Brussels, 10 April 2019:Today, environmental organisations all over Europe join forces in responding with great concern to a newly released report from the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF). Once again the annual report reveals an alarming lack of progress from the EU in implementing the reformed Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) and honoring the fast approaching deadline to end overfishing by 2020 (1).
“When the STECF experts say European Ministers and Governments are behind schedule on ensuring an end to overfishing, it’s not just time to listen, it’s time to act,” said Gonçalo Carvalho, Executive Coordinator at Sciaena.
“The EU’s own legally binding deadline for achieving sustainable fishing levels for all fished stocks is just around the corner, but still 41% of the assessed stocks in the Northeast Atlantic are subject to overfishing. That’s not good enough if we are serious about safeguarding the future of our fisheries and oceans,” said Rebecca Hubbard, Program Director at Our Fish.
As part of the 2013 CFP reform, all EU member states signed up to a legal requirement to end overfishing by 2020 at the latest (2) and while STECF notes that stock status in the Northeast Atlantic has significantly improved since 2003, the rate of progress has slowed in the last few years. The situation in the Mediterranean and Black Sea remains dire. Overall, the results this year confirm that many stocks remain overfished and progress achieved until 2017 has been too slow to ensure that by 2020 all stocks are fished at or below levels that can deliver the maximum sustainable yield.
“We strongly encourage the European Commission to propose fishing limits in line with scientific advice on sustainable fishing levels. As guardian of the EU treaties, the Commission should lead on fast and decisive progress to meet the 2020 deadline to end overfishing”, said Jenni Grossmann, Science and Policy Advisor at ClientEarth.
“Member States must act on today’s report and show they are serious about safeguarding European fish stocks and broader marine ecosystems by setting sustainable fishing limits for 2020. If Governments allow for continued overfishing in the coming years, they will jeopardise not only the future of Europe’s fish stocks but the health of the ocean that we all depend on,“ said Andrea Ripol, Fisheries Policy Officer at Seas At Risk.
STECF advises the European Commission on fisheries management and is requested to release annual reports on the EU’s progress in achieving the Maximum Sustainable Yield objectives in line with the CFP (3).
Contacts:
CFP2020 Communications Coordinator, Christina Koll, koll@kollcomms.com, +4528109021
ClientEarth: Martin Watters, Communications Manager, mwatters@clientearth.org, +44 (0)30 3050 5973
New Economics Foundation: David Powell, Head of Environment & Green Transition, david.powell@neweconomics.org, +442078206362
Our Fish: Rebecca Hubbard, Program Director, rebecca@our.fish +34 657669425
The STECF report “Monitoring the performance of the Common Fisheries Policy (STECF-Adhoc-19-01)” covers the Northeast Atlantic and adjacent seas (FAO reg 27) and the Mediterranean and Black Sea (FAO 37). According to this report, 41% of the assessed stocks in the Northeast Atlantic were still subject to overfishing in 2017 (the most recent year for which this information is available), compared to 43% in 2016, and 37% of stocks were still outside safe biological limits (for those with sufficient data to assess stock health). Moreover, based on information for 2016, in the Mediterranean “only around 13% (6 stocks) are not overfished, the majority are overfished” (p. 8).
The reformed Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) includes the fundamental objective to progressively restore and maintain fish stocks above sustainable levels, specifically above levels capable of producing the maximum sustainable yield (‘MSY’, see Article 2(2) of the CFP Basic Regulation, Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013). For the purpose of achieving this ‘MSY objective’, the law says that the MSY exploitation rate shall be achieved by 2020 at the latest for all stocks. Moreover, the CFP is clear that measures should be taken in accordance with the best available scientific advice (Article 3(c) of the CFP Basic Regulation).
Article 50 of the CFP Basic Regulation stipulates: “The Commission shall report annually to the European Parliament and to the Council on the progress on achieving maximum sustainable yield and on the situation of fish stocks, as early as possible following the adoption of the yearly Council Regulation fixing the fishing opportunities available in Union waters and, in certain non-Union waters, to Union vessels.” As part of this, the STECF is annually requested to report on “progress in achieving MSY objectives in line with the Common Fisheries Policy”. The Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF) was set up in 1993, and STEFC members “are nominated by the European Commission from highly qualified scientific experts having competence in these fields”.
Bruxelles, 11. april 2019: I dag reagerer miljøorganisationer i hele Europa med stor bekymring på en netop offentliggjort rapport fra den Videnskabelige, Tekniske og Økonomiske Komité for Fiskeri (STECF). Rapporten afslører, at Danmark og de øvrige EU medlemslande sakker gevaldigt bagud i forhold at overholde en ellers juridisk bindende deadline 1. januar 2020 for stop af overfiskeri i hele EU (1).
“Når STECF-eksperterne siger, at Eva Kjer Hansen og de øvrige europæiske fiskeriministre og regeringer er bagud i forhold til tidsplanen om at stoppe overfiskeri, så er det ikke kun tid til at lytte, det er tid til at handle,” siger Gonçalo Carvalho, Executive Coordinator hos Sciaena.
“EU’ s egen juridisk bindende deadline for at stoppe overfiskeri i 2020 er lige rundt om hjørnet, alligevel er 41% af de Nordøstatlantiske bestande stadig overfisket. Det er ikke godt nok, hvis vi skal sikre et sundt havmiljø og fiskeri fremover,” siger Cathrine Pedersen Schirmer, kampagneansvarlig i Our Fish i Danmark.
2020 deadlinen er del af en række tiltag fra 2013, da den Fælles Europæiske Fiskeripolitik (FFP) blev reformeret. Alle EU-medlemsstater herunder Danmark har således skrevet under på et lovkrav om at bringe overfiskeri til ophør senest i 2020 (2).
