we rely on observation and rules of thumb. Knowing the broad direction of tide relative to high and low water is helpful, while pot buoys and navigation marks are useful indicators of tidal flow.

Of course we often need to make a decision between prioritising wind or tide, if the two forces are in opposition or if one is likely to be particularly strong throughout the day. In light conditions with spring tides, for example, heeding the tide is particularly important. Finding a helpful back eddy will speed our progress no end, while sailing up the estuary against the ebb may be nearly impossible.


where the beauty of Kensa lies. One of the great advantages of the yawl rigged lugger is the number of control options it offers. Several reefing options and a boomless rig gives us a great deal of flexibility and allows us to quickly and easily brail up the main to reduce our power, giving us a large and safe working area when fishing slowly over a shoal or rock. Meanwhile, Kensa’s large rig – 242 square feet (22.47m²) on her 18'6" (5.7m) hull – gives us maximum power for times when conditions are light or we want to make good speed to a mark or mooring. Her shallow hull profile and bilge keels are also advantageous. Not only do they mean that draught is not a limiting factor, the same qualities result in increased leeway. Although this has its drawbacks when sailing upwind, these are exactly the qualities we are looking for when drifting.

Maximising Kensa’s potential and working out ways to manoeuvre her at close quarters while dealing with fishing gear was our next big challenge.

In our March/April issue, on sale 26 February, Cat and Simon share more of their boat handling techniques.

mind we need to consider timings and quantities; knowing our customer’s typical order sizes and time requirements make all the difference to being able to successfully combine fishing and fish-selling. This is not just a question of knowing when a local restaurant will need to have an order delivered in time to prepare for their evening service. Selling our fish within a small radius of where it’s caught has its shortcomings. A glut of fish like mackerel will mean the local market is quickly saturated. Even if we could easily go out and get a sizeable catch, it is not worth the time and effort if customers are not forthcoming and there is a limit to our smoking, pickling and freezing capacity!

Finally, we also need to cater to our own capabilities – or lack thereof. Our plans for the day will be shaped by whether Simon is fishing singlehanded or there are two of us on board. As with any other physical activity or job, fatigue can quickly become a limiting factor, especially if recent conditions have been challenging.

KensaTo overcome these constraints and difficulties, we need a boat that will easily adapt to our changing parameters. This is


assured it was a sure-fire bet. Fishing marks simply indicate fishing grounds; they are positions where you are likely to catch, usually due to the presence of a habitat or spot where fish congregate. Marks tend to be rocks, wrecks or underwater

obstructions which give the area the right characteristics to encourage certain species. They are found by using a series of land-based transits, often highly subject to local knowledge which has been recorded secretly or verbally over generations. It’s no surprise this information tends to be so jealously guarded; on a good day marks are as valuable as crosses on a treasure map.

Fishing mark transits use different combinations of conspicuous features lined up on the land; anything from a distinctively shaped headland to a brightly coloured front door that is easily and unambiguously visible at sea. Fortunately for us, some of the most popular local fishing marks have been documented and shared, so we started out with a few to explore. Some were easier to find than others; sometimes we’d line up two transits and be unable to find the other pair. Over time, houses have been repainted, hedges uprooted and trees grown, causing mark transits to be obscured or to vanish. On other occasions, the question of “I wonder if this is the right place?” would be quickly and happily answered - as on that first day - by the feeling of a fish on the end of the line.

Of course, having found a mark, we could just save a waypoint on our GPS or plotter and save ourselves the hassle of using transits. But having no engine means fixed instrumentation requiring power is not the most viable option for us. Although we do use handheld devices on occasion, we generally find they’re somewhat impractical with hands that

In W109, we looked at how harnessing the effects of wind, tide and other variables has helped us to fish under sail and oar more effectively. This time we’ll concentrate on the

practical side of things and share some of the boat handling techniques we use on a day-to-day basis when fishing. That might make it sound like we know what we’re doing. The truth is we don’t – or at least we didn’t. There’s no beginner's guide to fishing under sail and not many accounts of methods and techniques. There are few people who remember how it was done and fewer still who fish under sail today. Although we were lucky enough to be given some enormously helpful advice from the outset, ultimately the only thing to do was to have a go ourselves. So once we’d gleaned all the knowledge we could, we set about learning the rest the only way possible – by trial and error. Or rather via a series of trying errors.

