A report on iUU fishing of Baltic Sea cod - Fisheries Secretariat

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Fishing in closed areasEU fisheries regulations provide for seasonal,temporary and permanently closed areas to allor specified forms of fishing. On occasion, somefishermen are known to deliberately breach theseregulations. Indeed, in 2005 Polish fishermenconducted a mass demonstration against theseasonal closure of the cod fishery by fishing duringa closed period. However, the extent to whichdeliberate fishing in closed areas takes place isuncertain.Unless a vessel is boarded in the act of fishingor without their nets appropriately stowed, itis extremely difficult to prove that they are orhave been fishing. While VMS will confirm thata vessel is in transit within a closed area it willnot confirm, without reasonable doubt, that it isfishing.Landing undersized codThe minimum landing size (MLS) for cod fromthe Baltic is 38 cm. This means that any cod underthis length should not be landed. The catching,retaining and landing of undersized cod washighlighted as an occasional widespread problemand often associated with a strong year classentering the fishery at, or close to, the MLS.As a result of the comparatively strong 2003 yearclass, more small cod are presently recruitingto the fishery and this has apparently coincidedwith an increase in landings of undersized fish.ICES estimate, that in 2004, 47% of the codcaught in the eastern Baltic Sea were 3 years oldor younger and 34% were 4 years old.Individuals involved in discard sampling in Sweden<strong>report</strong>ed that landing of undersized cod wasmore prevalent in some inshore areas where codstocks have declined or become less common.Apparently some fishermen have the attitude thatthey cannot afford to wait for the cod to growany bigger and/or be left for others to catch.In Poland, there appears to be a market forundersized cod – or “bolek” – and it was suggestedthat this was one of the reasons that someapparently good year classes had not resulted inthe predicted increase in stocks.The MLS increased from 33 cm to 35 cm in2002, with a further increase in 2003 to thepresent 38 cm. It was suggested that these changesmay be a contributing factor in the apparentcontinued landing of small cod, with some fishermenunable to get out of the habit or mindset ofcatching and keeping, what are now, undersizedfish. Limited or ineffective enforcement plus amarket for small cod will likely mean that thelanding of undersized cod will continue.Small mesh size or illegal rigging of gearThe increase in MLS has also been coupled withthe required use of more size-selective fishinggear such as the BACOMA trawl. However, withthe apparent market and the potential mindset offishermen to catch and retain undersize cod, instancesof rigging fishing gear so that mesh sizeswere restricted have been <strong>report</strong>ed.The gillnet fishery tends to target larger fish andso it was suggested that the landing of undersizedfish and the illegal rigging of gear were morelikely and characteristic of the trawl fishery.“Targeted” bycatchPelagic vessels are allowed a maximum 3%bycatch of cod. Some vessels are known to occasionallyand deliberately exceed this limit. Iflanding inspection is avoided, then the bycatchwill go undetected.When inspectors monitor the landing from apelagic vessel, visual inspection and sampling areused to indicate the percentage bycatch. It takesan experienced inspector to be able to estimatethe percentage of cod bycatch, particularly as theprocess of landing pelagic species does not necessarilyeasily lend itself to inspection. Pelagic speciesare often rapidly pumped from the fish holdsashore in large quantities. This is in contrast tocod and other demersal species that are commonlyboxed and winched ashore. It was suggestedthat the bycatch would need to be significantlyabove the 3% before some inspectors have theconfidence to suspend a landing and take appropriateaction.Exceeding 48 hour soak time for gillnetsExceeding the 48 hour soak time for gillnets washighlighted as a common complaint by trawlerfishermen. It was unclear as to whether this is a– 18 –
genuine concern for spoiling and wasting of codleft in nets for too long a period, or whether itis more to do with a territorial dispute betweenmobile and static fishermen.Fishing without a “special permit”In order to legitimately fish for cod in the BalticSea, Member States are required to issue “specialpermits” to fishermen. The number of permitsis capped in order to ensure that the cod fisheryis not subject to any increase in fishing capacity.While it was suggested that in some MemberStates anybody that had initially applied for thespecial permit got it, there were still fishermenwithout them who deliberately targeted codunder the guise of fishing for flatfish, such asflounder, turbot and dab. A 10% bycatch of codis allowed in these fisheries, but it was suggestedthat this is exceeded in some regions at certaintimes of the year. There was a suggestion thatsmaller vessels are often the culprits as they areless prone to inspections or are