I den netop offentliggjorte STECF-rapport konstateres det imidlertid, at mange fiskebestandene i det nordøstlige Atlanterhav trods forbedringer siden 2003 stadig overfiskes. I Middelhavet og Sortehavet er situationen yderst alvorlig. Generelt går det ifølge eksperternes rapport for langsomt med at forbedre situationen for fiskebestandene, til at vi kan være sikre på, at 2020-deadlinen overholdes.
“Vi opfordrer på det kraftigste EU Kommissionen til fremadrettet at foreslå fiskekvoter, der er i overensstemmelse med videnskabelig rådgivning om bæredygtige fangstgrænser. Som vogter af EU’s traktater bør Kommissionen tage lederskab og sikre en hurtigere og mere effektiv proces frem mod 2020-deadlinen”, siger Jenni Grossmann, politisk rådgiver hos ClientEarth.
“EU’s medlemslande bør smøge ærmerne op som reaktion på rapporten fra EU’s eksperter og vise, at de virkelig mener det alvorligt, når de har skrevet under på at beskytte vores europæiske fiskebestande. Hvis regeringer og fiskeriministre fortsat tillader overfiskeri, sætter de både fremtiden for Europas fiskebestande og vores havmiljø på spil “ siger Andrea Ripol, fiskeripolitisk rådgiver hos Seas At Risk.
STECF rådgiver Europa-Kommissionen om fiskeriforvaltning og offentliggør hvert år en slags statusrapport over EU landenes fremskridt med hensyn til at nå målet om det maksimale bæredygtige udbytte (3).
Kontakt:
CFP2020 Kommunikationsansvarlig, Christina Koll, koll@kollcomms.com, +4528109021
Cathrine Pedersen Schirmer, kampagneansvarlig i Our Fish i Danmark, cathrine@our.fish, +45 21977905
ClientEarth: Martin Watters, Kommunikationsansvarlig, mwatters@clientearth.org, +44 (0)30 3050 5973
New Economics Foundation: David Powell, chef for miljø og grøn udvikling, david.powell@neweconomics.org, +442078206362
Seas At Risk: Andrea Ripol, fiskeripolitisk rådgiver, aripol@seas-at-risk.org, +32486168396
Noter:
STECF-rapporten “Monitoring the performance of the Common Fisheries Policy (STECF-Adhoc-19-01)”. Rapporten dækker det nordøstlige Atlanterhav og tilstødende farvande som f.eks. Østersøen ( FAO reg 27 ). Desuden dækker den over Middelhavet og Sortehavet ( FAO 37 ).Ifølge rapporten i år, var 41% af de kendte fiskebestande i Nordøstatlanten og tilhørende havområder stadig udsat for overfiskeri i seneste data-år 2017 (sammenlignet med 43% i 2016). Desuden var 37% af bestandene i 2017 uden for biologisk sikre grænser. I Middelhavet er størstedelen af bestandene overfisket med kun 13% (6 s), der ikke er udsat for overfiskeri (p. 8).
Den reformerede fælles fiskeripolitik omfatter et grundlæggende mål om at sikre, at udnyttelsen af havets levende, biologiske ressourcer genopretter og opretholder populationer af de befiskede arter på niveauer, der kan give maksimalt bæredygtigt udbytte.( “MSY” Grundforordningens artikel 2, stk. 2 , Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets forordning (EU) nr. 1380/2013 af 11. december 2013). For at nå målsætningen om, at populationer af fiskebestande gradvist skal genoprettes til og opretholdes på et biomasse-niveau, der kan give maksimalt bæredygtigt udbytte, skal udnyttelsesgraden for det maksimale bæredygtige udbytte nås inden udgangen af 2020 for alle bestande. Endvidere står det klart i den fælles fiskeripolitik, at der skal vedtages foranstaltninger i overensstemmelse med den bedste foreliggende videnskabelige rådgivning (artikel 3 (c)).
Artikel 50 i den fælles fiskeripolitik grundforordningen fastsætter: “Kommissionen aflægger hvert år så tidligt som muligt efter vedtagelsen af den årlige rådsforordning om fastsættelse af de fiskerimuligheder, der er til rådighed i EU-farvandene og, for EU-fartøjer, i visse ikke-EU-farvande rapport til Europa-Parlamentet og Rådet om fremskridt med hensyn til at nå det maksimale bæredygtige udbytte og om fiskebestandenes situation.” Som led i dette anmodes STECF årligt om at rapportere om fremskridt med hensyn til at nå det maksimale bæredygtige udbytte og om fiskebestandenes situation. DenVidenskabelige, Tekniske og Økonomiske Komité for Fiskeri(STECF) blev nedsat i 1993 for at rådgive Kommissionen om fiskeriforvaltning. Medlemmer af STECF udnævnes af Kommissionen ud fra deres ekspertise inden for havbiologi og havøkologi, fiskerividenskab, redskabsteknologi, akvakultur og fiskeriøkonomi. STECF rapporterer direkte til Kommissionen.
Sardines for sale – Vila do Bisbo, Algarve, Portugal. Photo: davewalshphoto.com
8 April 2019: – Following a workshop organized by the International Council for the Exploration of the Seas (ICES)in Lisbon to evaluate the recovery and management plan for Iberian sardine (Sardina pilchardus), 15 nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) from Portugal and Spain (1) are concerned about a plan submitted to the European Commission by the Portuguese and Spanish governments. This plan does not recognize the critical situation in which the stock is and does not provide the measures that can ensure its unquestionable recovery as has been certified by the researchers in the workshop.