The first time we left our mooring off Portscatho in south Cornwall and headed out into Gerrans Bay is still fresh in our minds. In full view of the village, we were desperately hoping we’d catch some fish and make it back to the mooring without making too many mistakes. As anyone who has ever been on a boat will know, get it right and nobody will be watching but if you mess things up you’re guaranteed to have an audience. So we did what any self-respecting person would do and sailed as fast as we could around the nearest headland and hid from any keenly trained binoculars.

Making a markSafely out of sight, we set about trying to find some fish. We headed for a well-known local fishing mark, having been

In the second of their 2-part series, Cat and Simon Holman describe the techniques they devised

for commercial fishing under sail and oar. With diagrams by Simon Holman and photograph by Nigel Sharp.

Dressage for Boats - 2


fore lug as it should technically be known – was a plan from the design stage of things and a known tool for working lug sail. Other ideas evolved more spontaneously from necessity. If we found brailing up alone slowed us down too much or didn’t give us enough steerage, we would fiddle around with trim and pointing angles, all the time trying to improve the situation and minimise the frustration of lost fish. Eventually, one of us would invariably suggest some kind of unorthodox manoeuvre, often voiced with a slight edge of desperation Although trying this out would sometimes be quickly followed by a shaky “Won’t be doing that again…”, at other times this tentative bodge job would lead to one of the following techniques, allowing us to safely – if not always stylishly – achieve our goals.

Technique 1: Reach – Gybe – ReachThis is a technique we use in light winds. We find it’s particular good for passing and re-passing over a shoal or a mark which covers a larger area. First, we sail Kensa towards the upwind side of the shoal. As we start to encounter the shoal, we brail the main up and trim the mizzen appropriately for a beam reach or thereabouts. At this point, the boat speed drops as the main stops driving and Kensa becomes powered by the mizzen alone. Despite the absence of a sail up forward, we find that we are able to control the boat well at a beam reach or deeper. As we reach the edge of the shoal, we release the mizzen sheet and allow Kensa to gybe, using the drag from the brailed main to pull her head round. Once we’ve gybed, we re-sheet the mizzen and set off once more on a reach to the other side of the shoal, continuing with this pattern until the shoal comes to an end. At this point we power up, return to the ‘top’ of the shoal and start the process once again.

are wet from handling lines and fish or simply busy steering. Instead, eyeball navigation becomes our main tool, whether for revisiting known marks or grounds or for establishing new ones. We’ve learned that when we find a good spot for fish, the key is to look up, not down at the water and to make a mental note of at least two references for our position so that we can find it again. Once we’re home – or before if possible – we log this information along with the date, weather and time of day and tide.

Working with transits to safely negotiate a rock-bound channel or fix a position was familiar territory for us, so initially laying a fishing mark wasn’t too much of an issue, assuming we correctly allowed for wind and tide and our wiggly steering abilities while fishing. The problem, we realised, was that once we’d found fish on a mark or happened upon a shoal, we needed to stay over it for as long as possible. In Kensa’s dynamic rig and shallow hull profile, we had a veritable arsenal of options when it came to quick changes of speed; we just needed to learn how to use them.

Developing techniquesManoeuvring around a shoal or mark shares certain similarities with man overboard procedures; both require control of speed, awareness of the variables and the ability to return to a fixed point on the water. Whilst the general principles for MOB will apply to any boat, everyone will develop their own preferences for how to do this under sail and modify these according to the conditions at hand. We’ve found a few specific techniques that work well for us with Kensa and which are adaptable enough to be combined into an average day’s fishing.

It’s fair to say that the development of some of these techniques has been haphazard. Brailing up the main – or


tack, leaving the mainsail lashed up to windward in order to forereach slowly back over the mark. Finally, we tack round and repeat these steps. In light conditions, when wind strength may not be enough to push the boat’s head through the wind under reduced sail, we sometimes find it’s necessary to gybe rather than tack. The beauty of this technique is its ‘hands free’ nature; when we get it right, we’re able to leave the two sails set and repeat this for a long time, leaving us free to concentrate on dealing with lines and fish.

