Letter signed by six NGOs, sent to to the EU Council, following the Ombudsman’s recommendations on fisheries TAC transparency, asking the Council to implement these recommendations as a matter of urgency:
“The Council should proactively make public documents related to the adoption of the TAC Regulation at the time they are circulated to Member States or as soon as possible thereafter”.
NGO Letter: transparency and accountability in setting the 2020 fishing opportunities
Joint NGO recommendations on the setting of Northeast Atlantic fishing opportunities for 2020 »
In our joint recommendations to the EU Fisheries Council, Our Fish, along with The Pew Charitable Trusts, Seas At Risk, Oceana, ClientEarth, and The Fisheries Secretariat have provided concrete policy proposals ahead of the December Council at which fishing limits or TACs will be set for over 100 stocks in the North Sea and Northeast Atlantic.
The MSY obligation, all stocks managed with a sustainable fishing mortality (under Fmsy) in order to achieve a sustainable biomass (Bmsy) by 2020, is due to be fully implemented at this Council meeting. However, there is serious threat of the legal requirement not being met.
We provide an overview of “progress in implementing the CFP”, referencing the EU body, the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee on Fisheries (STECF), which clearly show that implementing of sustainable fishing limits has slowed in recent years.
Further, we provide recommendations for setting TACs in line with the CFP requirements, the implementation of the Landing Obligation, and improving the transparency and accountability of the TAC setting process, in line with the EU Ombudsman investigation into the Council.
Finally, we reference the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate (SROCC), which predicts severe declines in European fisheries production and highlights the need to alleviate all other stressors on ocean ecosystems, specifically, ending overfishing to help restore fish populations and increase ocean resilience. “In light of this clear call to climate action, all fishing limits should at the very least not exceed the best available scientific advice and preferably be even more precautionary in light of diverse threats and uncertainty.”
Joint NGO recommendations on the setting of Northeast Atlantic fishing opportunities for 2020 »
public money to build the plant in the first place
Briefing, PDF: Is Western Baltic Herring Essential for the Euro-Baltic Fish- Processing Plant?
U. Rashid Sumaila and Travis C. Tai
Fisheries Economics Research Unit, Institute for the Oceans and Fisheries & School of Public Policy and Global Affairs, the University of British Columbia
Abstract
Marine fish stocks and the ecosystems they inhabit are in decline in many parts of our ocean, including in some European waters, because of overfishing and the ecosystem effect of fishing in general. At the same time, climate change is disrupting the physics, chemistry and ecology of the ocean, with significant consequences on the life it holds. While the positive effects of mitigating climate change on the ocean and marine life are currently being documented, papers that examine how ending overfishing could increase ocean resilience to climate change are less common. The goal of this paper is to review the current literature and conduct an analysis that demonstrate that ending overfishing and reducing other negative ecosystem effects of fishing would make fish stocks and marine ecosystems more resilient to climate change. Our findings suggest that fish are no different from people in that a healthy person is more likely to survive an epidemic than a person who is less healthy.
Working Paper: Ending Overfishing Can Mitigate Impacts of Climate Change
Press release: Ending Overfishing Is Opportunity to Combat Climate Crisis – Report
Powerpoint from webinar, September 2nd 2019: Ending overfishing can mitigate impacts of climate change
Webinar video, September 2nd, 2019
Dear Karmenu Vella, Commissioner for the Environment, Maritime Affairs and Fisheries Dear João Aguiar Machado, Director-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries
Dear Ana Paula Vitorino, Minister of the Sea of the Portuguese Government
Dear Luis Planas, Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food of the Spanish Government Dear José Apolinário, Secretary of State of Fisheries of the Portuguese Government Dear Alicia Villauriz, General Secretary of Fisheries of the Spanish Government
Lisbon and Madrid, July 23rd 2019
Subject: Iberian sardine, a tale of poor management
The 12 environmental non-governmental organizations (ENGOs) that sign this open letter have been closely following the developments of the management of the Iberian sardine stock (Sardina pilchardus) for almost a decade and have patiently waited for effective management measures, proportional to the serious and long-lasting state of depletion the stock has been in during this period. So far, the Portuguese and Spanish Administrations, with the oversight and consent of the European Commission (EC), have failed to deliver.
What we conclude:
a. That the Iberian sardine stock is managed accordingly with the CFP, specifically in line with article 2.2 that states that a precautionary approach should be applied “to fisheries management, and shall aim to ensure that exploitation of living marine biological resources restores and maintains populations of harvested species above levels which can produce the maximum sustainable yield.”;
b. That a Long Term Management Strategy that includes the recovery and the management of the Iberian Sardine stock is adopted. This plan must be considered by the International Council for the Exploration of the Seas (ICES) to be precautionary and in line with the CFP objective to maintain all stocks at sustainable levels. The adoption of such a plan is in fact what is being done at EU level for several other important pelagic stocks.
