The EU committed itself to the MSY target by signing the conclusions at Johannesburg already in 2002. This is reflected in the Commission’s proposal for a new basic Regulation as part of the reform of the Common Fisheries Policy, aiming for the EU to “restore and maintain populations of harvested species above levels which can produce the MSY by 2015”.  However, many Member States have failed to commit themselves to this target so far and the Danish Presidency therefore called for a structured discussion at this week’s Council meeting in order to move forward.

The Council roundtable began with the Swedish Minister, Eskil Erlandsson, attempting to lead his fellow Ministers. He clearly supported the MSY principle while referring to an OECD report demonstrating the value of rebuilding fish stocks. However, one after one, his colleagues failed to demonstrate similar leadership, referring to the short-term problems of making the transition.

Several Member States discussed issues surrounding the application of the MSY principle in mixed fisheries. Moreover, many supported application of MSY through multiannual management plans (MAPs). These positions, however, will most likely lead to further inaction. While it may not be possible to reach BMSY for all stocks in a mixed fishery simultaneously, quotas can be set below FMSY tomorrow, which would lead to fish stocks rebuilding toward MSY levels (more details can be found here – MSY explained document link). Moreover, all proposed MAPs are currently on hold due to the impasse between Council and Parliament over whether the co-decision principle applies.

Ironically, the Council meeting took place on the same day as the American National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) produced its annual report on the status of U.S. fisheries. Since 2006, when a new fisheries law came into place ensuring that quotas were set in line with scientific advice, the state of U.S. stocks has greatly improved. Today, 21% of stocks are overfished while 27 stocks have been rebuilt.

In contrast, of the assessed stocks, 63% in the Atlantic are overfished, 82% in the Mediterranean and 4 out of the 6 stocks for which scientific advice is available in the Baltic. Moreover, Commission figures show that “scientific advice about overfishing is missing for about two-thirds of the total allowable catches. In most cases this is because of missing information on catches, incomplete surveys or poor sampling. Providing scientific data on fisheries is a responsibility of Member States which is currently not fully met in a number of cases”.

At their press conference after Council, both Commissioner Damanaki and the Danish Minister Mette Gjerskov, seemed crestfallen and had to admit that given the lack of support from the Council at large, MSY may have to be delayed until 2020 for several fisheries and only applied “where possible”. Were this to happen, it would add yet another failure to the litany associated with the Common Fisheries Policy.

Council also discussed allocation of funds under the proposed European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF). There was wide agreement that fisheries should be the primary focus of the EMFF, with less funding going to the Integrated Maritime Policy.

The report had attracted 542 amendments from MEPs, conscious of the need to improve the state of fish stocks and marine ecosystems. Political groups in the Parliament agreed to narrow these down into 38 consolidated amendments, all of which were voted through by the committee.

In order to ensure the sustainability of our fisheries, ENVI has stated that stocks should be managed at their maximum sustainable yield (MSY) by 2015 and their maximum economic yield (MEY) by 2020. This long-term perspective is likely to prevent fishery collapses in the short-term and enable the industry to grow in terms of employment and be more profitable in the future.

Moreover, the committee has elected to link subsidy funding and compliance with the law more closely. They have argued that those proven to have been engaged in illegal fishing activities should be ineligible for government handouts for 5 years, at present the proposals are for a 1 year ban. Aid for modernisation should be conditional on existing vessel capacity being assessed, while the report also states that the Commission must transparently disclose fisheries aid payments in future.

At the Council, only 5 of 27 Member States spoke out in support of the proposal for mandatory TFCs, and even countries which have longstanding TFC-like systems such as Denmark, Estonia and the Netherlands were against the Commission proposals. Damanaki responded to this by stressing that a focus on matching fishing opportunities to the size of the fleet must be retained so that the key issue of overfishing is resolved. To this end, both the Commissioner and the Danish Presidency agreed on the need for Member States to submit evaluations of their fleet’s capacity, in terms of engine power. Such an evaluation represents an important first step to understanding where overcapacities lie in the EU fleet.

The Commission has been unable to produce a report that includes an analysis of the EU fleet as several Member States have failed to submitted data on the engine power of their vessels. In future, Damanaki suggested that subsidy funds could we withheld from non-compliant Member States under a conditionality clause, if approved by the legal services.

Mette Gjerskov, the Danish Minister and current chair of the Council, aimed to present a compromise solution that would help to align resources and catching capacity. She argued that other mandatory measures could apply to Member States that forces them to address the issue of capacity. Plans could be submitted to the Commission for review, which outlines how after a capacity evaluation, each country aims to reduce its fleet power. A range of measures could then be implemented to reach the goal of “sustainable fisheries”.

At the Council meeting, regionalisation and the socio-economic impacts of the CFP reform were also discussed. BALTFISH was held up as an example of regionalisation in action by the Commissioner and Minsters from several Baltic Member States. There was widespread agreement that a sea-basin approach would help to avoid micro-management from Brussels and better integrate regional stakeholders.