Technique 2: Reach – Tack – ReachA useful technique when fishing over a mark in a wind against tide situation, we start by sailing as directly into the tide as possible, adjusting the boat speed as necessary to glide over the mark. Depending on the conditions, we achieve this by either reefing, oversheeting or undersheeting the sails and trimming them according to the wind direction. Once we’re past the mark with enough space to turn Kensa around, we


the wind as possible without allowing her to tack. As the fish start to thin out, we brail up the main and hard-sheet the mizzen. Kensa will then drift nicely back over the shoal, about twenty degrees off dead downwind. At the end of the shoal, we unbrail the main and repeat the process once again.

Learning to fish with Kensa has undoubtedly made us better sailors. Using ‘dressage’ techniques like these can be hugely rewarding; when everything comes together and works well, Kensa feels like a well-trained, responsive gun dog. And when it doesn’t she’s more like our actual dog; generally well-behaved, apt to embarrass us in public when tired or over-excited, very lovable, fond of mackerel. But it’s early days and with practice and perseverance we hope there will be many new tricks to come.

Technique 3: Luff and DriftThis is a great option if we have more than one person on the boat and can spare a hand to steer. In certain circumstances, we find there’s more benefit in allocating one person to be full-time helm, allowing the others to focus fully on fishing; this is particularly true if we’re catching well over a small shoal of mackerel in brisker conditions, for example. We leave the main unbrailed for this but use a reef to cut speed down and provide minimal drive through the water. Having found a shoal, we sail Kensa through the upwind side on a close reach. Easing the main so that it is just luffing, the person on the helm then steers the boat on a zig-zag course through the shoal, powering and depowering by keeping as close to

1

A feasibility study into the potential for sail-powered craft in Cardigan Bay fisheries

Vessel requirements Reasons for seeking an alternative vessel design

Local fishermen have the view that the high financial investments and start-up costs of fishing are substantial barriers for new entrants to the industry and also for employed crewmen who may seek to work their own vessel in the future. A suitable registered vessel with an appropriate fishing licence is mandatory, as well as basic training, safety equipment and the myriad of fishing gear, equipment and navigation devices an individual may require.

Currently, a fishing vessel without an engine is not required to have a licence, hence this study into a method of propulsion alternative to inboard diesel and petrol outboard engines1. However, it is uncertain how the authorities may view unlicensed commercial activity, as there are existing bylaws for certain species caught by unlicensed leisure fishermen2.

The Figs.4, 5, 6 and 7 are all examples of small inshore vessels currently available for sale around the UK6. These highlight the minimum space, equipment and machinery required by inshore fishermen in such small vessels, along with their corresponding market sale value. Type of fishing business

Nearly all of the commercial fishermen of Cardigan fish from boats on a full-time basis or are part-time where fishing is their main income3. Target fish

The majority of Cardigan fishermen only catch shellfish comprising lobster, prawns and spider, velvet and brown crab. Some larger boats trawl for scallops in the season. However, some also diversify throughout the year to catch wet fish like mackerel, bass, herring and dover sole, etc10. Types of fishing gear needed

Shellfish are caught with a variety of pots which are baited and entrap the target species. The pots are strung together to form a fleet and consist of a weighted backline, weights, risers and marker buoys. On every vessel there is a power-driven hauler to retrieve the fleet of pots with power coming from a hydraulic pump driven by the main engine or by a separate petrol/diesel power pack. Spider crab can also be caught with

A fleet of nets and a fleet of pots

2

tangle nets. Wet fish are caught with gill nets, hand lines and rods with baited hooks and lures. Vessels which use static nets have a net hauler and sometimes a net flaker, both powered in the same manner as the pot hauler. Handlines are long, thin lines with a weight and hooks at one end. They can either be coiled into a suitable container or wound around a reel. Manual, hydraulic or electric machinery is available to jig multiple lines and to strip the catch from the hooks but this is rarely seen locally. Quantity of gear used and carried

Typically, local vessels work fleets of between 10 to 30 pots with perhaps 500 to 1500 pots belonging to each vessel on the sea bed at any one time. The pots are left for 1 to 3 days to soak before being hauled, emptied, re-baited and shot in the required location. The fleets are stacked on deck when worked and the size of fleets is dictated by the deck space available. A rotation is worked so that hauling, soaking and relocating of the fleets is carried out in sequence, as not all of the gear can be worked in a single day.

