Talk:Fishing trawler

Trawler image

Image:False Creek boats.JPG shows F/V Krista Gail rigged to fish as a purse seiner, and is thus not appropriate for an entry on fishing trawlers. The area of False Creek where the photo was taken is home predominantly to seiners, trollers and gillnetters... 24.84.44.248 (talk) 03:35, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Trawler Game

I used to play this game in grade school.

You control a trawler with various nets to catch fish and other seafood.

I don't know what the system name was. I think it was unix, but I'm not sure.

I really want this game.

please respond if you have any info on the game I'm talking about. 07:53, 31 May 2006 User:209.217.123.71

Trawler Boats

I have added a page Trawler (boat). Maybe a disambiguation page is needed. 00:48, 29 July 2006 User:Skapur

Cruising Trawler

Seems that "Cruising Trawler" should be changed to "Recreational Trawler." It is a better description. Not all trawler owners "cruise," which has a long-term connotation (several weeks or more). Many -- probably most -- owners just make day trips or weekend trips.

There are a few changes I would suggest on the Cruising Trawler page, but I will list them there.

If anyone has any thoughts, please speak up.

TheMadMariner 23:57, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

• I agree that "cruising trawler" is not the best name for this type of vessel and suggest that a better name is "trawler yacht". I disagree that the term "cruising trawler" has a long term travel connotation. To me the boating term "cruiser" refers to a boat, usually with a planing hull, that is relatively fast such as a Bayliner or Carver that will get to its destination very quickly but is not suitable for blue water navigation. The word now often applied to pleasure boats used for long term/long distance travel is "passagemaker".

I strongly agree that a trawler yacht, like fishing trawlers, must be a displacement hull. A Grand Banks 42 is a beautiful yacht but due to its semi-displacement hull does not qualify as a trawler yacht. Trawleryacht (talk) 21:45, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Proposed merge

There is a proposal to merge Recreational trawler with Commercial trawler. I oppose this merge on the grounds that they are chalk and cheese. A commercial trawler is an industrial boat falling under categories such as the fishing industry and fishing vessels. A recreational trawler is a recreational boat falling under categories such as recreation and boats. The two articles fall into entirely different interest areas. --Geronimo20 (talk) 06:24, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Edits 24 August 2008

This discussion has been moved from User talk:Anthony Appleyard. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:13, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

I have a problem with your deletions and additions to commercial trawler. You have removed two core summary sections about the naval and recreational use of trawlers, stating, as though it were sufficient reason, that the material can be found elsewhere.

You have replaced these sections with a section of your own an an image gallery. The section you added by yourself is titled "Design features", and contains one sentence, which says: "The crew's beds are bunks, with cot sides to stop the occupant from rolling out when the boat rolls in heavy weather." Well Anthony, this applies to pretty much any boat that has beds in it. It has nothing specifically to do with trawlers.

Your image gallery contains a picture of a bed with cot sides (sigh), two unclear picture of the aft deck, one of which might be useful if you could actually see how the gear was laid out, and a picture of the bridge, which mainly shows just the normal navigation aids you would find on any boat of this size. The picture of the bridge might have been useful if it focused on the extensive electronic equipment which modern trawlers carry specifically to aid the trawling, but your picture doesn't do that.

I appreciate that you are enthusiastic. Your approach might seem a nice approach to a reader who knows nothing about boats, and is reading the article on commercial trawlers in order to find out what a boat is. But readers who come to the article to find out what a commercial trawler is will find that you have removed specific information about trawlers and replaced it with information that applies to pretty much any larger boat.

I have restored the sections on naval and recreational uses and removed your offering on "Design features". Perhaps you could add this section and your cot picture to the articles on boats. Anyway, I have left your image gallery for now, but I really don't think it illustrates anything much that specifically distinguishes commercial trawlers.--Geronimo20 (talk) 22:01, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

• "The crew's beds are bunks, with cot sides ...": I was hoping that other users would add to this. Surely there are other Wikipedia users who know about trawlers. Even in this age when I come across the word "trawl" 10 or 20 times to mean searching thru literature for every time that it means fishing.
  • Not all boats have beds with cot sides. For example, the beds in most Red Sea scuba diving liveaboards do not.
  • "Your image gallery contains a picture of a bed with cot sides": It does not.
  • The information that I removed was also in Naval trawler and Recreational trawler, i.e. it was content forking.
  • Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:12, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

• As this page is called "Commercial trawler", I have again merged the non-commercial matter into Recreational trawler and Naval trawler, where it is described. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:28, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

• Replying to your points in order:

• Perhaps you could create an article about cot beds on boats, but this stuff doesn't belong in an article on trawlers.
• Yes, make a separate article about it.
• You are right, it wasn't a picture of a cot bed. It was picture of a galley with clamps to stop cooking pots from falling off in rough weather. However, the same comments apply to the galley as apply to the bed. This is not specific to trawlers, which is what the article is about. --Geronimo20 (talk) 22:44, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
• This has nothing to do with content forking, which is trying to push a POV, and everything to do with summary style. --Geronimo20 (talk) 22:44, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

• I have restored those aspects of the article that align it with summary style. --Geronimo20 (talk) 23:06, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

• The trawler's crew's sleeping arrangements and cooking arrangements are an integral part of the trawler, and I do not see why not mention them here. There is not enough matter to make a separate article on beds in boats. For example, most Red Sea liveaboards do not have bed cot sides or galley pot clamps.
  • I have read Wikipedia:Summary style, and I saw no need to put in here any more than needed to disambiguate the link being pointed to. As you wrote above at 06:24, 20 April 2008, recreational trawlers and commercial trawlers are chalk and cheese, and should each be described in its own page.
  • Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:54, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
• I have reverted again. Please discuss. This page is about commercial trawlers, and naval and recreational trawler info belongs on their proper pages. This page is no longer a general page about all boats called trawlers. There is a page Trawler for that sort of basic disambiguating between types. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 23:07, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

