Explanatory Memorandum to COM(2020)436 - Fixing for 2021 of the fishing opportunities for certain (groups of) fish stocks in the Baltic Sea, and amending Reg. 2020/123 as regards fishing opportunities in other waters - Main contents
Please note
This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.
| dossier | COM(2020)436 - Fixing for 2021 of the fishing opportunities for certain (groups of) fish stocks in the Baltic Sea, and amending Reg. ... |
|---|---|
| source | COM(2020)436  |
| date | 28-08-2020 |
1. CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL
• Reasons for and objectives of the proposal
In accordance with Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), the exploitation of living marine biological resources shall restore and maintain populations of harvested species above levels which can produce the maximum sustainable yield (MSY). One important tool in this respect is the annual fixing of fishing opportunities in the form of total allowable catches (TACs) and quotas.
Regulation (EU) 2016/1139 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 July 2016 establishing a multiannual management plan for the stocks of cod, herring and sprat in the Baltic sea and the fisheries exploiting those stocks (hereafter “MAP”) further specifies the values of fishing mortalities expressed as ranges which are used in this proposal in order to reach the objectives of the CFP, especially reaching and maintaining the MSY.
The objective of this proposal is to fix, for the commercially most important fish stocks in the Baltic Sea, the fishing opportunities for Member States for 2021. With a view to simplifying and clarifying the annual TAC and quota decisions, fishing opportunities in the Baltic Sea have been fixed by a separate Regulation since 2006.
• Consistency with existing policy provisions in the policy area
The proposal establishes quotas at the levels consistent with the objectives of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013.
• Consistency with other Union policies
The proposed measures are in accordance with the objectives and rules of the Common Fisheries Policy and are consistent with the Union’s policy on sustainable development.
2. LEGAL BASIS, SUBSIDIARITY AND PROPORTIONALITY
• Legal basis
Article 43(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).
• Subsidiarity (for non-exclusive competence)
The proposal falls under the Union’s exclusive competence as referred to in Article 3(1)(d) TFEU. The subsidiarity principle therefore does not apply.
• Proportionality
The proposal complies with the proportionality principle for the following reasons.
The Common Fisheries Policy is a common policy. According to Article 43(3) TFEU it is incumbent upon the Council to adopt measures on the fixing and allocation of fishing opportunities.
The Council Regulation in question allocates fishing opportunities to Member States. Having regard to Article 16(6) and (7) and Article 17 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013, Member States are free to allocate such opportunities among regions or operators according to the criteria set in the mentioned Articles. 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. This particular Regulation is adopted by the Council every year, and the public and private means to implement it are already in place.
• Choice of instrument
Proposed instrument: Regulation.
This is a proposal for fisheries management on the basis of Article 43(3) TFEU.
3. RESULTS OF EX-POST EVALUATIONS, STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATIONS AND IMPACT ASSESSMENTS
• Stakeholder consultations
The Baltic Sea Advisory Council (BSAC) was consulted on the basis of the Communication from the Commission concerning Consultation on the Fishing Opportunities for 2021 under the Common Fisheries Policy COM(2020) 248 final. The scientific basis for the proposal was provided by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES). The preliminary views expressed by various stakeholders on all the fish stocks concerned were considered and taken into account as far as possible in the proposal without contradicting existing policies or causing any deterioration in the state of vulnerable resources.
The scientific advice on catch limitations and status of the stocks were also discussed with Member States in the regional forum BALTFISH in June 2020.
• Collection and use of expertise
The scientific organisation consulted was the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES).
The Union seeks scientific advice on the state of important fish stocks from ICES each year. The advice received covers all Baltic stocks and TACs are proposed for the commercially most important stocks (www.ices.dk/advice/Pages/Latest-Advice.aspx).
• Impact assessment
The proposal is part of a long-term approach whereby the level of fishing is adjusted to and maintained at long-term sustainable levels. This approach is expected to result in a stable fishing pressure, higher quotas and hence an improved income for fishermen and their families. The increased landings are expected to be beneficial for the fishing industry, consumers, processing and retail industry as well as for the rest of the ancillary industry linked to commercial and recreational fishing.
Decisions taken on the Baltic fishing opportunities over the past years had succeeded until 2019 in bringing fishing mortality for stocks with an MSY advice in line with the MSY ranges at the moment of the TAC setting for all stocks except for western Baltic herring, and in rebuilding stocks and rebalancing fishing capacity and fishing opportunities. Unfortunately, eastern Baltic cod came under severe pressure in 2019 and ICES estimates that that stock will most probably remain in a dire condition in the years to come. Hence progress is still necessary to rebuild all stocks, some of them still below safe biomass limits, and to bring all stocks in line with MSY.
