Explanatory Memorandum to COM(2019)483 - Fixing for 2020 of fishing opportunities for certain (groups of) fish stocks, applicable in Union waters and, for Union fishing vessels, in certain non-Union waters - Main contents
Please note
This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.
| dossier | COM(2019)483 - Fixing for 2020 of fishing opportunities for certain (groups of) fish stocks, applicable in Union waters and, for Union ... |
|---|---|
| source | COM(2019)483  |
| date | 24-10-2019 |
1. CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL
• Reasons for and objectives of the proposal
All fishing opportunities regulations must limit the harvesting of the fish stocks to levels that must be consistent with the overall objectives of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). In this respect, Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Common Fisheries Policy (“the Basic Regulation”) sets out the objectives for the annual proposals for catch and fishing effort limitations to ensure that Union fisheries are ecologically, economically and socially sustainable.
The fishing opportunities exercise represents an annual management cycle (biennial in the case of deep-sea stocks). However, this does not stand in the way of the introduction of long-term management approaches. The multiannual plans for the North Sea 1 and for the Western Waters 2 had been adopted by the European Parliament and the Council and were published in the Official Journal of the European Union.
This proposal contains fishing opportunities that the Union establishes autonomously. However, it also features fishing opportunities resulting from multilateral or bilateral fisheries consultations. The outcome is implemented by providing for internal allocation among Member States on the principle of relative stability.
Thus, this proposal covers, apart from autonomous Union stocks:
·Shared stocks, i.e. stocks that are jointly managed with Norway in the North Sea and the Skagerrak, or related to North East Atlantic Fisheries Commission (NEAFC) Coastal State consultations;
·Fishing opportunities resulting from agreements reached in the framework of Regional Fisheries Management Organisations (RFMOs).
A number of fishing opportunities are marked as 'pm' (pro memoria) in this proposal. This is due to the fact that:
–the advice on some stocks is not available at the time when the proposal is adopted; or
–certain catch limitations and other recommendations from the relevant RFMOs are pending because their annual meetings have not taken place yet; or
–for some stocks in Greenland waters, as well as shared stocks or stocks exchanged with Norway and other third countries, the figures are not available yet, pending the conclusion of consultations in November and December 2019 with those countries; or
–for a few TACs, the advice has been received, but the evaluation is still ongoing.
Approach for setting fishing opportunities
As usual, the Commission has reviewed the situation to which the fishing opportunities proposals must respond via its annual Communication from the Commission concerning a consultation on Fishing Opportunities (COM(2019)274), hereinafter 'Communication'). The Communication provides an overview of the state of the stocks based on the findings of the scientific advice available and explains the process for establishing fishing opportunities.
In response to the Commission's request, the International Council for the Exploration of the Seas (ICES) provided on 28 June 2019 its annual advice on most fish stocks covered by this proposal.
Scientific advice delivered by ICES is essentially dependent on data: only stocks for which there is sufficient and reliable data can be fully assessed, so that stock size estimates are produced, as well as a forecast of how they will react to the various exploitation scenarios (this is referred to as 'catch scenario tables'). Where sufficient data is available, the scientific bodies are able to provide estimates of adjustments to the fishing opportunities that will bring the stock to produce its maximum sustainable yield (MSY). The advice is then referred to as 'MSY advice'. In other cases, the scientific bodies rely on the precautionary approach to make recommendations as to what the level of fishing opportunities should be. The methodology followed by ICES to that end is presented in ICES published material pertaining to the implementation of advice for data limited stocks 3 .
All the proposed fishing opportunities respond to the scientific advice received by the Commission as to the state of the stocks, which has been used in the manner outlined in the Communication.
Contents
- Landing obligation introduced by Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013
- By-catch TACs
- STECF concludes that the additional proposals for further assessment and evaluation will only be useful, if they lead to concrete measures that will reduce bycatch.”
- Inter-annual flexibility
- Measures on European eel
- Measures on sea bass
- Not applicable
The landing obligation introduced by the Basic Regulation of the CFP was introduced progressively from 2015 to 2019. As from 1 January 2019, all stocks under catch limits are subject to the landing obligation. Certain exceptions from the landing obligation provided for in the Basic Regulation may apply. Based on the joint recommendations submitted by the Member States, the Commission adopted Delegated Regulations laying down specific discard plans, which allow limited quantities of discards to occur on the basis of de minimis or high survivability exemptions.