Similarly, nets are set, soaked and hauled, with soaking times between a few hours and 3 days, depending on species targeted. A typical net is approximately 100m x 2m with mesh sizes to suit the target species, although sizes vary greatly. The nets can be roped together to form longer fleets with the larger crewed boats working an average of 5 fleets of 3 nets. Vessels that use nets have machinery to haul and then flake out the empty net. The catch is usually picked out from the net by hand whilst the net is on the deck. Nets are carried in bins of suitable size to accommodate the net, ropes and buoys with the anchor weights being attached as the net is shot in the desired location. Weights and volume of gear

A 24” standard steel lobster pot is approximately 20kg (fig.1) and a plastic prawn creel of similar size is 4kg. Anchor weights, of 25kg on average, are used at each end of a fleet, with a continuous lead line connecting each pot of approximately 15kg per 100m. Therefore a 10 pot fleet will weigh approximately 300kg, this varying greatly on the ground and depth worked. A new 100m tangle net with a 330mm mesh weighed 14kg (fig.2) and is either weighted or anchored at each end, again with 25kg. Therefore a single net would weigh approximately 80kg when fully rigged and fishing (fig.3).

Fresh bait for crab, salted for lobster and live bait for hooks is carried in variable quantities and is proportional to the amount of gear set. Ice, a third in each fish box and topped up with sea water to make slush ice, is only used by vessels landing wet fish. Amounts of ice vary but a rule of thumb of 1kg ice to 1kg fish is acceptable for day fishing, which allows for wastage and melting. Shellfish are kept alive either in vivier tanks aerated by pumped seawater or in covered damp boxes. In either case the shell fish must be kept alive for sale.

Fig.1

Fig.2

Fig.3

3

A standard 6 stone plastic fish box dimensions are 800x500x280 and will hold approximately 50 mackerel or 10 bass with ice to keep the catch in best condition. A larger insulated fish box of 800x500x450 with lid has double the capacity. Modern plastic fish boxes nest inside each other when not in use and by turning a box around the boxes will stack on top of each other, thus protecting the contents. Storage

Deck space is at a premium for working the gear at all times, but bait, spare fishing gear, the catch and all the other accoutrements required must be organised and easily to hand. Standardised nesting/stacking boxes and tubs are heavily used throughout the industry and virtually all equipment is on deck and open to the elements at all times. Only the largest inshore boats have any form of hold or fish room. Rods, hooks and lures need to be kept dry and are usually kept in sealed boxes in lockers. Slush ice is carried in insulated boxes, salted bait in open boxes and live bait in vivier tanks, all on deck.

Distance to fishing grounds

Generally the size of the vessel dictates where, when, how long and how far from port it is worked. There are no specific fishing grounds that the Cardigan fleet targets, en masse, on a regular basis. This is because of the nature of the mixed catch available over a wide area and the diverse size and type of vessels used. Manoeuvrability

This is a key attribute for an inshore fishing vessel. Multiple pick-ups of marker buoys in deep water and slow manoeuvres in tight spaces between rocks and shallow waters require a vessel to be easily handled in differing situations. Some fishermen employ a steadying sail to balance the windage of their vessel whilst hauling their gear but all rely purely on the power of the main engine and propeller for close quarters manoeuvring. The larger vessels, having inboard engines and deeper draft, are not as manoeuvrable as smaller shallow draft vessels with outboard engines, thus they tend to work different grounds. Hours worked at sea In virtually all cases the tide dictates when a vessel puts to sea and for inshore fishing most fishermen are out approximately 3 hours before and after low water. Working the tides is important for hauling and shooting the gear in specific places and exploiting fish feeding and shoaling habits. Cardigan fishermen also have the added complication of negotiating the river mouth and sand bar only when the tide and wind allows.

4.3m - 6hp outboard - Full licence - £4950

£

Fig.4

4

Weather

The weather is a fundamental part of being at sea. Prolonged gales affect all fishermen and cause enforced days in port and damage to gear left soaking at sea. On days when the weather is marginal, a fisherman’s personal preferences, abilities and fishing area dictate whether he puts to sea. Seaworthiness in a vessel, in most cases, relies on the operator. Crew and safety requirements Larger boats have a wheelhouse that may have a small galley, a heads and one or two bunks and are equipped to work away for one or two nights. The majority have a wheelhouse or cuddy to accommodate two men standing, which gives some protection from the elements when steaming. The smaller boats are completely open. Suitably clothed in wellies, oilskins and lifejacket, a fisherman is capable of being at sea for the six or so hours required to work

the tide, so the smaller boats forgo the comfort of a cuddy/wheelhouse and utilise the deck space for working instead. Dry storage is required for personal kit, first aid, flares, etc. and is in the form of built-in watertight lockers or deck boxes. The electronic aids such as GPS plotters, sounders and fish-finders on the open vessels are either fully water-proof or mounted in clear-fronted watertight boxes.4

Emerging boat requirements

A scenario has been put forward whereby a vessel is affordable, does not require expensive machinery to operate and can be worked by one man. Not requiring a crewman is important to this scenario because the extra wage bill would easily double the catch needed, therefore demanding at least double the gear, more physical effort and a much larger vessel. Affordability can be relative, but the smaller the vessel, the smaller the cost to manufacture and maintain. A smaller vessel has a limited load capacity and therefore will accommodate less fishing gear. Less fishing gear means less fishing effort, therefore less income for the fisherman. However, with vastly reduced set-up costs, overheads and repayments, the catch can be reduced but still provide an income. To do this, the fisherman would have to shy away from heavy bulk fishing for one or two species, as the vessel would not have the capacity for large amounts of gear; he would need to be more selective and diverse in his catch as the seasons change. Fortunately, Cardigan has a broad range of marketable species which allows for a multi-disciplined approach, which, with care, could provide a catch of extremely high quality and freshness and therefore command a premium price5. In this scenario, it is envisaged that pots

6.4m – 30hp inboard – Full licence - £14,500

Fig.5

5.9m – 22hp inboard – Full licence - £14,500

Fig.6

4.92m – 13.5hp inboard – Full licence - £10,000

Fig.7

5

would be worked in singles, as it would not be physically possible to hand haul more than one pot at a time, for any length of time, without machinery. The pots would be accurately placed near rocks and shallows where other boats are unable to go because of their draft. Because of a pot’s inherent weight, it would not require any weights or anchors, thus keeping the gear to a minimum. The nets would be set and hauled over the gunwale and would be in singles, rather than fleets, due to the space restrictions on deck for sorting the catch. Handlines, long lines and rods could be used in any combination and quantity which the fisherman could handle. Anchoring the boat to check drifting would have to be a routine and easily accomplished task. Close-quarters slow manoeuvring would be carried out with oars if relying solely on human power. Steaming to and from pots, nets and pitches would be done under sail. Therefore, the storage and use of the oars, along with the raising, reefing and controlling of the sails, has to be as simple and effective as possible and not hinder the working of the fishing gear. The ability to keep the vessel hauled up on the shore or on a trailer would dispense with mooring costs and the need for a tender, and would also reduce the potential for damage in bad weather. Proposed design An unpowered new vessel design has to incorporate sufficient deck space to allow the fisherman to work his gear manually, efficiently and safely and be of an overall size that is operable by one person and be capable of carrying a varying load.

The size of the vessel will depend on its displacement and therefore its ability to carry the fishing gear safely. Virtually all inshore vessels are within the ‘under 10m’ category with the smallest practical commercial size starting from approximately 4.5m loa x 2m beam (see figs. 4-7). Also note the open clear decks, high bulwarks, handrails, extra storage space (catcatchers) and combined hydraulic net/pot haulers which are used extensively in the industry, as only the simplest of rod and line boats have no mechanical equipment.