c. That the most up-to-date recommendations of the ICES are followed. Scientific advice is the basis for a sustainable management and the scientific data provided by the national institutes – and paid by tax money – should be seriously taken into account when setting fishing opportunities;
d. That immediate efforts are put in place for the financial, human and institutional capacity building of the Iberian institutes that contribute to ICES working groups and other marine research institutions in order to improve their capacity to collect and process scientific data that could serve the countries’ fisheries management interests;
e. An urgent and serious investment in finding durable solutions for the fisheries sector, which go beyond granting subsidies for closing the fishing activity. There are other small pelagic species on the Iberian coast that are being well managed, such as horse mackerel. This species is undervalued by the consumers and the TAC has even remained to be used fully. Thus, one of the solutions for the sector may be to encourage the consumption of horse mackerel and other species captured by the national fleets that are in good condition. However, it is necessary to keep these stocks well monitored from a scientific point of view;
f. Measures to diversify the activity are implemented and that professionals redirect to activities that do not cause other negative impacts on ecosystems, bringing benefits to local economies and not being an additional expense for the Member States (e.g.: Tourism). It is fundamental that PO’s and operators create alternative sources of income complementary to fisheries;
g. That the sector does not depend so highly on a single species, as it is important that, in the future, the sector does not focus its socio-economic dependence on one species, especially when it is a small pelagic that is influenced by factors that can hardly be controlled or managed;
h. That socio-economic studies that substantiate the fleet’s high dependence on the resource are carried out.
In this joint NGO letter to the Commission co-signed by ClientEarth, Seas At Risk, Fisheries Secretariat, Our Fish, Oceana, WWF and BirdWatch Ireland, we express our serious concerns about the consequences of an ongoing failure to effectively implement, monitor and control the landing obligation. A key problem is that a number of approaches have already been taken to facilitate the implementation of the landing obligation, such as exemptions, quota increases to account for previous discards and bycatch TACs for vulnerable stocks with scientific zero-catch advice, based on the false assumption of full compliance.
In this letter we outline the various issues and provide recommendations for how the Commission should address these. While the day-to-day ‘on the water’ implementation of the landing obligation falls in large part into the hands of the Member States and the fishing industry itself, the Commission plays a crucial role in overseeing this process and stepping in if the achievement of the CFP’s objectives is being jeopardised. The letter was sent on 17 July 2019 to Director-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries João Aguiar Machado.
Download PDF Briefing: Mismanagement of European Maritime and Fisheries Fund Sees Taxpayers’ Money Vanish into the Wrong Pockets
The European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF)i is the fund for the EU’s maritime and fisheries policy during the period 2014-2020. The EU provides over €6 billion to this fund, which, when combined with Member State contributions, totals over €8 billion. In principle, the fund is designed to promote the objectives of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), which is to ensure that EU fisheries are restored to good health and are managed sustainably – thus improving the economic, environmental and social performance of the fisheries sector. The EMFF was created to:
Environmental NGOs recommend that:
However, a 2018 report by the Danish Court of Auditors has found that large sums of EMFF money have been mismanaged in Denmark. While the report focuses on the situation in Denmark, it also prompts questions over how the EMFF has been managed in other EU countries.
EMFF decision-makers in Denmark and other EU Member States should take stock of the lessons learnt from this case study on the use and abuse of EMFF funds. Poor management and fraud must be detected and stopped. Taxpayers’ money cannot be misappropriated at the expense of environmentally sustainable fishing operations, or of the part of the fleet that needs support to improve their sustainability and viability.
In October 2018, the Danish Court of Auditors (Rigsrevisionen) published a report concerning the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ management of money from the EMFF, during the period 2014-2017. The support under the EMFF-programme in this period was DKK 875.4 million (approx. €117.18 million), of which the EU financed approximately 75%.
The Auditors strongly criticised the Danish authorities’ management of EMFF funds, with errors and irregularities in the management of the funds reported to have been “so extensive that it is an expression of a worrying and unusual administrative culture”.
Continue reading: Download PDF Briefing of Mismanagement of European Maritime and Fisheries Fund Sees Taxpayers’ Money Vanish into the Wrong Pockets
In October 2019, EU fisheries ministers will agree on fishing opportunities in the Baltic Sea for 2020. This will be the final Council meeting where fisheries ministers have the opportunity to end overfishing of Baltic Sea species by 2020, as is legally required by the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP)[1].
The following text outlines the joint NGO recommendations on Baltic Sea fishing opportunities for 2020 in the context of EU fisheries legislation, scientific advice on catch limits and the sharing of stocks with third countries.
We urge the European Commission (EC) to propose, and the Council to agree on, Total Allowable Catches (TACs) in accordance with the following recommendations:
NGO recommendation on eastern Baltic cod for the remaining part of 2019
In addition to recommendations on 2020 TACs, we include a recommendation on eastern Baltic cod for the remaining part of 2019. The stock has been deteriorating for many years and the ICES advice now confirms it is in a critical state. We recommend the Commission and Baltic Sea member states introduce emergency measures in order to safeguard the eastern Baltic cod stock, including closing the fishery immediately, in accordance with the CFP articles 12 and 13[2].
Notes:
[1] Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy.