• It's a waste of time discussing matters with you, as the above record shows. You have removed core material from this article. Commercial trawler is the main article for naval trawlers and recreational trawlers. These types are derivatives of the commercial trawler. The material you add about cots and galleys and uninformative images of an obsolete trawler do not add value to this article. The stuff you added in your new section "Design features" is not true for most modern trawlers. However, it's a waste of time edit warring with you, so we may as well leave it in this mess for now. --Geronimo20 (talk) 01:27, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Third opinion

For what it's worth:

• The issue is less about WP:SS as it is about the relevance of the recreational and naval subsections to the specific topic of this article. As this is an article on commercial trawlers and not trawlers in general, there is no need for short summaries of other trawler types. It is sufficient that articles on other trawler types are mentioned in the "See Also".
• That said, the sentence "During World War I and World War II, many commercial trawlers were used as minesweepers, the activities being similar, and both the crew and the equipment aboard already suited to the task." may have a place here as it specifically relates to an adaption of commercial trawlers (the subject of this article) rather than a vessel designed for another purpose. It would be good if there was a reference for this statement which could be included as well.
• Although it is not the subject of the Third Opinion request, I don't think the image gallery adds much - I agree with Geronimo that the pictures are too low-res and generalised.

in summary - I'd support leaving the recreational and naval subsections out except the single sentence referred to above. Naval and recreational trawlers should be linked in "See Also", and a hunt commenced for better images. Euryalus (talk) 04:17, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Discussion continued

• I have restored section ===Design features=== and added the {{expand}} template so that someone can expand it. Surely there is much about trawler design that can be added there.
• I have restored sectios ===Images===; those images are better than no images. They are not "low-res": to see the full 1,600 × 1,200 pixel images, right click on the thumbnails and follow instructions. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 06:21, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Fine by me. I didn't have a view on the Design features section, and the images don't bother me that much - I just think there must be others out there that more clearly demonstrate the salient points. I don't have any of my own, otherwise I'd add them myself. Euryalus (talk) 07:00, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Design features

Having had a chance to read the article in more detail I have copyedited the "Design features" section to:

• add some references, particularly for the absence of uniformity in survey standards and therefore its absence in design. More refs are needed - its hard to definitively source a negative (ie that there is an absence of a standard). I'll hunt through the class societies pages and see what I can find for small commercial trawlers, but if anyone else has anything to add, go right ahead.
• remove a small quantity of existing material which was common to all vessels. There is no need to highlight that a trawler's bow is higher than the stern to prevent swamping - this is a design feature in pretty much all vessels other than rafts. I left the discussion of oilskins and boilers, but I'm not sure this is a unique feature of trawlers either and would be interested to hear why this is relevant. A source for the quote would also be good, to avoid the appearance of original research.
• include some common design features such as the stern trawl which is present in msot modern trawler fleets. Obviously no set of design features will be universal - there are hundreds of thousands of commercial trawlers worldwide and the design standards of (say) the US fleet won't be the same as (say) Nigeria's. Still, if the section is going to be useful it needs to start with the features most likely to be found on modern fleets. If there are regional variations or whatever, these can easily be added in.

As always, any disagreements or opposing views are welcome - am happy to discuss here at length and see if a consensus can be reached on the way the section (ro article) should appear. Euryalus (talk) 23:58, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was PAGE MOVED per discussion below. -GTBacchus^(talk) 01:44, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

---

• I am proposing that Commercial trawler be renamed Fishing trawler. These trawlers are fishing trawlers and are generally known as such. The term "commercial trawler" is relatively uncommon. For example, on Google, "fishing trawler" gets 130,000 hits, while "commercial trawler" gets only 5,750 hits. --Geronimo20 (talk) 05:55, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
• Which trawlers are not commercial? (I suppose that marine biologists may run a few. I have heard of naval types using a trawl to remove unidentified scuba divers from patrolled water.) Anthony Appleyard (talk) 07:06, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Naval trawlers are not commercial, and neither are recreational trawlers. --Geronimo20 (talk) 07:47, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

• But, as far as I can see, naval trawlers and recreational trawlers don't trawl. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 09:01, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Well fishing trawlers trawl for fish, naval trawlers traditionally trawled for mines, and recreational "trawlers" just use the basic design and sea keeping abilities of a trawler as the basis for a recreational boat. You can read about it in the articles for these types of boats. --Geronimo20 (talk) 18:42, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

• Support move: fishing trawler is the more common name, and the more usefully descriptive name. It's more important to tell readers that these vessels are used for fishing than to tell them the use is for commercial reasons. The article content is focused primarily on the fishing characteristics, not commercial characteristics, of these vessels (as one might expect from an article titled commercial trawler). Baileypalblue (talk) 06:32, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Trawler controversies

This article do probably need a section addressing the major environmental damage that trawler fishing causes —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.89.255.216 (talk) 21:18, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Environmental issues to do with trawling are covered in some detail in the article on trawling and particularly in the article on bottom trawling. --Epipelagic (talk) 23:29, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Can there be a link to that article? I found 'trawlers' by mistake while looking for 'trawling' and didn't realize it's controversial.80.42.48.64 (talk) 08:17, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fishing trawler. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101202015738/http://kjappeal.org/history.html to http://www.kjappeal.org/history.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:37, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fishing trawler. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://travel.independent.co.uk/uk/article176414.ece
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070529060325/http://www.hullheritageprints.co.uk/trawlerhistory/index.htm to http://www.hullheritageprints.co.uk/trawlerhistory/index.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:00, 1 October 2017 (UTC)