With the introduction of the landing obligation, and in accordance with Article 16(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013, the fishing opportunities proposed have to reflect the change from amount landed to amount caught, taking into account that discards are no longer allowed. This is done on the basis of the received scientific advice for the fish stocks in fisheries referred to in Article 15(1) of the Basic Regulation of the CFP. The fishing opportunities should also be fixed in accordance with other relevant provisions, i.e. Articles 16(1) (referring to the principle of relative stability) and 16 i (referring to the objectives of the Common Fisheries Policy and the rules provided for in multiannual plans).
Therefore, to take account of the full application of the landing obligation as from 1 January 2019, the Commission proposes TACs on the basis of catch advice instead of previously used landings advice. The proposed TACs take account of the fact that certain limited discards based on established exemptions will occur, and thus will not be landed and counted against the quotas. Therefore, these amounts are deducted from the catch-based TACs.
ICES has issued scientific advice for zero catch in 2019 for six stocks (West of Scotland cod and whiting, Irish Sea whiting, cod in the Celtic Sea and plaice Celtic Sea South, southwest of Ireland, cod in Kattegat). As regards cod in the Celtic Sea, the stock is included in the list of target stocks in Article 1(1) of the Western Waters multiannual plan. Therefore, fishing opportunities for this stock must be set in line with the Fmsy range as provided in Article 4 of the plan. Moreover, under Article 8 of the plan the safeguard measures must be taken to rebuild the spawning biomass above the safeguard levels.
As regards the five by-catch TACs for which by-catch TACs have been set in 2019 fishing opportunities, the Member States of the North Western Waters undertook the commitments set out in this statement:
“On by-catch reduction plans and control measures (North West Waters Group, i.e. Belgium, France, Ireland, the Netherlands, Spain and the United Kingdom, and the Commission)
Member States cooperating in the North-Western Waters, in close cooperation with the North Western Waters Advisory Council, will prepare a by-catch reduction plan to ensure that by-catches of the stocks for which ICES has issued zero catch advice for 2019 are reduced through selectivity or avoidance measures. To this end the Member States concerned will submit to the Commission a by-catch reduction plan at the latest on 30 April 2019. By-catch reduction plans will contain measures such as more selective gears, area closures, real time closures, avoidance measures and move-on rules. They may build on the latest relevant discard plans. The by-catch reduction plans should be adapted to the species in question and be chosen from the above catalogue of measures according to the specificities of each fishery. The plans will be assessed by the STECF regarding their effectiveness. The Chair of the North Western Waters Group will report to the Commission by 1 October every year on progress achieved with the by-catch reduction plan.
In line with the Control Regulation, the Member States will undertake all appropriate control measures to ensure that by-catches of the stocks for which ICES has issued zero catch advice for 2019 are strictly unavoidable and that no discards take place beyond levels allowed by the discard plan. By 1 July 2019 the Member States concerned will inform the Commission of the control measures taken.”
The by-catch reduction plan was submitted to the Commission and assessed with the STECF. The STECF issued the following conclusions in respect of the by-catch reduction plan (BCReP) 4 :
“STECF concludes that the BCReP does not fulfil the commitments made by the Member States as it does not contain any elements to ensure reduced by-catches of the relevant stocks over and above the measures already included in the discard plan, the JR and the new technical-measures regulation and the BCReP does not contain any elements of monitoring or control.
Regarding effectiveness, STECF concludes nevertheless that the respective measures in the new technical-measures regulation, the discard plan and the JR that are mentioned in the BCReP are likely to reduce by-catches of the relevant species, as qualitatively assessed by EWG 18-06 and EWG 19-08. This effectiveness is conditional upon adequate control and enforcement. For the quantitative evaluation and the assessment of the impact on the stocks, follow-up studies are needed, as proposed in the BCReP.
Regarding comprehensiveness, STECF concludes that the BCReP is not comprehensive, as it did not consider any additional gear options that are available and did not contain any area closures, real-time closures, avoidance measures and move-on rules nor did it contain proposals for monitoring, control and enforcement.
STECF concludes that the additional proposals for further assessment and evaluation will only be useful, if they lead to concrete measures that will reduce bycatch.”
As concerns to the uptake of by-catch TACs, in particular where large majority of by-catches are under the minimum conservation reference size (e.g. Irish Sea whiting), the uptake remains very low and landings are similar to those before the application of the landing obligation. This leads to a conclusion that, in the absence of appropriate control measures that should have already been put in place by the Member States as required by the Control Regulation, discarding will continue, thus undermining the effectiveness of by-catch TACs.
