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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

InspectionsThe Fisheries Control Department and the CoastGuard uses a process of risk analysis to directresources as well as control and enforcementeffort. An inspection procedure has been developedwhich requires a minimum of checksto be undertaken according to vessel size andwhere the inspection takes place, i.e. at sea oron shore. Targets of 2% and 10% have been setfor inspection of demersal and pelagic landings,respectively.Fisheries inspectors have the authority to boardand search vessels, premises dealing with fishand vehicles suspected of transporting fish. Theyare also empowered to seize information anddocumentation, including accounts (although thepolice need to be notified) and can retain a vesselor confiscate gear. If during inspection there isreasonable suspicion that an offence has beencommitted, the Fisheries Inspector has policeauthority to undertake further investigation.Dealing with infringementsPreparatory criminal investigations and infringement<strong>report</strong>s are drafted by Fisheries Inspectorsfrom the National Board of Fisheries or theCoast Guard and submitted to the public prosecutor.The public prosecutor then directs eitherthe police, the Coast Guard, or the NationalBoard of Fisheries to conduct supplementaryinvestigations before submitting a final case. Ifthere is adequate evidence, the public prosecutorcan ask for the case to be presented in court offirst instance. The setting of any subsequent fineis at the discretion of the court. Appeals can bemade to the next instance, i.e. the Court of Appeal.Additional commentsIn the Commission’s 2004 evaluation <strong>report</strong> ofthe Swedish implementation of the CFP whichrefers to the period 2000–2002, it highlightsconcern in the level of cooperation betweenthe National Board of Fisheries and the CoastGuard. Their structure and relative independencefrom each other was thought to limit the abilityof the National Board of Fisheries to establishguidelines with the Coast Guard regarding thedirection, scope and content of fisheries control.The number of sea and shore based inspectionswas considered to be low and there were someconcerns as to the thoroughness of monitoring ofpelagic landings.There were also criticisms of the efficiency andeffectiveness of the sanctioning procedure. Therewas comment that the judiciary did not perceivebreeches in fisheries regulations to be very seriousand the length of time between detection anda court hearing were highlighted as being undulylong. A combination of factors were put forwardas contributing to this problem: the low prioritygiven by the police and prosecutors; extendedprocessing times by the Board; and poor evidencegathering and presentation.The Commission recommended improved cooperationbetween the Board, the Coast Guard andthe prosecution authorities, improvements intraining on follow-up to infringements and witnesstraining and the manner with which infringementsare <strong>report</strong>ed to the police.No procedures or guidelines for monitoring andcontrol of fish following first sale had been establishedand control was considered to be limited.Overall the Commission’s view was that furthersignificant effort was required by the Swedishauthorities to ensure full compliance by the Swedishauthorities.13, 14, 15, 16GermanyFisheries Management InstitutesThe Federal Ministry of Agriculture, Food andConsumer Protection (Bundesministerium für Ernährung,Landwirtschaft und Verbraucherschutz)has overall responsibility for general legislativepolicy for fisheries, monitoring, control andlicensing.13Federal Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Consumer Affairs website:http://www.ble.de/index.cfm/D8A924F16E11433096BA6DA376003DEA14Commission staff working documents, Annex to the <strong>report</strong> from the Commission on the monitoring of the Member States implementation ofthe CFP. COM(2004)84915Information provided from individuals during the course of the project16Sustainable Baltic Sea Fisheries – the way forward, Coalition Clean Baltic, 2004 http://www.ccb.se/pdf/050217_ccb_<strong>report</strong>_fisheries.pdf– 66 –
Outside of the 12 mile limit, the Ministry isgenerally responsible for the surveillance, monitoringand control of fisheries. Within 12 miles,monitoring and control is the responsibility ofthe coastal states or Länder (Schleswig-Holstein,Niedersachsen/Bremen and Micklenburg-Vorpommern).The Federal Customs Administration (Zoll) mayalso undertake fisheries inspections at sea orashore while the Federal Border Guard (Bundesgrenzschutz)may undertake surveillance but donot undertake physical inspections.ResourcesThe Ministry has approximately 20 inspectorswho are involved in offshore inspections with afurther 5 inspectors based in Hamburg. The Länderhave approximately 30 inspectors who havea dual sea going and shore based role. While notdedicated fisheries inspectors, Customs Officersare also considered inspectors in the scope oftheir designated competencies.A total of 42 patrol vessels are capable of inspectionsat sea. Of these, 3 are operated by theMinistry, 8 by the Border Guard, 12 by Customsand 19 by the Länder within the 12 nautcial milelimit.In total, 30% of the Customs’ vessel time is spenton fisheries control. They are trained by theMinistry inspectors and are able to make inspectionsand conduct investigations. Border Guardscan be used to monitor protected areas such asspawning areas and they <strong>report</strong> any apparent offencesto the Ministry for follow-up action.Monitoring, control and enforcement: VMSData is centralised in the Fisheries MonitoringCentre in Hamburg and the large Ministryinspection vessels have access and can use thisdata while at sea. Data is exchanged automaticallywith Denmark, Finland and Sweden and theCommission can access recorded data on-line.LicensingAll registered vessels are required to be licensed.There are two types of licence and a special permitfor cod. The licences allow fishing for quotaand non-quota species, respectively.Catch recordingThe collection of logbooks, landing declarationsand sales notes is mainly carried out by theLänder fisheries inspectors. Landings into portswithin Mecklenburg-Vorpommern are crosscheckedand processed by the Länder authorities,whereas landings into other Länder are crosscheckedand then sent to the Ministry offices inHamburg for data processing.Producer Organisations (POs) have some responsibilitiesfor catch restrictions and they areexpected to use internal management measuresto discipline any over-shooting of quotas. POsmay be fined or have the equivalent over quotafish removed from their allocation the followingyear.InspectionsInspections are normally documented in aninspection <strong>report</strong>, a copy of which is provided tothe skipper of the vessel or owner of any premisesthat may be inspected. The control of landingsis the responsibility of the Länder.Ministry and Länder Fisheries Inspectors andCustom Officers, when acting as Fisheries Inspectors,are entitled to seize and search vesselsand premises in the normal course of their duties.They also have powers to search vehicles whenthey are stationary while only the police have theauthority to stop a vehicle in transit.Dealing with infringementsAn administrative sanctioning system is appliedin Germany. Inspection <strong>report</strong>s that establish thatan infringement has taken place are forwardedto either the Ministry’s or Länder’s Headquartersfor further investigation and a decision onwhether to impose a sanction. It is only at thestage of appeal that the prosecution authoritiesare involved.Maximum federal fines are €76,600 if the offenceis considered to be intentional; if the offenceis considered to be a result of negligence themaximum is half this value. The sanction is setaccording to the seriousness of the offence andthe economic circumstances of the offender. However,the legislation states that the fine shouldexceed any economic benefit from the offence. If– 67 –
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 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 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?