The NGOs emphasize that the Iberian sardine stock, of great socioeconomic importance for several Portuguese and Spanish fleets, is, according to the scientific institutions that study it, in sharp decline for some decades ago and below the biological safety limits since 2009.After ICES issued an advice of zero-catch for the last two years (2), the two Member States submitted a recovery plan which had hitherto been considered by ICES to be insufficiently clear or complete for evaluation. At the time, this same plan was criticized by the Portuguese and Spanish NGOs due to the reduced relevance of control of catches for several years and the protection of juveniles.It is important to state that fish resources are public resources and, as such, should be managed for the common good, besides ensuring the viability of a sector. In addition, there is a need for the development of consistent and sustainable alternatives that will enable the industry to reduce its dependence and to not compromise its livelihoods when the biomass of one of its main target stocks is drastically reduced. Relying solely on a stock – and failing in its management – leads to its collapse, which in the medium to long term could lead to the collapse of the sector and the communities that depend on it.
The NGOs acknowledge all efforts already made by the sector, as well as all the work that has been done by researchers, within and outside the ICES working groups, to have a sound knowledge of the stock and to measures that would give the resource the best chance of recovery. They also point out that it is only by using scientific advice in establishing the fishing opportunities – as well as other management measures – that the main objective of the Common Fisheries Policy will be achieved: all European stocks at sustainable levels.
The NGOs acknowledge all efforts already made by the sector, as well as all the work that has been done by researchers, within and outside the ICES working groups, to have a sound knowledge of the stock and to measures that would give the resource the best chance of recovery. They also point out that it is only by using scientific advice in establishing the fishing opportunities – as well as other management measures – that the main objective of the Common Fisheries Policy will be achieved: all European stocks at sustainable levels.
1 Associação Natureza Portugal em associação com WWF, Associação Portuguesa para o Estudo e Conservação de Elasmobrânquios (APECE), Ecologistas en Acción, Fundació ENT, Grupo de Estudos de Ordenamento do Território eAmbiente (GEOTA), Greenpeace, Liga para a Protecção da Natureza, Oceana, Observatório Marítimo dos Açores(OMA), Our Fish, Quercus, Sciaena – Oceanos # Conservação # Sensibilização, Sociedad Española de Ornitología (SEO), Sociedade Portuguesa para o Estudo das Aves (SPEA) and World Wildlife Fund (WWF)
GOVERNMENT agencies have been accused of turning a blind eye to “rampant” rule breaking in the fishing industry, after no undersized cod were reported landed last year.
The campaign group Our Fish said it was unbelievable that, according to official data, zero tonnes of unwanted fish were landed by the UK fleet between January and mid-November.
They suggested around 7500 tonnes of undersized (below 35cm) cod had in fact been illegally discarded, and an allowance for such fish abused to land more lucrative adult cod instead.
The upshot may have been the UK exceeding its cod quota by a third
Our Fish, which obtained data from the Marine Maritime Organisation using freedom of information, is now urging Brussels to cut the UK cod quota by 7500 tonnes in 2019.
The Scottish fishing fleets gets 70% of the UK’s North Sea’s cod quota.
Since January 2018, all UK fishers have been obliged to count and land undersized cod – which is used for fishmeal, pet food and chemicals – with vessels given a 5,200 tonne “top-up” over and above the main 16,800 tonne quota to help cope with the burden.
However, no undersized fish were reported and instead the UK officially landed 21,596 tonnes of adult cod only, suggesting 7500 tonnes of small fish were dumped at sea.
Rebecca Hubbard, Program Director for Our Fish, said: “This unreported catch would represent an enormous waste of valuable fish, and significantly worsen overfishing. This is extremely concerning.
“In recent years north sea cod was thought to be recovering, however the outlook is again looking very poor with scientists recommending a huge cut for 2019 fishing limits.”
She added: “The UK government appears to be aware that large-scale unreported, illegal fishing for an important stock like cod is taking place within its fishing fleet, yet the Marine Management Organisation and Marine Scotland seem to be turning a blind eye. It is incomprehensible and indefensible that such rampant non-compliance would be simply ignored.”
Exclusive: ‘It is incomprehensible and indefensible that such rampant non-compliance would be simply ignored’
Codfishing vessels have been accused of illegally dumping thousands of tons of fish into the North Sea in a bid to sidestep strict new European rules.
Official data collected by the UK fisheries body shows there were no unwanted, undersized cod caught between January and mid-November last year at all.
This result was branded “impossible” by campaigners from Our Fish, who said British fishers must have twisted the figures by discarding at least 7,500 tons of smaller fish.
Manipulating the data in this way would also have allowed them to land around a third over their quota of cod in 2018, according to the group.
Programme director for Our Fish Rebecca Hubbard said authorities in England and Scotland seemed to be “turning a blind eye” to this problem.
“The UK government appears to be aware that large-scale unreported, illegal fishing for an important stock like cod is taking place within its fishing fleet,” she said.
“It is incomprehensible and indefensible that such rampant non-compliance would be simply ignored.”
Our Fish has written to the European Commission, presenting the findings and requesting it takes at least 7,500 tons off this year’s UK cod quota to account for the alleged infringement.
North Sea cod were thought to be on the rise after a long decline, but scientists have now recommended a significant cut to 2019 fishing limits to help their stocks recover.
Under EU regulations introduced to curb overfishing, boats are no longer allowed to discard any undersized cod they catch.
Instead, the smaller fish – which cannot be sold for human consumption – must be taken back to land and count towards their overall quota.
The move is intended to encourage a shift towards better equipment and fishing practices that avoid catching young fish.
To help the fishers cope with the sudden burden of extra fish cutting into their margins, they were granted an additional 5,200 tons of extra quota for the first year of the new regulations.
Freshly caught cod. Agencja Fotograficzna Caro / Alamy Stock Photo
London, 11 March, 2019:– A freedom of information request to the UK’s fisheries management body (the Marine Management Organisation) has revealed that despite the landing obligation having applied to all catches of North Sea Cod from January 2018, zero tonnes of unwanted undersize cod were landed by the UK fleet from 1 January – 15 November, in comparison to at least 7,500 tonnes accounted for in the quota setting [1].