Therefore, in order to continue the approach of by-catch reduction TACs, the necessary measures to protect the stocks in poor biological situation must be taken. They should consist of setting fishing opportunities for fisheries in which fish from these stocks is caught at levels that help rebuilding the biomass of depleted stocks, as well as other measures that are intrinsically linked to fishing opportunities. Such measures should lead to improvements in selectivity (e.g. gear modifications and move-on rules), temporary and permanent closures and control and surveillance measures capable of discouraging discarding.
Finally, the links between the Basic Regulation of the CFP and Council Regulation (EC) No 847/96 must be considered. The latter establishes additional conditions for year-to-year management of TACs, including flexibility provisions under Articles 3 and 4 for precautionary and analytical stocks respectively. Under its Article 2, when fixing the TACs, the Council is to decide to which stocks Articles 3 and 4 shall not apply, in particular on the basis of the biological status of the stocks. More recently, another flexibility mechanism was introduced by Article 15(9) of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013. Therefore, in order to avoid excessive flexibility that would undermine the principle of rational and responsible exploitation of living marine biological resources and hinder the achievement of the objectives of the Common Fisheries Policy, it should be clarified that Article 3 and 4 of Regulation (EC) No 847/96 cannot apply in addition to the year-to-year flexibility provided for in Article 15(9) of Regulation 1380/2013.
The inter-annual flexibility under Article 15(9) of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 should be excluded where the application of this flexibility would undermine the achievement of the CFP objectives, in particular for stocks with spawning biomass below Blim.
The measures for European eel will be established following the scientific advice by ICES, after the full analysis of that advice has been made.
The measures for European seabass will be established following the scientific advice by ICES after the full analysis of that advice has been made.
TACs with variation exceeding 20% compared to 2019
When the Western Waters Multiannual Plan was adopted, the Commission made a statement that, where the Commission proposes setting TACs that deviate by more than 20% from the previously established TAC level, these cases will be listed in the explanatory memorandum of the Commission Proposal, providing, where appropriate, the underlying reasons for the TAC variations. Such a list is provided here:
| TAC | Sea Area Name | Proposed TAC for 2020 | Proposal TAC change from 2019 | Explanation |
| Blue ling in International waters of 12 | International waters of North of Azores | 137 | -40% | The stock is considered depleted and there are no signs of stock rebuilding. Scientific advice is for 0 catches for 2020-2023. However, a zero TAC would cause a premature closure of other fisheries. |
| Blue ling in Union and international waters of 2 and 4 | Union and international waters of the Norwegian Sea and the North Sea | 32 | -40% | The stock is considered depleted and there are no signs of stock rebuilding. Scientific advice is for 0 catches for 2020-2023. However, a zero TAC would cause a premature closure of other fisheries. |
| Blue ling in Union and international waters of 3a | Union and international waters of Skagerrak and Kattegat | 5 | -40% | The stock is considered depleted and there are no signs of stock rebuilding. Scientific advice is for 0 catches for 2020-2023. However, a zero TAC would cause a premature closure of other fisheries. |
| Cod in 7a | Irish Sea | 257 | -68% | Biomass index shows significant decline and an increase in harvest rate since 2017. The TAC is established at the level of catches in 2018 at 257 tonnes. |
| Cod in 7b, 7c, 7e-k, 8, 9 and 10; Union waters of CECAF 34.1.1 | West of Ireland, Porcupine Bank, Western English Channel, Celtic Sea, Bay of Biscay, Portuguese waters, Azores Grounds; Union waters of CECAF 34.1.1 | 189 | -88% | The stock is listed as a target stock under the Western Waters multiannual plan. The Commission Proposal is to set the TAC in the lower Fmsy range, as required by the multiannual plan. |
| Common sole in 7f and 7g | Bristol Channel and Celtic Sea North | 1 559 | 55% | The stock is listed as a target stock under the Western Waters multiannual plan. The Commission Proposal is to set the TAC at the MSY point value, in line with the multiannual plan. |
| Common sole in 7h, 7j and 7k | Southern Celtic Sea, South-West of Ireland | 213 | -44,0% | Stock sustainable biomass is below proxies and is heading towards Blim. Recruitment is uncertain. ICES advises that catches in 2020 should be no more than 213 tonnes. The TAC is proposed in line with the ICES advice. |
| Horse mackerel in Union waters of 2a, 4a; 6, 7a-c,7e-k, 8a, 8b, 8d and 8e; Union and international waters of 5b; international waters of 12 and 14 | Union waters of the Northern North Sea, North-Western Waters and the Bay of Biscay | 70 617 | -41% | The TAC is proposed at MSY point value. |