Damanaki is seeking support for the Commission’s proposals for the Common Fisheries Reform (CFP), which is scheduled to be finalised at the beginning of 2013. This is the first CFP reform for 12 EU Member States who joined from 2004 onward, including those from the Eastern Baltic. In September, the European Parliament plenary will take place on most of the reform package and the Council working groups have made significant progress on much of the reform so this mission represented a late rallying call to a Member State not wholly onboard with their proposals.

However, the key messages of rebuilding fish stocks to their maximum sustainable yield, which it is projected would create 100,000 jobs, increase landings by 3 million tonnes per year (a 33% increase on today’s figures) and generate €3.2 billion annually, was not universally welcomed. While this objective was praised by a group of NGOs who submitted their priorities for the reform to the Commissioner, Damanaki was attacked in the national media. She was decried as a “Greek bearing only bad news” and criticised for not providing subsidies for engine modernisation, which contribute to overfishing.

On 9 May the Commissioner will visit Lithuania with another mission scheduled for Estonia shortly after. She will likely repeat the message of planning for the long-term so that sustainable stocks can lead to a sustainable industry that is not dependent on subsidies, and call for Member States to support her in achieving this aim.

Davies was speaking at a panel discussion in the European Parliament, entitled “sustainable fisheries in the EU: getting the incentives right”. In his report for ENVI, Davies noted that shadow rapporteurs from every group in the Parliament had rejected the Commission proposals for mandatory TFCs. He thought that the amendments in the Fisheries Committee (PECH) would follow a similar line. Moreover, in the Council, a significant majority of Member States have also voiced the opinion that quota allocation should remain their prerogative.

Rather than merely looking at the way in which TFCs may or may not contribute to sustainable fisheries management, academics from Gothenburg University and the MEP Isabella Lövin (Greens/EFA, SE) stressed the need for fishing quotas to be set within the boundaries recommended by scientific advice. It was stressed that setting fishing limits which enhance the long-term sustainability of fish stocks should be the first step that the EU takes to solve its problems. Quota allocation systems can then be subsequently amended.

Lövin argued that harvest control rules, which would end the annual haggling over quotas at Council meetings, should be implemented. This would lead to the EU settling long-term targets for fish stocks, and annual quotas being negotiated which meet these targets. Moreover, a system of giving priority access to fishing vessels which best meet the objectives of managers would have a more sustainable outcome then merely allowing speculations within a TFC market to determine who has the right to fish.

The Fisheries Secretariat (FISH) is looking to recruit a new staff member; a Regional Policy Officer.

The Policy Officer will take part in our work on “greening” international fisheries policy, with a focus on collaboration in the Baltic Sea region.

They focus on spiny lobster pot fishing in Corsica,  whelk and lobster in Normandy and longline hake fishing in the Basque country.

Given the stakes of the CFP reform, these videos are a reminder of what our future fisheries should aspire toward.

Enjoy!

The first two days of this meeting mainly focused on compiling current knowledge of ICES’s work on multispecies interactions in the Baltic, the economic status of fleets and enforcement issues were also discussed. Scientists, economists, members of the Baltic Sea Regional Advisory Council (BS RAC) and a few external observers attended the meeting.

At a preceding workshop, ICES presented a “multispecies” model for determining catch quotas which accounts for the ecological interactions between the main Baltic fish species (cod, herring and sprat) in the central Baltic and northern Baltic proper. Several concerns were raised regarding the predictive capabilities of the model and the implications for management that would follow such an advice.

In Rostock, many of these aspects had been revised and improved but it was concluded that too many “question marks” remain for a safe implementation of any advice. One problem that once again was raised was the dated cod diet records used for the modeling, these could skew the results and the STECF committee urged for more contemporary data to be used.

Regarding the western cod stock, it was advised that no changes be made to the current management plan, see STECF report from July 2011, since no new information has been put forward to confidently improve current management plans.

Other aspects concerned the economy of the fishery as well as enforcement and control of fishing activities. Trawling for sprat and herring was identified to be the most fruitful fishery today, especially among fleets operating in the northern parts of the Baltic. In terms of enforcement, a switch towards a more administrative approach to control was proposed and it was suggested it could be more cost-effective than the current “at seas control”. To this end, transferrable fishing concessions were suggested to be a complement as if they reduce capacity, this would yield fewer units to control. However, experience shows that TFC systems also tend to raise the costs of control for Member States.

For more technical details about the revised multispecies model see attached PDF.

The alliance has a number of suggestions for the CFP, notably that there should be obligatory multiannual management plans (MAPs) for all fisheries by 2015. Regionalised management with more responsibility decentralised, and improved selectivity so that discards are minimised. Moreover, they suggest that as 60% of EU fish products are imported, the figure is 80% for Sweden, sustainable aquaculture production is a necessity. These policy recommendations are laudable, yet further detail is required for how these would be implemented. To this end, a launch event will take place at the European Seafood Exposition in April.

Per Baummann of Svensk Dagligvaruhandel and Euro Commerce highlighted the benefits of sustainable fisheries management for the processing industry and consumers. He argued that all stakeholders have a shared interest in our seas becoming healthy again and, along with several other participants, referred to the New Economic Foundation report, which stated that if EU fisheries were managed at MSY 100,000 new jobs would be created and revenues would increase by over €3 billion per year.

For more information on the event, please read the original article written on this topic (link below).