The landing obligation required all UK fishers to count and land unwanted undersize North Sea cod since January 2018, but data provided to Our Fish by Marine Management Organisation (MMO) suggests that while an enormous 5,200 tonnes of extra quota was given to fishers to cope with the burden of landing extra fish, it appears to have been used to land even more adult fish, mostly in Scotland and England [2].
“Of an estimated 5,200 tonnes of expected undersize cod, absolutely zero had been landed by November 2018. The UK instead landed a total catch of 21,596 tonnes of adult cod. This suggests that, extrapolating the percentage of undersize fish, at least 7,500 tonnes of undersize fish were illegally discarded, and the UK’s total catch of North Sea cod could actually have been over 29,000 tonnes, or around one third above the quota”, said Rebecca Hubbard, Program Director for Our Fish. “This unreported catch would represent an enormous waste of valuable fish, and significantly worsen overfishing of the iconic north sea cod stock. This is extremely concerning; in recent years north sea cod was thought to be recovering, however the outlook is again looking very poor with scientists recommending a huge cut for 2019 fishing limits.”[3]
The International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) advised that for cod in the North Sea, Skagerrak and the English Channel, total catches should be no more than 53,058 tonnes in 2018 [4]. This included an estimated 17,333 tonnes of unwanted bycatch – equivalent to 32% of all cod landings in those areas. The discard ban requires that this 17,333 tonnes is landed and counted against quota to inform science, and to incentivise not catching it in the first place. The EU Council approved a total catch limit of 43,156 tonnes for 2018 for the North Sea – including a “top-up” of 13,414 tonnes, which was designed to allow the unwanted catch to be landed without it using up all fishing vessel’s existing quota [5]. Of this total for the North Sea, the UK was allocated 16,808 tonnes, including a “top-up” of 5,224 tonnes to account for fish that would have to be landed because of the discard ban.
According to data released under a freedom of information request by the MMO to Our Fish, the UK fleet recorded landings of 21,596 tonnes of cod up until 15th November 2018, but none of those landed were unwanted sizes i.e. all of the fish landed was wanted and saleable [6,7]. Assuming the UK landed it’s entire North Sea and Skaggerak Cod quota of 16,808 tonnes, extrapolating the “top-up” would equate to at least 7,500 tonnes of undersize cod – adding up to a total of some 29,000 tonnes caught.
“The UK government appears to be aware that large-scale unreported, illegal fishing for an important stock like cod is taking place within its fishing fleet, yet the Marine Management Organisation (MMO) and Marine Scotland seem to be turning a blind eye. It is incomprehensible and indefensible that such rampant non-compliance would be simply ignored”, she continued. “The UK fishing industry reportedly supports remote electronic monitoring as a requirement for EU vessels accessing UK waters after Brexit, however it is clear from this data, that the UK needs to start implementing this technology with its own fleet first.” [8]
“Our Fish has written to the European Commission, requesting that they take at least 7,500 tonnes off the UK 2019 North Sea Cod quota to account for the unreported undersize cod from 2018 [9]. We are also urging the UK to hold aside quota for discards in the 2019 cod quota, and only release it if discards are landed in ports, and all catches are documented through remote electronic monitoring or onboard observers in medium-very high risk discarding fleets,” said Ms Hubbard.
The iconic North Sea cod stock, considered a favourite for UK consumers, was heavily overfished for most of the 80s and 90s, but due to strong intervention, had started to show signs of recovery in the last ten years. However, forecasts of the state of the stock again worsened in 2018, and ICES proposed a radical cut to the TAC of almost 50% from 2018 levels. [10]. Despite a commitment to end overfishing, the annual fishing limit (TAC) for North Sea Cod in 2019 was set 25% above scientifically advised levels by the EU Agrifish Council [11].
The lack of landings of unwanted catches in the UK has also been confirmed by other members of the fish processing industry, who were expecting to receive the unwanted catches to process into other fish byproducts (the Landing Obligation requires that unwanted and undersize catches are only used in industries outside of direct human consumption markets, such as fishmeal, fish oil, pet food, food additives, pharmaceuticals and cosmetics).
Pelagia General Manager Mike Hryckowian, in correspondence with Our Fish, sais there has been a tiny volume sold into the fishmeal sector in Aberdeen (serviced by Fraserburgh and Peterhead) and zero volume into Grimsby (serviced by all English ports) [11].
I am absolutely certain that if discards were to be landed our factory would receive some if not all of them, because we are one of the few, if not the only, establishment in England capable of dealing with every type of fish discard and in any volume.[12]
The low uptake of product into fishmeal production in both Aberdeen and Grimsby fishmeal plants consolidates the landings data provided by the Marine Management Organisation.
The issue of non-compliance with the landing obligation does not only apply to the UK fishing fleet. The European Commission has proposed the introduction of remote electronic monitoring systems, including CCTV, into the EU fleet in order to properly monitor and enforce the landing obligation, through the revision of the Control Regulation [14] The European Parliament Pech Committee is expected to vote on the Commission’s proposal on 25 March or early April [15].
[3] ICES Advice on fishing opportunities, catch, and effort, Greater North Sea Ecoregion. Cod.27.47d20. Published 29 June 2018. Available at: https://doi.org/10.17895/ices.pub.4436
[5] COUNCIL REGULATION (EU) 2018/120 of 23 January 2018 fixing for 2018 the fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, applicable in Union waters and, for Union fishing vessels, in certain non-Union waters, and amending Regulation (EU) 2017/127. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32018R0120
[7] The UK also swapped in 3,989 tonnes of cod and swapped out 500 tonnes for 2018, so the total cod quota available for landing by the UK fleet should be approximately 20,308 tonnes.
[10] ICES Advice on fishing opportunities, catch, and effort, Greater North Sea Ecoregion. Cod.27.47d20. Published 29 June 2018. Available at: https://doi.org/10.17895/ices.pub.4436
MMO saying it has deducted 20 tonnes of cod from one operator for illegal discards they recorded via the Fully Documented Fisheries scheme (FDF)
NOTE – The MMO stated in the House of Lords that they only give quota top-up to fleets with FDF, however, as per the below data, this does not align with the landings data we received in the FOI.
