News

Uncertainties around Baltic quotas for 2015 in BALTFISH Forum meeting

Published on September 10, 2014

In the first Forum meeting under the Lithuanian BALTFISH Presidency, Baltic quotas for 2015 was discussed.  Although opinions on quotas for pelagic stocks as well as salmon slightly differed between the Baltic Member States (MS) most discussions were on the considerable cuts for the Baltic cod stocks as advised by the International Council for Exploitation of the Sea (ICES).

Short summary
The Commission who largely have supported the ICES advice have not so far delivered any proposal for the eastern cod. Besides quotas, information about the progress on the discard ban plan and the multispecies plan for the Baltic Sea was presented by the Commission. At the end of the meeting NGOs also raised two additional issues, namely the necessity to include environmental authorities and stakeholders when deciding for fishing opportunities in Natura 2000 areas and the need to finalize and implement the multiannual plan for Baltic salmon. The Forum meeting was followed by a meeting in the High Level Group, where an agreement among the Baltic MS on Baltic fishing opportunities for 2015 hopefully will be reached.

Last Monday, BALTFISH Forum meeting was held in Vilnius and fishing opportunities in the Baltic Sea for 2015 was the main topic on the agenda. Besides fisheries managers from the different Baltic Member States (all but Poland), the Baltic Sea Advisory Council (BSAC), the Fisheries Secretariat (FISH), Coalition Clean Baltic (CCB), OCEANA and WWF Lithuania were present at the meeting. Below you find the FISH view on ICES advice and the Commission proposal on the matter (this doc was distributed to the MS before the meeting). TACs will be decided in the Council in October 13-14.

In brief the Member States (MS) was supportive towards quotas suggested by ICES and the Commission for pelagic species although a few countries were reluctant to accept the proposed 17% cut for sprat since they wanted to have more stable quotas between years. These states (e.g. Latvia) further stated that with consideration to the current Russian sanction against EU prices will be lower, and to uphold the economy catches should remain at higher levels. However the opposite argumentation, to not dump the market by catching too large amounts of fish were not discussed.

Most MS saw the need to reduce catches of both the western and eastern cod stocks, however, most of them seemed reluctant to commit to the 2015 MSY target and instead proposed a new transition period towards 2020 for the western cod stock (n.b. this is not in line with the scientific advice and the only transition period that has been presented by ICES aims for MSY at 2015). Most of them considered the ICES interim advice for the eastern cod to be too drastic. However, a few countries, for instance Sweden expressed the necessity for substantial cuts for both stocks. MS views on salmon were unclear and several MS had not final positions clear yet. Sweden raised the issue of protecting the weak stocks with further measures (meaning not just adjusting TAC). 

The BSAC criticized the COM proposal to reduce plaice catches in spite that the population seems to increase – especially in a period when landing obligation should be implemented. For both cod stocks the industry view of the BSAC was that the drastic reductions in catches advised by ICES were not justified, although they thought that a transition period for the western stock would be acceptable.

The NGOs supported the importance to adhere to the ICES advice for both cod stocks, both for precautionary reasons (mostly considering the worrying state of the eastern stock) and since it is in accordance with the EU Treaty, the CFP and the Cod management plan art. 7. As raised by CCB, ICES has repeatedly reported that the western stock is weak and that the cod management plan is not in line with MSY target, also BALTFISH has addressed this before, and ICES has therefore suggested a MSY transition already earlier – which has not been adhered to. The NGOs stressed that the time to take action is now. For the eastern cod stock the NGOs supported the ICES interim advice and stressed the need to have a qualitative benchmark for the stock without rushing the process. However, with respect to the views of MS on fishing opportunities for the eastern cod stock, and with considerations to the necessity of introducing a discard ban, the NGOs as a compromiseproposed a roll over from last years’ catches for the stock (that is 36.4 kt). Furthermore, the NGOs supported the idea of adopting a regionalized management of sprat and herring to increase the amount of available prey in areas with high cod abundance.  

The ICES advice and the Commission proposal for Baltic salmon stocks differ somewhat since they are based on different principles (proportion of potential smolt productivity in rivers and the MSY principle= F 0.1, respectively). OCEANA raised the need to protect the weaker stocks by phasing out the fishery in the open sea on mixed salmon populations.

The Commission presented the framework for a multispecies plan (eastern cod, central herring and sprat), not including Harvest Control Rules, for example ± 15 % quota variation between two consecutive years. They have decided that F-values should be advised for by ICES in ranges (not clear how that would be operational) and the first advice for such ranges will be presented by ICES very shortly (perhaps already within a week). The Commission have not considered the objectives of the plan, that is on what basis should fishing mortalities be set, such as different ecological functions in the ecosystem provided by different species etc. and had consequently not instructed ICES to do so either. Effects on flatfishes due to fishing activities on especially cod, should also be considered in the plan. Appropriate measures from the control plan will be included into the multispecies plan and a proposal of the plan should be available very soon.

There was also a discussion about the discard ban plan and how it will be implemented. The plan is currently on inter-service consultation and will be approved by the COM in mid-October. We, the NGOs stressed the importance not to postpone the implementation since correct information on discard rate for particularly the eastern cod is essential to improve the modelling and age based assessment of the stock. The message from the Commission was also clear that the ban will be introduced as planned. The fishermen representatives stressed the urgent need for detailed instructions on how to handle fish taken as bycatch in boats and at ports etc. which all participants agreed already should have been presented by this stage.

The last issue on the agenda was the technical measures needed to implement the multispecies plan and most importantly, these measures should be developed by the MS, through BALTFISH, by delegated acts once the plan is adopted. 

At the end of the meeting OCEANA stressed the importance of having more influence by the environmental authorities, as well as stakeholders, when deciding for fishing opportunities in Natura 2000 areas (see link to PDF below). CCB raised the question of the urgency to implement the Multi Annual Plan for Baltic salmon and that it has to be addressed by BALTFISH the coming year. CCB also underlined that the plan is in the hands of BALTFISH and nobody else.

The Forum meeting was followed by a meeting last Tuesday in the High Level Group, where an agreement among the Baltic MS on Baltic fishing opportunities for 2015 hopefully was reached.

 For more information: