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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

of cod and hake. The Commission will be ableto ask that particular sources of information areused including commercial, trade and tax dataand Commission inspectors will be able to participatein the inquiries.This is a key initiative and something that is tobe anticipated within the Baltic. At the time ofwriting it had apparently not been decided whensuch a request will be made. It was not possibleto gauge the level of detail or the extent to whichthe Commission anticipates being involved inthese inquiries. However, it would seem prudentto ensure limited warning is given to those thatmight be involved in the trade of un<strong>report</strong>edlandings; that the level of participation by theCommission is high; and, that appropriatelyqualified and skilled investigators are used toundertake a task that is, potentially, beyond thenormal capabilities and expectations of fisheriesinspectors who are more accustomed to dealingwith fishermen, fishing vessels and other fisheriesinspectors than trade and tax data.Redirecting EU inspectorsTo ensure that the Commission is able to bestdirect its limited inspection resources to this newway of working, Commission inspector time inRFO fisheries will be freed up and the shortfallwill be made up by inspectors from the MemberStates benefiting from these fisheries. This hasalready happened within the NAFO region. Also,as indicated above, in order to ensure that it ismore able to effectively carry out these areasof work, the Commission is in the process ofappointing a further 29 Commission inspectors.These will be based in Brussels and will be taskedwith developing, undertaking and evaluatingmonitoring programmes in all the coastal MemberStates.Ensuring there is a deterrentMember States are required to have systemsthat will deprive offenders of any financial gainfrom their actions and also act as an appropriatedeterrent. When Member States fail to complywith these requirements, the Commission is ableto improve the level of compliance by suspendingfinancial assistance, invoking preventive measuresand reducing future fishing opportunities.As regards preventive measures, as a first stage,the Commission envisages using this instrumentprimarily in relation to “black fish” concerningvulnerable stocks such as cod and hake.These appear to be appropriate and effectivemeasures. However, the time and human resourcesneeded to undertake such action areconsidered likely to act as more of a deterrent forthe Commission than the Member States. It wasonly after 15 years of political and legal wranglingthat France was finally penalised last yearfor overfishing. It is not clear how or why theprocess for penalising Member State judicial oradministrative systems for inappropriate deterrentswill be any easier or quicker.In addition to what the Commission may havein their “deterrent armoury”, Article 25(4) of thereformed CFP (EC Reg. No. 2371/2002) saysthat the Council will establish, “…a catalogue ofmeasures to be applied by Member States relatingto serious infringements…”. The Commissionand others have regularly highlighted thatappropriate deterrents are either not used or arenot consistently applied, and so this was seen bymany as a positive move toward establishing away by which Member State judicial and administrativesystems could accordingly set penalties.However, during the course of the discussionswith the Commission staff they said that theywould delay the development of such a catalogueand first focus on making the existing transparencyelements of their Work Plan (i.e. the SeriousInfringement Report and the Compliance Scoreboard)more meaningful and effective (see page37). This would not likely happen until 2007.Community Fisheries Control AgencyThe following is based on a summary from CommissionCOM(2003)130 21 , Commission staffworking paper SEC(2004)448 22 and the CouncilRegulation 23 that confirmed the establishmentof the Community Fisheries Control Agency(CFCA) – ’’the Agency’’.The setting up of the Agency was agreed by theCouncil of Ministers in April 2005 and preempteda feasibility study that the Commissionhad already put out to tender with the intentionof informing the Agency’s establishment.The Regulation confirms the objective of theAgency is “…to organise operational coordinationof fisheries control and inspection activitiesby the Member States and to assist them tocooperate so as to comply with the rules of theCFP in order to ensure its effective and uniformapplication”.– 32 –
It also confirms that there will be a correspondingobligation on Member States to make availablethe resources needed, and to deploy these“…in accordance with the joint deploymentplan”. Figure 2 includes the joint deploymentplan and also shows how the Agency will potentiallywork with, coordinate and assist MemberStates on specific monitoring, control and surveillanceoperations.Its Administrative Board was constituted at itsfirst meeting held in February 2006 (see AnnexII). At its second meeting held in Vigo, Spain, inJune 2006, the Administrative Board appointedthe Executive Director of the Agency. The Agencyis in the process of setting up its basic administrativeand financial structures and recruitingstaff so as to be ready to commence its operationalactivities from January 2007. It is basingitself in Brussels until its new headquarters arebuilt in Vigo.According to the Agency’s work programme itwill concentrate on organising operational coordinationof control and inspection by MemberStates on a fishery-by-fishery basis, apparentlycovering all stages of control and inspection offishing activities from fishing to the first sale offish landed or entering the Community market.Three operational priorities are highlighted:(i) Recovery and multi-annual plans for stocksand the fishing activities exploiting thosestocks;(ii) The Community Action Plan to combatillegal, un<strong>report</strong>ed and unregulated fishing;and,(iii) The need to reduce the impact of destructivefishing practices and discards.Preparation of operational “Joint DeploymentPlans” (JDP) will be undertaken and they will beFigure 2. Showing the potential structure for a joint inspection framework within which the Agency might operateBench marks &prioritiesSupportCOMMUNITYFISHERIES CONTROL AGENCY(CFCA)Reports & adviceEuropean CommissionReal timeInformationAgreement supervisonJoint Deployment Plan (JDP)Developed by the CFCAMember State1CONTROL GROUPCoordinated deploymentat target fisheryMember State2Joint Deployment Plan– 33 –
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 18 and 19: Fishing in closed areasEU fisheries
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 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

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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?