What the House of Lords report doesn’t cover (key points in bold):
The UK govt was given at least 5,200 tonnes as top-up for undersize cod to be landed in 2018 (as part of their 16,808t quota); ZERO of this has been landed (exact data provided by MMO from monthly landings)
Even after swaps are taken into account, the UK fleet should only have access to approximately 20,308t cod in 2018, including undersized fish, but it landed 21,596t of cod which included ZERO undersize
This equates to overfishing of at least 7,500t by the UK fleet in 2018
Our Fish is asking the EU Commission to deduct at least 7,500t of cod from the UK’s quota in 2019
For North Sea cod, the LO was fully applied from 1 jan 2018, and the landings data for all of 2018 is not released by ICES until after May, in aggregated form in their stock assessments – therefore it can only be accessed by reviewing monthly landings until that time.
This is overfishing as a result of illegal discarding (or high-grading) of undersize north sea cod by the UK fishing fleet, for which it specifically received quote from the EU, and the UK should therefore pay back the equivalent quota for the cod that it has subsequently overfished.
How did you find out about this missing 7,500 tonnes of undersized cod?
Following reports that virtually no discards were being landed in 2018 in UK ports, and commentary from the European Fisheries Control Agency that there was a very high risk of non-compliance with the landing obligation in the North Sea, Our Fish submitted a freedom of information (FOI) request to the UK Marine Management Organisation on 15 November 2018 for all of the landings data on cod from the UK fleet, including for under MCRS (minimum conservation reference size), which should now be landed according to the Landing Obligation (LO). According to the TAC approved by the EU Council, which allocated a “top-up” of around 30%, this data should show at least 7,500 tonnes of undersize cod, but it shows zero.
How much undersized north sea cod were landed in previous years?
Although the landing obligation didn’t require all North Sea Cod to be landed in previous years, there was some reporting in 2016 (for reasons unknown to Our Fish). Besides this small amount of 1.8 thousand tonnes in 2016 (equivalent to about 10% of that year’s landings), nothing else was recorded from 2015 onwards. Since 2018, under the LO, all undersize cod should be recorded and landed.
What is the minimum size for north sea cod? How is undersized defined?
35cm is the minimum conservation reference size for North Sea Cod. This minimum size is set to incentivise small, juvenile fish are not caught and can grow to maturity, ensuring that the fish stock can continue to reproduce sustainably into the future. Fish below minimum conservation reference size (undersize) must now be landed but cannot be sold for human consumption.
What exactly is wrong here?
No undersize North Sea Cod were landed by UK fishers in the UK between January 1 and Nov 15, 2018 – even though the Landing Obligation (LO) requires them to be landed.
Why would they land undersized cod?
Undersized cod should be landed and counted against quota as part of the LO. The estimated tonnes of undersize catches are based on scientific observations of previous fishing and discarding patterns. As the UK has landed 21,596 tonnes of North Sea cod in 2018, at least 7,500 tonnes would be undersized.
Is this Overfishing?
The UK’s cod fishery has not undergone a rapid and broadscale improvement in selectivity, so most undersize cod was probably still caught and discarded – but not reported. The UK landed 21,596 tonnes of cod according to the MMO data, this means that around 29,000 tonnes of North Sea Cod was probably caught (including at least 7,500 tonnes of undersize). Instead of following the rules aimed at ending overfishing, this is an example of gaming the system to carry out even more overfishing.
Why did the UK catch 21,596 tonnes if North Sea cod, if it had quota for 11,600 tonnes of allowable sized catch and 5,200 undersized, totalling 16,968?
The UK fleet has landed the full 16,968 tonnes allocated in the original TAC regulation, however they have also swapped in 3,989 tonnes of cod and swapped out 500 tonnes for 2018, so the total cod quota available for landing by the UK fleet should be approximately 20,308 tonnes. The extremely concerning thing is that of the 21,596 tonnes of cod landed, despite at least 5,200 – or 7,500 tonnes if the top-up is included – being allocated for landing undersize cod, zero was landed.
Yes. The landing obligation is clearly being ignored and rules broken – the true impact of that is unknown because we don’t have any onboard monitoring to show total catch, but it is likely to be at least 7,500 tonnes of illegal discards (see calculations in endnotes).
Surely if the UK fishing fleet is not landing any undersized cod, this is a good thing? Doesn’t it mean that UK fisheries are extremely selective?
It is impossible for the UK fleet to have completely eliminated unwanted, undersized cod in less than one year. It is also highly unlikely that they have significantly eliminated unwanted catches because there has been a lot of resistance from fishers to adopt all of the selectivity measures available.
How would you rank the wrongdoing here? Crime? Infraction?
This is illegal unreported fishing across a wide part of the UK fishing fleet.
What are the punishments for this kind of wrongdoing?
The EU Control Regulation rates non-compliance with the landing obligation as a serious offence, and therefore individual cases of illegal discarding would normally be dealt with through way of sanctions to the individual fishers. In this case, this is not possible because we have evidence of broadscale non-compliance, but we do not have evidence of individual discarding and misreporting (for this, monitoring at sea is required).
(COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 1224/2009, article 90 1(c): “the failure to land any species subject to a quota caught during a fishing operation, unless such landing would be contrary to obligations provided for in the rules of the common fisheries policy in fisheries or fishing zones where such rules apply.” Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A32009R1224 )
Is what you a presenting proof, or evidence, or something less?
This is evidence that the majority of the UK fleet fishing are not counting or landing North Sea Cod undersize cod, according to the Landing Obligation. It is also evidence that the UK has used “top-up quota” intended for assisting the industry to comply with the Landing Obligation, to simply land more saleable cod, and therefore overfish their quota by one-third. Because there is no recording of the actual discarding of undersize cod, individuals cannot be prosecuted.
Who are the wrongdoers?
According to risk assessments from the EU Fisheries Control Agency (EFCA), the demersal trawlers including otter trawls/seines and beam trawls, have medium-high risk of non-compliance with the landing obligation or misrecording in the North Sea and Skaggerak. It is therefore likely these fishing fleets, and especially those from Scotland and England (see below), who are most responsible.
The Scottish fishing fleet gets 70% of the UK’s North Sea Cod quota (16,856 tonnes in 2018), and English fishers receive the majority of the rest, with a tiny amount going to Northern Ireland and Wales (6,560 tonnes in 2018).
The quota is taken from the North Sea (ICES Subarea 4), Skagerrak (ICES area subdivision 20) and the Eastern English Channel (ICES Division 7d). Based on ICES estimates and the “top-up”, the bulk of the discards would be in the North Sea. See calculations and endnotes.
Couldn’t this just be an accounting or reporting error? Couldn’t the 21,596 tonnes landed include the 7,500 tonnes of undersized cod?
All undersize cod have to be recorded as such, and cannot be sold for human consumption, according to the Landing Obligation. It would be a pretty big error – 7,500 tonnes to 0.
If this is wrongdoing, why didn’t they cover it up more?
The UK government, and the agencies of the Marine Management Organisation and Marine Scotland, are clearly not making a serious effort to monitor and enforce the landing obligation, so fishers don’t feel like they need to follow the rules. Instead of embracing 21st century technology, transparency and accountability to consumers and the public, the UK fishing industry and government is clearly still dominated by a cave-dwellers mentality.
Who is responsible for enforcement against this kind of behaviour?
Have they done their job correctly?
The UK government – particularly the agencies of the Marine Management Organisation and Marine Scotland – should be monitoring and enforcing the landing obligation for north sea cod. The Department of Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (DEFRA) has overall responsibility for fisheries management. With this very clear data, they must be turning a blind eye.
If this discrepancy has been recorded, yet not reported, who should it have been reported to, by whom?
This information, from the UK’s Marine Management Organisation (MMO), which was accessed through a freedom of information request, is based on landings data from ports all across the UK. Port Authorities must be aware that there are no substantial landings of discards, and could have reported it to the authorities. However it is hard to believe that the UK government and fisheries management authorities don’t know about this, as they should be regularly reviewing this data.
If the Landing Obligation is an EU regulation and the UK is leaving the EU anyway, none of this matters, right? It’s not really a crime if it will no longer be illegal?
The UK is still operating under the EU Common Fisheries Policy, and certainly was in 2018, so this is definitely evidence of illegal, unreported activity. Going forward, the UK government has said it is committed to a ban on discards, so presumably, the UK fleet should still be counting and landing all unwanted, undersize cod.
Now that this is out in the open, what happens next?
This depends on how willing the UK government and the EU Commission are to respond to these findings.
What Our Fish wants: The UK government, and indeed all EU member states, need to urgently upscale their at-sea monitoring and control systems to stop this illegal behaviour and ensure that the correct catch data is being reported for management purposes. Remote electronic monitoring systems with CCTV are already used in part of the UK fleet voluntarily, however this needs to be made mandatory, and extended into higher-risk sections of the fleet. The EU Commission should reduce the UK’s North Sea Cod quota for 2019 by at least 7,500 tonnes, as payback for overfishing their cod allocation in 2018. The UK should also hold aside quota for discards in the 2019 cod quota, and only release it if discards are landed in ports, and all catches are documented through remote electronic monitoring (CCTV) or onboard observers in medium-very high risk discarding fleets.
Illegality is one thing, but what are the environmental ramifications of this wrongdoing?
Ongoing discarding without proper reporting and catch accountability can have huge impacts on fish stocks and management. If this 9,000 tonnes of undersize fish were discarded, that’s equivalent to the UK overfishing its allocation by almost one third. For a stock like North Sea Cod which has been historically overfished and is struggling to rebuild, it could have devastating impacts and contribute to another crash in the population. It also undermines the reliability of scientific data, the stock assessments, quota allocations and fisheries management that depend on that science, introduces illegality into the seafood supply chain, and destroys consumer trust in the fishing industry
Who should journalists call to find out more, or to find out what action will be taken?
We suggest they speak to the European Commission, DEFRA, the MMO and Marine Scotland.
NOTES – Calculations (tonnes)
2018 TAC for North Sea + Skaggerak + Channel = 43156+7995+1733 = 52,884
2018 Top-up for unwanted discards for North Sea + Skaggerak (0 channel) incl in TAC = 13414+3746 = 17,160
UK portion of TAC = 16,808+160 = 16,968
UK portion of top-up = 5,224
For North Sea only:
2018 TAC = 43,156
2018 top-up for unwanted discards = 13,414
UK portion of TAC = 16,808
UK portion of top-up = 5,224
UK Landings of above-size cod Jan-Nov 2018 = 21,596
Unaccounted for top-up for undersize cod not landed in the UK = at least 7,500
Neues Rechtsgutachten zeigt: Für die Kontrolle des EU-Rückwurfverbots ist Videodokumentation an Bord von Fischereischiffen rechtlich möglich – Deutsche Umwelthilfe und Our Fish fordern umfassende Dokumentation der Fangaktivitäten, um illegale Rückwürfe und Überfischung zu beenden – Ohne Kontrollen bleibt Rückwurfverbot wirkungslos
Berlin, 19.3.2019: Um illegale Fischrückwürfe zu beenden und eine vollständige Dokumentation der Fänge sicherzustellen, können durch die vorhandenen technischen Möglichkeiten Videoaufnahmen oder elektronische Fernüberwachung (REM) auf Fischereifahrzeugen eingesetzt werden. Gleichzeitig können die Privatsphäre der an Bord Arbeitenden sowie Datenschutzbestimmungen geschützt werden. Zu diesem Ergebnis kommt ein Rechtsgutachten in Auftrag gegeben von der Initiative Our Fish. Die Deutsche Umwelthilfe (DUH) und Our Fish setzen sich für ein Ende der Überfischung ein. Sie fordern die sofortige Umsetzung der EU-Anlandeverpflichtung mit Hilfe von bereits heute einsetzbarer elektronischer Fernüberwachung. Ohne eine Dokumentation an Bord werden auch zukünftig illegal zu kleine oder ungewollte Fische sterbend zurück ins Meer geworfen.