As a basis for a design, a maximum capacity for five pots, three nets, two rods and two handlines has been proposed as an example of what might be practical to carry at any one time in a small sailing boat. Further study of catch rates and wholesale prices is needed to ascertain how much gear is required to catch enough fish for a part-time living wage, although this does depend heavily on a fisherman’s individual fishing skills. However, the quantity of pots and nets worked is only limited to physical endurance, as any number and combination of fishing gear can be taken to the grounds over a few days and left to soak, thus increasing fishing effort without the need for a burdensome vessel.

This initial amount of fishing gear to be carried would have a combined approximate weight of 404Kg (5x30kg pots+3x80kg nets+2x2kg rods+2x5kg lines). Other equipment, such as fish boxes, ice, etc., could be rounded up to 25kg with an allocation of 25kg for the catch. An allowance of 100kg for a fully equipped fisherman brings the total load to

6

554kg as a minimum8. In addition, all sorts of extra gear, tools, etc., and basic safety equipment as stipulated by the MCA also has to be carried. SeaFish, the UK fishing governing body, has its own vessel construction standards to which any new registered fishing vessel has to comply 7. However, other existing European construction standards are in place for all new vessels (leisure and commercial); therefore, compliance with either design standard is obligatory. Sample Design

The following is an example of a design proposal based on these initial findings, existing powered vessel dimensions and an assortment of historical sailing craft. This is produced here to form a starting point for discussion and a focus for further design review.

A flat bottomed skiff 9

a) Approximate dimensions LOA 6m x Beam 2m b) Flat bottom, for extreme shoal draft c) Transom stern, for buoyancy and stability d) Self-draining deck, for safety and easy flushing/wash down e) Built-in buoyancy and storage f) Simple shape to build, maintain and beach/recover onto trailer g) Flare of topsides keeps waterline narrow for rowing but gives buoyancy for sailing

and carrying loads h) A loose-footed sail is easy to stow quickly with brails and leaves a clear working area i) Different sail plans for different fisheries on same hull

Vessel full of all sorts of gear

8

References Assistance has been given by Len Walters, full-time commercial fisherman of Cardigan, in reviewing the current

characteristics of fishing vessels and fishing methods employed in Cardigan , in order to understand and

outline the requirements for a potential vessel design.

1. https://www.gov.uk/fishing-vessel-licence-under-10-metres/overview 2. The Shellfish Law – Cardigan Bay fisherman’s Association http://www.cbfaltd.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=132&Itemid=172 3. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/vessel-lists-10-metres-and-under 4. https://www.gov.uk/fishing-vessel-classification-registration-and-inspection#fishing-vessel-inspection-and-survey-requirements-and-procedures

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/msn-1813-code-of-practice-safety-of-small-fishing-vessels 5. http://www.seafish.org/responsible-sourcing/responsible-fishing-scheme 6. http://www.findafishingboat.com/ 7. http://www.seafish.org/industry-support/marine-survey/vessel-certification-and-inspections http://www.seafish.org/industry-support/marine-survey/construction-standards 8. Common fishing gear sizes – Len Walters

Item Weight Kg Size mm

Lobster pot 20 600 x 450 x 360 Plastic Prawn

creel 4 650 x 360 x 360

Tangle Net 14 800 x 500 x 280 (with integral leadline) Anchor/weight 25 Commonly items of scrap metal, railway track, spare chain,

etc., otherwise purpose-made ‘fisherman’ pattern anchors Lead line 15/100m Used between pots

Fishing rod 2 2400 long with reel, line and lure. Handline 5 50m line wrapped round a 300 x 100 x 20 board including

hooks and weight Fish box 2 800 x 500 x 280

Insulated fish box 5 800 x 500 x 450

9

9. © Iain Oughtred

10. Cardigan Bay catch species Common

Name

Latin Name Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Lobster Homarus gammarus