| Horse mackerel in 8c | Southern Bay of Biscay | 11 179 | -41% | The TAC is proposed at MSY point value. |
| Horse Mackerel in 9 | Portuguese Waters | 46 659 | -50% | The TAC is proposed following the Pelagic Advisory Council long-term management strategy from the ICES advice catch scenarios table, below MSY point value. |
| Lemon sole and witch in Union waters of 2a and 4 | Union waters of the Norwegian Sea and the North Sea | 5 580 | -30% | This TAC consists of two species. We are following the scientific advice for both, which adds up to a total reduction of -29%. The large downward change in the witch advice is due to a changed perception of the stock following the change from category 3 (precautionary) to category 1 (MSY assessed) stock. |
| Plaice in 7f and 7g | Bristol Channel and Celtic Sea North | 2 295 | 38% | The Commission proposes to set the TAC in line with the ICES advice, i.e. at 2295 tonnes. |
| Plaice in Kattegat | Kattegat | 1 141 | -33% | The Commission proposed to set the TAC in line with the ICES advice, which is precautionary. |
| Pollack in 6; Union and international waters of 5b; international waters of 12 and 14 | West of Scotland, Rockall; Union and international waters of Faroes grounds; international waters of North of Azores and East of Greenland | 238 | -40% | The Commission proposes that the TAC be reduced by 40% in the direction of ICES advice. |
| Pollack in 7 | Celtic Seas and Irish Sea | 7 298 | -40% | The Commission proposes that the TAC be reduced by 40% in the direction of the ICES advice. |
| Sole in 8c, 8d, 8e, 9 and 10; Union waters of CECAF 34.1.1 | Bay of Biscay (South and offshore), West of Bay of Biscay, Portuguese Waters, Azores Grounds; Union waters of CECAF 34.1.1Sea | 643 | -40% | TAC was always set much higher than the advice and above the landings in the past years. The uptake in 2018 was 261 t for Spain (59%) and 454 t for Portugal (62%). Average catches 2014-2016: 628 t. Available information is insufficient to evaluate stock trends. Cat 5 stock, stock without information on abundance or exploitation, therefore a precautionary reduction of catches should be implemented |
| Sprat in 7d and 7e | Eastern Channel | 1 506 | -40% | The biomass has declined and at half of the historic level. ICES advises that catches should not be more than 1506 tonnes. The TAC is set in line with the ICES advice. |
| Turbot and brill in Union waters of 2 and 4 | Union waters of the Norwegian Sea and the North Sea | 6 208 | -24% | The proposed TAC combines two stocks, which are covered by the North Sea multiannual plan. The plan requiring the TAC to be set according to the precautionary approach, however, for brill the Commission used the MSY figure. |
• Consistency with existing policy provisions in the policy area
The measures proposed are designed in accordance with the objectives and the rules of the Common Fisheries Policy and are consistent with the Union's policy on sustainable development.
• Consistency with other Union policies
The measures proposed are consistent with other Union policies, in particular with the policies in the field of environment.
2. LEGAL BASIS, SUBSIDIARITY AND PROPORTIONALITY
• Legal basis
The legal basis of this proposal is Article 43(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
The Union's obligations for sustainable exploitation of living aquatic resources arise from obligations set out in Article 2 of the Basic Regulation of the CFP.
• Subsidiarity (for non-exclusive competence)
The proposal falls under the Union exclusive competence as referred to in Article 3(1)(d) of the Treaty. The subsidiarity principle therefore does not apply.
• Proportionality
The proposal complies with the proportionality principle for the following reason: the CFP is a common policy. According to Article 43(3) of the Treaty, it is incumbent upon the Council to adopt the measures on the fixing and allocation of fishing opportunities.
The proposed Council Regulation allocates fishing opportunities to Member States. Having regard to Articles 16 and 17 of the Basic Regulation, Member States then proceed to allocate in turn such opportunities among regions or operators as they see fit. Therefore, Member States have ample room for manoeuvre on decisions related to the social/economic model of their choice to exploit their allocated fishing opportunities.
The proposal has no new financial implications for Member States. The Council adopts this Regulation every year, and the public and private means to implement it are already in place.
• Choice of the instrument
Proposed instrument: regulation.
3. RESULTS OF EX-POST EVALUATIONS, STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATIONS AND IMPACT ASSESSMENTS
• Ex-post evaluations/fitness checks of existing legislation
The fishing opportunities regulation is revised several times per year to introduce the necessary changes to reflect the most recent scientific advice and other developments.