Die Anlandeverpflichtung – das Verbot, tote oder sterbende Fische nach dem Fang zurück ins Meer zu werfen – wurde 2013 von der Europäischen Union im Rahmen der reformierten Gemeinsamen Fischereipolitik erlassen. Seit Januar 2019 gilt sie vollständig. Dennoch werden noch immer Fische illegal zurück ins Meer geworfen. Der Einsatz elektronischer Fernüberwachung hat das Potenzial, dies zu verhindern.
„Dass noch immer Fische illegal zurück ins Meer geworfen werden, ist ein Skandal und gefährdet die Gesundheit der Meere und das Vertrauen der Verbraucher in die Industrie. Der Bericht von Our Fish zeigt, dass die heutigen technischen Möglichkeiten zur Dokumentation der Fischfänge dem Schutz der Privatsphäre nicht entgegenstehen. Die Aufnahmen können nicht nur der Kontrolle von Gesetzen dienen, sondern sie können auch der Wissenschaft Informationen über Fischbestände liefern, die letztlich ein besseres, nachhaltiges Fischereimanagement ermöglichen”, sagt Sascha Müller-Kraenner, Bundesgeschäftsführer der DUH.
Die Bedenken beim Einsatz von Kameras an Bord sind nachvollziehbar, sollten jedoch kein Grund sein, bestehende Handlungsmöglichkeiten von vornherein auszuschließen. Andere Industriezweige setzen bereits technische Mittel zur Dokumentation ein: Beispielsweise in Schlachtbetrieben werden die Produktionsprozesse kontrolliert. „Die Dokumentation von Fischfängen durch Videoaufnahmen an Bord von Fischereifahrzeugen ist schon jetzt unter bestimmten Voraussetzungen möglich, ohne den Datenschutzanforderungen zu widersprechen. Das ergibt sich aus dem Rechtsgutachten. Die vorhandene Technik muss an Bord zum Einsatz kommen, um die illegalen Fischrückwürfe zu stoppen und unsere Meere und ihre Bewohner zu schützen“, sagt Rebecca Hubbard, Programmdirektorin von Our Fish.
Das Papier von Our Fish empfiehlt Gesetzgebern und Betreibern zum Einsatz von „Digitalen Fischereibeobachtern“:
Videodokumentation von Risikogruppen: Bei Verdacht auf mangelnde Einhaltung der gesetzlichen Vorschriften können die Fangtätigkeiten vorübergehend überwacht werden.
Vermeidung personenbezogener Daten: Begrenzung der Dokumentation auf den technischen Prozess, ohne dass einzelne Personen identifizierbar werden – dann fände die DSGVO keine Anwendung.
Anonymisierung: Überwachung des gesamten Prozesses, aber Unkenntlichmachung der gefilmten Personen durch Verpixelung.
Datenminimierung: Begrenzung der Videoüberwachung auf den kleinstmöglichen Zeitraum, z. B. das Anlanden, Sortieren und Verarbeiten des Fangs.
Dateneigentum und -sichtung: Die Aufnahmen wären in der Regel Eigentum der Schiffsbetreiber, würden von einem Dritten gesichtet und die gewonnenen Daten den zuständigen Behörden zum Zwecke der Überprüfung von Fang- und Anlandungsmengen zur Verfügung gestellt.
Über Our Fish:
Die europäische Initiative Our Fish will sicherstellen, dass die EU-Mitgliedstaaten die Gemeinsame Fischereipolitik umsetzen und für nachhaltige Fischbestände in den europäischen Gewässern sorgen. Die Deutsche Umwelthilfe koordiniert die Our Fish-Kampagne in Deutschland.
Brussels, March 7, 2019:- A report published today, Legal Opinion on Video Monitoring on Fishing Vessels with Special Focus on Other Comparable Cases, shows that the use of video monitoring, or Remote Electronic Monitoring (REM), can be used on board EU fishing vessels to ensure proper catch reporting, and to end illegal discarding of fish under the EU’s Landing Obligation, without impinging on privacy, or contradicting data protection rules.
The report, commissioned by Our Fish, demonstrates that while there are justifiable concerns around REM, these are not reason for inaction. Other sectors, such as the meat industry, are dealing with the same challenges, showing that it is possible to have effective monitoring while conforming to data protection requirements.
“Protecting privacy while ending the wasteful practice of discarding dead and dying fish at sea can be achieved by using video monitoring on board fishing vessels”, said Rebecca Hubbard, Program Director of Our Fish.
The EU’s ban on discarding dead or dying fish back into the sea, known as the Landing Obligation (LO), was part of the 2013 reform of the Common Fisheries Policy, and strongly supported by EU citizens. The aim of the Landing Obligation is to end discarding and drive change in fishing practices, e.g. avoid catching unwanted and non-valuable fish, incentivise improvements in selectivity, count everything that is caught, and promote ecosystem-based management.
However five years on, the European Fisheries Control Agency (EFCA) has assessed that a majority of fishing activities using active gears, e.g. trawling, are still at risk of discarding, along with increased illegal and unreported fishing. In response, the European Commission is proposing to use a review of its Control Regulation to introduce Remote Electronic Monitoring (REM) [1]; however concerns have been raised over privacy and data protection.