Brown Crab Cancer pagurus Velvet Crab Necora puber Spider Crab Maja squinado

Prawn Palaemon serratus Whelk Buccinum undatum Winkle Littorina littorea Mussel Mytilus edulis Cockle Cerastaderma edule

Scallop (king) Pecten maximus

Dogfish (lesser spotted) Scyliorhinus canicula

Dab Limanda limanda Pollock Pollachius pollachius

Dover Sole Solea solea

Sea Bass Dicentrarchus

labrax Cod Gadus morhua

Mullet (grey) Chelon labrosus Huss (aka rock

salmon) Scyliorhinus stellaris Flounder Platichthys flesus

Plaice Pleuronectes platessa Skate/Ray Raja spp Mackerel Scomber scombrus Black Sea

Bream Spondyliosoma

cantharus Red Mullet Mullus barbatu

Sprat Sprattus sprattus

Whiting Merlangius

merlangus Herring Clupea harengus

Brill Scophthalmus

rhombus Triggerfish Balistes capriscus

Turbot Psetta maxima Coley (aka

saithe) Pollachius virens AVAILABILITY

Locally targeted good medium poor/none

Appendix 3 Simon Holman’s Porthscatho experience

Here is a resume of the conversation between Colin Evans and Simon Holman.

The boat - Works well but would have two others as part of the armoury of fishing gear, a 14' dinghy and a kayak – for versatility and lightness. He uses water ballast and loose ballast which are handy for reducing weight for trailering. Hasn't considered trailering to other locations to target seasonal marks but sees this as an advantage for certain circumstances. The volume, displacement and stability work well and are almost essential. The rig works well after 2 years of tweaking. Simon does not use the oars much as it is not easy, so the boat is basically sailing all the time. The boat does not drift much which is an advantage. A ballast keel would not work as he often works in depths of 3 to 6 feet. A more modern design might sail to the grounds faster but could it cope with the displacement, how would it drift, would the draft increase etc? Currently, Simon would not change anything to the design. Was surprised how much of the build cost went into hardware and liked the concept of a cheap/replaceable boat.

Weather/tides - Working in summer is no problem. Spring/autumn is more challenging often with conditions not being favourable but the powered vessels are out. Usually gets underway at low water and sails up wind and works down wind. Always checks the weather/tide and works the gear accordingly rather than trying to fight the elements to fish from the same area day in day out.

Gear - uses static, drifting and lines, no shell fish (licencing/bylaws). To keep up with the seasonal fluctuations of species requires having a lot of different gear in stock. He is currently working on methods to reduce the physical effort whilst increasing the catch of a more valuable species, such as experimenting with drift netting at night. Has access to the local ice plant and a commercial freezer in a local pub. Might invest in a large bow roller to haul nets over and says that a mackerel gurdy is essential and would consider installing a hauler and power pack if the cost could be justified. Currently can fish 5 nets a day single handed which can provide an adequate income.

Selling – Probably takes up 50% of time. Technology/social media works. Sells to anyone and local restaurants/bars. Has found that smoking fish or supplying fillets would be more acceptable by public rather than supplying whole/gutted fish but tricky to do because of infrastructure/set-up to become essentially a small fish monger. Would like to develop a 3 or 4 boat co-op which could then cover the whole range of species, supply demand and spread the work of maintenance, selling, admin etc. and/or develop a ‘community fish box’ – a weekly subscription for a mixed box of fish. Current activity would suit part time fishing.