The latest best available scientific advice estimates that the biomass of two stocks is below healthy limits (central Baltic herring and western Baltic cod), two even below safe biological limits (western Baltic herring and eastern Baltic cod). Next to eastern Baltic cod three other stocks receive precautionary advice (Gulf of Bothnia herring and the two salmon stocks). Two stocks receive an MSY advice and are at healty levels (sprat and herring in the Gulf of Riga). Plaice is composed of two stocks one of which receives MSY advice, the other one precautionary advice.
Taking the above into account, the Commission proposal would decrease fishing opportunities for western Baltic herring by 50%, for eastern Baltic cod by 70%, for western Baltic cod by 11%, for Central herring by 36% and for salmon in the Gulf of Finland by 10%. The Commission proposal would increase fishing opportunities for Gulf of Riga herring by 15% and for salmon in the main basin by 9%, and roll over those for herring in the Gulf of Bothnia, sprat and plaice.
The economic impact of the proposals for 2021 will therefore be a reduction for the fleets in all Member States. All in all, the Commission proposal leads to a level of approximately 425 000 tonnes for the Baltic fishing opportunities, representing a 11.3% reduction when compared to 2020.
• Regulatory fitness and simplification
The proposal remains flexible in the application of quota exchange mechanisms which were already introduced in the Regulations concerning fishing opportunities in the Baltic Sea in the previous years. There are no new elements or new administrative procedures proposed for public authorities (EU or national) which could increase the administrative burden.
The proposal concerns an annual Regulation for the year 2021 and therefore does not include a revision clause.
4. BUDGETARY IMPLICATIONS
The proposal has no implications for the EU budget.
5. OTHER ELEMENTS
• Implementation plans and monitoring, evaluation and reporting arrangements
The monitoring of the use of fishing opportunities in the form of TACs and quotas was established by Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009.
• Detailed explanation of the specific provisions of the proposal
The proposal fixes for 2021 the fishing opportunities for certain stocks or groups of stocks for Member States fishing in the Baltic Sea.
Regulation (EU) 2016/1139 establishing the MAP for the Baltic Sea entered into force on 20 July 2016. Under the provisions of this plan, the fishing opportunities are to be fixed in accordance with the objectives of the plan and are to comply with the target fishing mortality ranges provided in the best available scientific advice, in particular by ICES or a similar independent scientific body. For stocks benefitting from an MSY advice Article 4(3) of the MAP provides that the TAC is in principle to be set at or below the FMSY point value (so-called “lower FMSY range”), though the TAC can also always be set below the FMSY ranges according to Article 4 i of the MAP. For healthy stocks the TAC may, under the conditions spelled out in Article 4(5) of the MAP, be set above the FMSY point value (so-called “upper FMSY range”). For stocks with a biomass below healthy limits (so-called “Btrigger”) Article 5(1) of the MAP provides that appropriate remedial measures are to be taken to ensure the rapid return of the stock to healthy levels and in particular the TAC is to be set at a level reduced below the upper FMSY range, taking into account the decrease in biomass. If a stock’s biomass is even below safe biological limits (so-called “Blim”), Article 5(2) of the MAP provides that additional remedial measures are to be taken. According to the CFP Basic Regulation, fishing opportunities for stocks receiving precautionary advice are to be set at levels ensuring at least a comparable degree of conservation. Finally, the Basic Regulation states in its recital 8 that management decisions relating in mixed fisheries should take into account the difficulty of fishing all stocks in a mixed fishery at maximum sustainable yield at the same time, in particular where scientific advice indicates that it is very difficult to avoid the phenomenon of 'choke species' by increasing the selectivity of the fishing gears used.
The fishing opportunities are proposed in accordance with 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) of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013.
Where relevant, in order to set the EU quotas for stocks shared with the Russian Federation, the respective quantities of these stocks were deducted from the TACs advised by ICES. The TACs and quotas allocated to Member States are shown in Annex to the Regulation.
For western Baltic herring the stock size estimated by ICES continues to be below the limit spawning biomass reference point, below which there may be reduced reproductive capacity (Blim) as established by ICES. Taking into account the further decrease in estimated biomass of western Baltic herring to merely 48% of the minimum reference value (Blim), the Commission proposes pursuant to Articles 5(2) and 4 i of the MAP to set the TAC at a level lower than the ranges of FMSY. The Commission proposes to use the lower range value and to add a further decrease as a remedial measure. This results in a TAC of 1 575 tonnes (-50%).