“This legal analysis demonstrates that privacy and data protection are not barriers to video monitoring of fishing. Programming and video technology can avoid impinging on privacy and personal data, vessel operators can own the footage, and governments and scientists can utilise the data to audit records allowing for greater knowledge of catches, fish stocks, and ultimately achieve better fisheries management”, continued Hubbard.
“It is essential that EU decision-makers take a solutions-based approach to implementing onboard video monitoring, so that we put an end to widespread illegal, unreported fishing, which undermines ocean health, consumer trust and the industry”, said Hubbard.
CCTV surveillance of risk groups: When there is cause to suspect non-compliance with legal requirements, temporary monitoring of the fishing activities would be appropriate.
Avoiding personal data: Monitoring only the technical process without making individuals identifiable. This would also mean the GDPR would not apply [2].
Anonymisation: Monitoring the entire process and pixelating any recorded persons in such a way that identification is not possible.
Data minimisation: Limit the video monitoring to a minimum time i.e during landing, sorting and processing the catch.
Data ownership and review: Vessel operators may be the owners of the footage, the review conducted by a third party, and the resulting data provided to governments for auditing purposes of catches and landings. This audited data could also be shared with other interested or relevant parties such as scientists.
[2] Since May 2018, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) covers data protection and privacy for all individuals in the European Union (EU) and the European Economic Area (EEA), and covers the transfer of personal data outside the EU and EEA. It gives control of data to individuals while simplifying the legislative framework for data managers.
Dave Walsh, Our Fish Communications Advisor, dave@our.fish +34 691826764
Rebecca Hubbard, Our Fish Program Director, rebecca@our.fish +34 657669425
About Our Fish
Our Fish works to ensure European member states implement the Common Fisheries Policy and achieve sustainable fish stocks in European waters.
Our Fish works with organisations and individuals across Europe to deliver a powerful and unwavering message: overfishing must be stopped, and solutions put in place that ensure Europe’s waters are fished sustainably. Our Fish demands that the Common Fisheries Policy be properly enforced, and Europe’s fisheries effectively governed.
Our Fish calls on all EU Member States to set annual fishing limits at sustainable limits based on scientific advice, and to ensure that their fishing fleets prove that they are fishing sustainably, through monitoring and full documentation of their catch.
Brussels 14 February 2019:- People go about their daily life in the bustling city; then the fish start falling. First one by one, then a deluge – a busker, a policemen, customers queuing for hotdogs are whacked by fish falling from the sky. What is going on?
This newly released animation from campaign group Our Fish, created by filmmaker Daniel Bird of Wit and Wisdom TV, explores the problem of discarded fish through the mythological phenomena of raining fish.
“Each year, up to 1.7 million tonnes of unwanted fish and marine life are dumped back into the sea by EU fishers, because of indiscriminate and highly wasteful fishing practices”, said Our Fish Programme Director Rebecca Hubbard. “Low-value or unwanted fish – often vulnerable species, or juveniles who haven’t had a chance to breed – are thrown back, usually dead or dying.”
“Because this massive waste of fish, caught and then thrown away by EU fishers, happens out of sight and out of mind, it’s a real challenge to communicate the magnitude of the problem. But if 1.7 million tonnes of fish rained from the sky onto your city – you might just notice it – that’s why we’re telling the story through animation”, she continued. Our Fish are asking members of the public to take action , by signing a petition calling on EU fisheries ministers to end overfishing.
“It’s a monumental waste of fish by the European fishing industry. But to avoid getting bogged down in fisheries or political jargon, we chose to show the size of the discarding problem by taking it out of context, and adding a twist of dark humour,” said filmmaker Daniel Bird. “You can only either laugh or cry at the total absurdity of throwing away mountains of fish that shouldn’t have been caught in the first place.”
Since January 1st, when EU’s Landing Obligation came into force, most fish species can no longer be discarded, and instead must be counted towards quotas, and landed in ports [1]. This law is aimed at driving an improvement in sustainable fishing methods and to incentivise fishers to avoid catching unwanted fish in the first place. The ban has been phased in between 2015 and January 2019. However, reports suggest that despite a four-year phase-in of the Obligation, discarding is still continuing, fishing selectivity is not being significantly improved, and governments are refusing to increase at-sea monitoring to ensure the new laws are respected. [1,2,3]
“By signing up to the Landing Obligation, EU governments committed to ending this massive waste of fish, and to restore the health of our vulnerable oceans for the public good. Now they must get serious about turning those commitments into action on our seas – and the most important way to start is by properly monitoring and enforcing the rules so that the fishing industry can begin its urgently needed transition to a more environmentally and economically sustainable business model”, concluded Hubbard.
The European Commission has proposed the introduction of Remote Electronic Monitoring (REM) as part of the review of the Control Regulation [4]. The Pech Committee of the EU Parliament is expected to vote on the Commission’s Control Regulation proposal, and whether or not to introduce REM, at the end of March or early April [5]. The Control Regulation will then be negotiated through the trialogue process between the Parliament, Council and Commission.
Dave Walsh, Our Fish Communications Advisor, dave@our.fish +34 691826764
Rebecca Hubbard, Our Fish Program Director, rebecca@our.fish +34 657669425
About Our Fish
Our Fish works to ensure European member states implement the Common Fisheries Policy and achieve sustainable fish stocks in European waters.
Our Fish works with organisations and individuals across Europe to deliver a powerful and unwavering message: overfishing must be stopped, and solutions put in place that ensure Europe’s waters are fished sustainably. Our Fish demands that the Common Fisheries Policy be properly enforced, and Europe’s fisheries effectively governed.
Our Fish calls on all EU Member States to set annual fishing limits at sustainable limits based on scientific advice, and to ensure that their fishing fleets prove that they are fishing sustainably, through monitoring and full documentation of their catch.