• Stakeholder consultations
(a)Consultation methods, main sectors targeted and general profile of respondents
The Commission has consulted stakeholders, in particular through the Advisory Councils (ACs), and Member States on its proposed approach to its various fishing opportunities proposals on the basis of its Communication on Fishing Opportunities for 2020.
In addition, the Commission has followed the orientations outlined in its Communication to the Council and European Parliament on improving consultation on Community fisheries management (COM(2006)246 final), which sets out the principles for the so-called 'front-loading process'.
(b)Summary of responses and how they were taken into account
The response to the Commission Communication on Fishing Opportunities mentioned above reflects the views of stakeholders on the evaluation made by the Commission of the state of the resources and how to ensure the appropriate management response. These responses have been considered by the Commission when formulating the Proposal.
• Collection and use of expertise
As for the methodology used, the Commission consulted, as already noted, the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES). Advice from ICES is based on an advice framework developed by its expert groups and decision-making bodies and issued in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding agreed with the Commission.
The ultimate objective is to bring and maintain the stocks to levels that can deliver Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY). This objective has been incorporated expressly in the Basic Regulation of the CFP, in particular its Article 2(2) stating that this objective “shall be achieved by 2015 where possible, and […] by 2020 for all stocks". This reflects the commitment taken by the Union regarding the conclusions of the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg and its related Plan of Implementation. As already noted, for some stocks information on maximum sustainable yield levels is indeed available. Among these, there are very important stocks in terms of volume of catches and commercial value such as hake, cod, anglerfish, sole, megrims, haddock and Norway lobster.
Fishing opportunities for target stocks in the North Sea and Western Waters are to be set on the basis of the relevant MAPs, which define Fmsy ranges of mortality and therefore offer a degree of flexibility under specific conditions. ICES has been requested to give advice that makes it possible to assess the need for and possibility of using this flexibility. The upper range of Fmsy values are used to propose TACs only if, based on scientific advice, the setting of fishing opportunities in accordance with the Fmsy ranges would be either necessary to achieve the objectives set out in the relevant MAP in the case of mixed fisheries, or to avoid serious harm to a stock caused by intra- or inter-species stock dynamics, or to limit high fluctuations between the years. In cases when the stock's biomass is below the reference points referred to in the Plan, the fishing opportunities are to be fixed at a level corresponding to the fishing mortality that is reduced proportionally taking into account the decrease of the stock's biomass.
Reaching the MSY objective may, in certain cases, require a reduction in fishing mortality rates and/or a reduction in catches. Against this background, this proposal makes use of the MSY advice, where available. In line with the objectives of the Common Fisheries Policy, where TACs are proposed on the basis of MSY advice, the TAC corresponds to the level that, according to that advice, would ensure delivery of the MSY objective in 2020. This approach follows the principles presented in the Communication on fishing opportunities for 2020.
For data-limited stocks, the scientific advisory bodies issue recommendations as to whether to reduce, stabilise or allow catches to increase. ICES advice has in many cases provided quantitative guidance about such variations. This guidance has been used to set the TACs proposed.
For some stocks (mainly widely distributed stocks, sharks and rays), the advice will be issued in the autumn. This proposal will need to be updated as appropriate once that advice is received. Finally, as mentioned above, for certain stocks the advice is used for the purpose of implementing management plans.
• Impact assessment
The scope of the fishing opportunities regulation is circumscribed by Article 43(3) of the Treaty.
The proposal seeks to avoid short-term approaches in favour of long-term sustainability decisions, and hence it takes into account initiatives from stakeholders and Advisory Councils if they have been positively reviewed by ICES and/or STECF. Furthermore, the Commission's CFP reform proposal was duly developed on the basis of an impact assessment (SEC(2011)891) in the context of which the MSY objective was analysed. Its conclusions identify this objective as a necessary condition to achieve environmental, economic and social sustainability.
As regards RFMO fishing opportunities and stocks that are shared with third countries, this proposal essentially implements internationally agreed measures. Any elements relevant to assess possible impacts of the fishing opportunities are dealt with in the preparation and conduct phase of international negotiations in the framework of which the Union's fishing opportunities are agreed with third parties.
• Regulatory fitness and simplification
The proposal provides for simplification of administrative procedures for public authorities (Union or national), in particular as regards requirements regarding the effort management.
• Fundamental rights
4. BUDGETARY IMPLICATIONS
The proposed measures will have no budgetary implications.
5. OTHER ELEMENTS
• Implementation plans and monitoring, evaluation and reporting arrangements
The provisions of the Regulation will be implemented and the compliance will be controlled in accordance with the existing Common Fisheries Policy.