For eastern Baltic cod, after several years ICES was once again in a position to undertake an analytical assessment last year. However, ICES was not able to determine the values of the MSY fishing mortality ranges and therefore issued a precautionary advice. Moreover, ICES estimated that the stock size was below safe biological limits (Blim) and that it would remain below in the medium term even with no fishing at all. ICES estimates that the biomass has further decreased since last year and reiterated for 2021 its advice for zero catches. However, like last year setting a zero TAC would choke most of the fisheries in the Baltic Sea. In May 2020 ICES provided an updated advice on levels of cod by-catches in other fisheries. Therefore, based on a similar approach as the one adopted last year, the Commission proposes to set a TAC limited to unavoidable by-catches in other fisheries with an exception for purely scientific fisheries. Based on this scientific advice, the Commission proposes to set the fishing opportunities to the level corresponding to a by-catch level of 20%. Moreover, given the status of the stock of eastern Baltic cod and ICES’ advice that spawning closures can have additional benefits for the stock which cannot be achieved by TAC alone (e.g. increased recruitment through undisturbed spawning), the Commission proposes to maintain the existing summer spawning closure with an exception for purely scientific fisheries and certain small-scale coastal fisheries using passive gears. Finally, the Commission proposes to maintain the prohibition of recreational fishing in subdivisions 25 and 26 since the quantities caught would be substantial when compared to the by-catch TAC.
Regarding western Baltic cod, ICES indicated last year that the stock’s situation was fragile and deteriorating again. Therefore, fishing opportunities were set in the low part of the lower FMSY range and a prolonged and enlarged winter spawning closure was re-introduced for subdivisions 22-23 – with an exception for purely scientific fisheries and certain small-scale coastal fisheries using passive gears – as ICES considers that such closures can have additional benefits that cannot be achieved by TAC alone. As recreational fishing substantially contributes to fishing mortality, the bag limit for recreational fishing was reduced to the same extent as the reduction of the TAC. Finally, as eastern and western Baltic cod mix in subdivision 24 and following the emergency measures adopted in 2019, directed fishing for cod was forbidden and only unavoidable by-catches allowed to be caught beyond six nautical miles from shore in subdivision 24, with an exception for purely scientific fisheries and certain small-scale coastal fisheries using passive gears. Furthermore, and in order to establish a level playing field with the eastern Baltic cod management area, recreational fishing beyond six nautical miles from shore was prohibited in subdivision 24 since mostly eastern Baltic cod occurs in these areas, and a summer spawning closure introduced from 1 June to 31 July with an exception for purely scientific fisheries and certain small-scale coastal fisheries using passive gears. Despite positive prospects last year, the stock’s biomass has remained below healthy levels (Btrigger). For 2021 the Commission therefore proposes to maintain the accompanying measures unchanged while aligning the closure period in subdivision 24 with the closure period in subdivisions 25-26, i.e covering (1 May to 31 Aug), and to set the fishing opportunities at the lower point value (Flower) while adding the quantities for cod by-catches in subdivision 24 provided by ICES corresponding to a by-catch level of 20% except for small-scale coastal fisheries fishing with passive gears for which 100% are added since these fisheries are not covered by the by-catch limitation.
ICES estimates that the biomass of central herring has fallen below healthy levels (Btrigger). The Commission, in accordance with Article 5(1) therefore proposes to set the fishing opportunities below the upper FMSY range. ICES estimates that with this level of fishing mortality the biomass should be back above healthy levels already in 2021.
The proposed TACs for herring in the Gulf of Riga, and sprat correspond to the MSY fishing mortality range as referred to in Article 4(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1139. Sprat continues to rely on a single good year class only, its estimated biomass was revised downwards and has decreased. The latest year class 2019, which is estimated to be above average, should therefore be preserved for future years. Moreover, inter-species considerations should be taken into account because sprat is caught in a mixed fishery with herring whose TAC has to be significantly decreased under the rules of the MAP. Under these circumstances and in order to avoid risking exacerbating future decreases, the Commission proposes not to increase the TAC and proposes thus a roll-over.
The TAC for plaice corresponds to a combination of the MSY advice for the stock in subdivisions 21 to 23 and of the ICES approach for data limited stocks for the stock in subdivisions 24 to 32. The Commission proposes a roll-over because of inter-species considerations. Cod is an unavoidable by-catch in plaice fisheries, and the Commission proposes to reduce the fishing opportunities for cod.
The TACs for salmon in the main basin, Gulf of Finland salmon and herring in the Gulf of Bothnia correspond to the approach developed by ICES which is applied to data limited stocks. The Commission proposes to set the fishing opportunities according to the quantities advised by ICES. Regarding main-basin salmon, Finland and Estonia asked for the limited inter-area flexibility introduced two years ago to be maintained. Given that the Commission proposes to increase the fishing opportunities in the main basin but to reduce those in the Gulf of Finland, the Commission proposes to increase the inter-area flexibility to 25% and 500 specimens.
Council Regulation (EC) No 847/96 introduced 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, the flexibility mechanism was introduced for all stocks covered by the landing obligation 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 apply only where Member States do not use the year-to-year flexibility provided for in Article 15(9) of Regulation 1380/2013.