The Net Effect? - Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society

to investigate any potential exclusion effects;
and c) a parallel programme of development
of other forms of mitigation and alternative
fishing methods with an explicit view to
phasing out pingers within a set timeframe.
The Commission’s proposed requirement for
at-sea observer schemes in fisheries that
present a risk of cetacean bycatch is essential.
This measure is fundamental to any efforts to
quantify and address the bycatch problem
across the broad range of fisheries in which it
occurs. However, the levels of observer
coverage set out in the Proposal represent
only the minimum levels recommended by
the scientific advisers (SGFEN) and in some
cases fall below this. For instance, SGFEN
recommended that observer coverage should
be a minimum of 5–10% in the pelagic trawl
fisheries in the Biscay, Celtic Sea and
Channel areas, and “as high as feasible”
during the December to March period when
mass dolphin strandings occur. The
Commission proposes only 5% coverage in
these fisheries and 10% during these critical
months. While even the proposed levels of
observation would represent a major
improvement in most fisheries, political and
budgetary expediency must not be allowed to
compromise the proper assessment of the
scale and nature of the bycatch problem.
The Commission states in the accompanying
documents that “scientists consider that mitigation
of cetacean bycatch can be primarily
addressed through an overall reduction in
fishing pressure” and that this “is expected
as a result of other community measures
aimed at ensuring the sustainability of fisheries”.
While measures being planned and
introduced to reduce fishing effort within
the CFP are to be welcomed, effort reduction
targeted at those fishing sectors and gear
types causing the greatest impact should be
more actively used as a bycatch reduction
measure in its own right.
The Commission’s Proposal does not identify
any management objectives or targets for
bycatch reduction. Nor are any management
options identified in the event that reduction
of bycatch levels is not achieved. Although
the Commission acknowledges the need for a
management framework within which a
comprehensive strategy can be set up, it
contends that this cannot be put together at
this stage “given the absence of precise information
on bycatch patterns [etc]”. On the
contrary, a management framework is precisely
the tool required to identify monitoring
and surveillance requirements, assess the data
that are collected, devise appropriate management
responses for each specific fishery or
area (bycatch reduction plans with clear
targets and timeframes), oversee their implementation
and enforcement, and evaluate
their efficacy and impacts. Indeed, the first
and key recommendation in the SGFEN final
report is that “a management framework …
needs to be implemented at an EU and other
appropriate levels if cetacean bycatch is to be
addressed adequately” (CEC 2002b). This
must be introduced without delay.
6.4 Pelagic trawl fisheries
Although the Commission acknowledges
that gillnets and pelagic trawls appear to
contribute most cetacean bycatch in
European fisheries, the proposed Regulation
makes no provisions regarding the pelagic
trawl sector beyond observer monitoring.
To date, only a limited number of these
pelagic fisheries have been monitored in any
depth, so the compulsory observer monitoring
provisions are extremely important.
However, high dolphin bycatch rates have
been recorded already in the Dutch mackerel
and horse mackerel single-trawl fishery, the
Irish albacore pair-trawl fishery and the UK
sea bass pair-trawl fishery. The Community
must make clear its intention to introduce
without delay measures to reduce bycatch in
those pelagic trawl fisheries where bycatch
levels are found to be problematic.
While the UK’s work to develop an exclusion
The Net Effect?
A WDCS report for Greenpeace
59