Comments By Simon re the requirement Had a read through your proposed design requirements document. I picked up on a few points that I thought might be worth mentioning. I wasn't sure if the version of the doc was a draft as there were a couple of oddities in the formatting. Firstly, when you refer to features found on other comm vessels - catcatchers are a way of improving the space on vessels too small for the gear they are working. They have some value for e.g. Crabbers when taking out new fleets to soak or for carrying buffs but they can be highly detrimental to stability and not a feature that I feel should be countenanced in a new design. Stability in fishing vessels is only just starting to get the attention it has lacked for a long time due to a number of capsizes with fatalities in the past couple of years. If they bring in proper stability legislation they will probs be outlawed. This is based on conversations I have had with an MCA surveyor and our local IFCA chairman. Next, you are probably aware of this but the sub ten unpowered fleet cannot operate as commercial crabbers. You can set as many pots as you wish but are limited to landing two crustaceans like any other member of the public. This is because without a reg number you can't complete the shelfish permit. Might be worth having a couple on uppers for personal use but not for planning a business. You can set prawn and whelk pots which there might be a market for but prawn potting is a winter activity which put us off it (and the high cost of the gear). If you want to go down the netting route, you will prob be looking at tangles and gills on fairly short soaks. We've found that 6 - 12 hours is long enough as they fill with spiders, undersized browns and weed which makes hauling manually a bit of a marathon and if you work on your own you still have to sort through and clear before you can reset them. We tend to leave long anchor lines so we can stay anchored and clear before taking up the last bit. One huge change I would make to Kensa if doing her again would be to create an open transom to haul stern first as it's so much easier than trying to recover over the bows. Bear in mind that your practical operations will vary with season and tide. We don't net at springs like anyone else or tend to do too much handlining at neaps and we are still trying to work out the local calendar for species. We try to keep only the stuff we need on the boat or it gets lagged in fish crap. Also, because we have no engine to power a pump we dip each bucket of water for cleaning and then ironically have to pump it back out of the bilge. Saving effort in any single operation is very important. There is enough effort as it is... You will probably want a 220l ice bin somewhere handy. Ours is central. We use about 25 kg of ice a day in summer made up to slurry with 30 ish kilos of water. This is just enough for a good day on mackerel. This could be built into a boat as a standard item or two smaller lockers.

As regards structure. Unless you want to become registered you are not subject to MCA build standards. They are good rules but don't cover strip plank/glass on ply construction. For what it's worth I don't think any boat over 14' would work as a sail/oar fishing boat under oar. Sculling is good for short bursts and for going up rivers or coming up to the mooring but oars are awkward and stick out and tangle and the sheer effort with oars is massive. Sculling is also tiring but the oar can be left trailing. A small outboard would be an excellent feature in a quarter locker. It is necessary. You will want a large clear unobstructed working sole. It fills up with stuff very quickly and stuff can be shifted by sliding with booted feet. Lifting heavy boxes is dangerous with a roll. Sorry! That turned out to be more stuff than I thought.... sorry if it seems like I am teaching you to suck eggs! Let me know if there is anything else. Comment by Simon re the sizing of the boat Thanks for sending me your sketch in numbers. It all makes very interesting reading. Given the amount of variation in historical fishing boat types around the coast I don't think that there is an ideal all-rounder. So long as the boat meets the needs of the intended user that is the ultimate design criterion. I don't personally see anything wrong with number based design - I have a personal parametric study with the details of 800 ish different small craft that I like to extrapolate from every now and again which takes a lot of guess work away from the task. The buyers licence that I referred to is a separate thing from the fishing licence and is free from the MMO. It concerns "first sale" fish, I.e. fish just landed and means that we can legally buy the fish from ourselves and then resell it to customers requiring more than small quantities for a fry. For us it serves as recognition that the MMO have considered what we are doing and we have a communications trail with them to obtain it. I look forward to seeing the design in the flesh. I am sure she will perform everything asked of her. If I were doing Kensa again I would certainly design an outboard well in from the start which might seem counterintuitive but I underestimated how often we need to move her

because of the weather and also because our harbour master is particularly wary of boats without engines and won't let us use the inside of the Porth in case we "smash into the other boats".... In your study I didn't see any mention of ice weight. We use between 25 and 40 kg of flake ice a day when we are mackerelling which we mix with a similar quantity of seawater to make an ice slurry in our 220 litre insulated bin. Fish go straight in and don't struggle and thrash around which improves their condition at sale. We find that is sufficient even in the middle of summer and we land the fish in prime condition with the longest possible shelf life. With the bin that we use we have kept ice in the bin successfully for three days in the summer. I hope this of use.

Sail Powered Fishing Boats A feasibility study · The study was aimed at looking at the feasibility...

Documents

Transcript of Sail Powered Fishing Boats A feasibility study · The study was aimed at looking at the feasibility...