[2] Letter from NGOs to Fisheries Ministers in the Baltic Sea region on Eastern Baltic cod. April 11th, 2019. https://www.fishsec.org/app/uploads/2019/04/Letter-to-Ministers-about-Eastern-Baltic-Cod.pdf
Joint Letter from 59 NGOS to WTO Ambassadors, April 30, 2019
Re: World Trade Organization Fisheries Subsidies Negotiations
Excellency
This year will be pivotal for the world’s ocean.
We urge you to fulfil the December 2017 ministerial mandate for WTO members to agree to “comprehensive and effective disciplines that prohibit certain forms of fisheries subsidies that contribute to overcapacity and overfishing, and eliminate subsidies that contribute to illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing” by the end of 2019. The months ahead will be critical to realizing this commitment and achieving UN Sustainable Development Goal target 14.6 by 2020, universally agreed to in 2015.
Though not all subsidies are harmful, comprehensive estimates of global fisheries subsidies show that as much as $20 billion (1) is spent by governments globally on capacity-enhancing subsidies – harmful payments that offset fishing costs such as fuel, gear, and vessel construction, and allow fishers to travel farther for longer— which risk leading to fishing above sustainable biological limits. Applying economic theory to the fisheries sector reveals that in an open-access fishery, a revenue-enhancing or cost-reducing subsidy increases marginal profits at each level of fishing effort, and therefore leads to an increased overall fishing effort. (2)
In 2018, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture estimated that a third of all fish stocks are exploited at unsustainable levels and another 60% have no room for increased fishing without jeopardizing sustainability.3 Decades of overfishing have taken a significant toll on ocean health, contributing to poverty, food insecurity, ecosystem imbalances, distorted markets, and unemployment. This is compounded by harmful subsidies, leading to serious social, environmental and economic impacts for the more than 1 billion people who depend on seafood as a main source of protein, and the more than 40 million people who rely directly on fishing for their income (3).
There is now a brief window in which WTO members can achieve transformative change for the world’s ocean and the livelihoods of many coastal communities by addressing one of the drivers of global overfishing. If negotiations reach a successful conclusion, members will reignite confidence that multilateral cooperation can achieve global outcomes. In the wake of many rounds of fisheries subsidies negotiations dating back to the Doha Ministerial Conference in 2001, there is now an opportunity to not only demonstrate the vitality and effectiveness of the WTO, but to serve as leaders for an issue of shared global importance.
We, the 59 undersigned organizations, support members’ efforts to reach an ambitious agreement to end harmful fisheries subsidies by December 2019, and ensure a sustainable future for our ocean and the livelihoods that depend on it.
ANA: Asociación Asturiana de Amigos de la Naturaleza, Archipelagos Institute of Marine Conservation, BirdWatch Ireland, BLOOM, ClientEarth, Coalition Clean Baltic, Colectivo Ecologista de Avilés, Coordinadora Ecoloxista d’Asturies, Depana, Deutsche Umwelthilfe e.V. (EnvironmentalAction Germany), DSCC Ecologistas en Acción, EcoTrust Canada, El Chorlitejo Plataforma para la defensa del litoral del sureste de Gran Canaria, Environmental Pillar, European Environmental Bureau (EEB), FishAct, Forum Umwelt und Entwicklung (Forumfor Environment and Development), Fundació ENT, Fundación Lonxanet para la pesca sostenible, GEOTA, Gesellschaft zur Rettung der Delphine (Society for the Rescue of Dolphins) Global Fishing Watch, Global Ocean Trust, Green Budget Europe, Humane Society International (HSI), International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW), International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED), International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), Landsforeningen Levende Hav (Living Sea Denmark), LPN: Liga para a Protecção da Natureza Marine Conservation Institute
MEER e.V., Mission Blue, NATURSCHUTZINITIATIVE eV (NI), Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. (NRDC), Ocean Conservancy, Ocean Unite, Oceana, OceanCare, Oceanografica, Ondarroa 12 Milia, Our Fish, Pechethique, The Pew Charitable Trusts PONG-Pesca Posidonia Green Project
Pro Wildlife Quercus -Associação Nacional de Conservação da Natureza (ANCN), Sciaena, SeaChoice, Sea First Foundation, Sea Shepherd France, Seas at Risk, Sociedade Portuguesa para o Estudo das Aves (SPEA), Submon, The Nature Conservancy (TNC), Whale and Dolphin Conservation, World Wildlife Fund for Nature (WWF)
Download letters:
Re: World Trade Organization Fisheries Subsidies Negotiations (EN, PDF)
Re: Negociaciones de la Organización Mundial del Comercio sobre las subvenciones a la pesca (ES, PDF)
Notes:
1. Sumaila, U. Rashid, et al. “A Bottom-up Re-Estimation of Global Fisheries Subsidies.” Journal of Bioeconomics, vol. 12, no. 3, 2010, pp. 201–225., doi:10.1007/s10818-010-9091-8.
2. Porter, G. Fisheries Subsidies and Overfishing: Towards a Structured Discussion, Geneva: United Nations Environmental Programme. 2001. (http://www.unep.ch/etu/etp/acts/capbld/rdtwo/FE_vol_1.pdf)
3 FAO. 2018. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2018 – Meeting the sustainable development goals. Rome.Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO
Photo: Shoal of Fish in the Mediterranean Sea © Greenpeace / Gavin Parsons