not inspected asthoroughly as larger vessels.Possible future IUU fishing activitiesDuring the interviews, some participants highlightedan additional EU fisheries regulation thatmay result in further IUU fishing activities: theestablishment of two separate TACs in the Baltic(for the western and eastern stock).The change in the TAC system does provide anopportunity to mis<strong>report</strong> area of capture. As fishermenstart to work within the new system, mis<strong>report</strong>ingmay well be used as a way of optimisingquota. Depending on in which area they planto record their catch, vessels with a functioningVMS will have to ensure that they actually enterthe western or eastern Baltic. As long as they arenot closely monitored, they will be able to logtheir catch to whichever sea area they like.What can be done to improve compliance?In response to this question, the majority ofpeople concluded that there was a need for a reductionin fleet capacity, more forceful deterrents,adequate numbers of well-trained enforcementofficers, a greater focus on the first point of sale,better use of existing and new technologies, andan improvement in the understanding and participationof fishers in the scientific assessmentprocess.The following briefly describes the main pointsthat were highlighted:Reduce fleet capacityFleet overcapacity is considered to be the underlyingdriving force of IUU fishing for Baltic Seacod. With limited stocks and increasing fishingcosts, fishermen and vessel owners feel forced tobreak the rules to ensure continued payments ontheir vessels and a decent living for themselvesand their crews.Capacity will decrease in the Baltic Sea overthe next few years. The Accession countries arereceiving decommissioning funds that will likelysee a significant reduction in their cod fleets. Forexample, Poland is aiming to reduce its capacityby approximately 40%. In the older MemberStates, fishing capacity has been “capped” andreduction will likely be left to economics and“natural wastage”, though funding for decommissioningis still available. Whether decommissioningmoney will find its way back intothe fishing industry (i.e. decommissioning fundscould help fund the buying of licences and newvessels) is uncertain. However, those that expressedan opinion suggested that fishing was notan attractive option for younger people and thatEU funds were anticipated to help countries likePoland to develop its economy and create jobsoutside of the fishing industry.Some fishing industry representatives from the‘older’ Member States considered that their fleetcapacities were more in-line with their quotasand that this balance needed to be quicklyachieved by the new Member States.Improve deterrentsDeterrents to IUU fishing was recognised as asignificant shortfall in the present managementregime (see page 30). The sanctions imposed foroffences are considered to be woefully poor andinadequate to act as deterrents. The time betweendetecting an offence and bringing it to court wasalso seen as reducing the deterrent effect.Of those that expressed a preference, administrativesanctioning rather than a judicial system wasfavoured. The benefits of an administrative sanctioningsystem were considered to include administrationby people who knew and understood– 19 –
Page 1 and 2: A report on IUUfis
Page 3 and 4: A report on IUUfis
Page 5 and 6: Part II 21Policy and regulatory fra
Page 7: Executive summaryThe cod fisheries
Page 10 and 11: Part IDescribing and quantifying IU
Page 12 and 13: which it has undermined their abili
Page 14 and 15: the Association of Fish Processors
Page 16 and 17: or close to fishing communities was
Page 20 and 21: the fishing industry and, therefore
Page 22 and 23: very active on the issue and, at th
Page 24 and 25: that were adopted within the IBSFC
Page 26 and 27: Table 5. An analysis of the 11 Poin
Page 28 and 29: Action Point and its Aim6. Working
Page 30 and 31: failings in the process (see page 3
Page 32 and 33: of cod and hake. The Commission wil
Page 34 and 35: adopted in the North Sea, the Balti
Page 36 and 37: Table 6 Showing the indicators used
Page 38 and 39: Policy areas Policy theme Indicator
Page 40 and 41: Table 7. The list of types of behav
Page 42 and 43: of this Regulation is to streamline
Page 44 and 45: appeared to bear out that significa
Page 46 and 47: General headings/Sub-headingsDetail
Page 48 and 49: Notes1ICES. 2005. Report of the Bal
Page 50 and 51: ReferencesAnderson, J.L., 2002. Rea
Page 52 and 53: DENMARKThe Baltic is the third most
Page 54 and 55: highest allowable level of dioxin i
Page 56 and 57: duction are Iceland, Norway, Japan
Page 58 and 59: The processing sectorAt the beginni
Page 60 and 61: Annex IIMembers of the Administrati
Page 62 and 63: Annex IVSummary of the European Com
Page 64 and 65: Department of Fisheries and Game (k
Page 66 and 67: InspectionsThe Fisheries Control De
Page 68 and 69:
this was to exceed the maximum, the
Page 70 and 71:
Theme/ PolicyareaInspection andcont
show all

A report on iUU fishing of Baltic Sea cod - Fisheries Secretariat

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?