Fisheries ministers in the European Union have been entrusted to work with the European Parliament to chart a new path for EU fisheries management that breaks with decades of short-sighted overexploitation of our seas and recovers fish populations to levels that can be fished sustainably. This ongoing reform of the EU’s Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) will probably be the last chance to stop the collapse of European fish populations and the inevitable demise of the EU fishing sector. Yet, in recent weeks, horse-trading to accommodate all European countries and their fishing industries has resulted in an agreement amongst ministers that is astonishingly irresponsible. If this backroom deal were adopted unchanged, it would sanction continued overfishing by European fishermen for another decade, by which time most of the industry will have fished itself out of business.
Fisheries 1 UK at 2m 20s
Fisheries 2
Over at CFP Reform Watch they posted an excellent article prior to the meeting - reproduced here in full:
Discard ban dividing issue in Council negotiations
2012-06-04, 17:23 | Updated: 2012-06-11, 15:53
The Council is set to adopt a common position on the fisheries reform on 12 June. The most difficult issue that remains to be solved is the discard ban.
Member state representatives in Brussels are busy negotiating a compromise text with draft amendments to the basic regulation in the CFP reform. The goal is to adopt a so-called ‘General approach’, which outlines the Council’s position on the basic regulation.
Common positions have been reached on most issues during discussions at the level of government officials, but the final decisions on some details will be made by Ministers at their meeting on 12 June.
Discard ban – outstanding issue
Several sources with insight in the Council negotiations say that the discard ban is the most difficult issue that remains to be solved.
Several sources with insight in the Council negotiations say that the discard ban is the most difficult issue that remains to be solved.
In particular member states disagree on the dates for a discard ban in the different fisheries, and on several details about how to handle the bycatch that cannot be avoided even with more selective gear.
Ending overfishing 2020
When it comes to ending overfishing – i.e. reaching catch levels compatible with the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) – a majority of member states at this point are in favour of the compromise date 2020.
When it comes to ending overfishing – i.e. reaching catch levels compatible with the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) – a majority of member states at this point are in favour of the compromise date 2020.
A draft compromise document dated 29 May 2012, seen by CFP reform watch, says that the CFP shall aim to restore and maintain fish stocks of harvested species “at least at levels which can produce the maximum sustainable yield. This exploitation rate shall be achieved by 2015, where possible, and by 2020 for all stocks at the latest.”
Some member states have defended the Commission’s proposal, which is that the EU shall aim for stock levels above those that can produce MSY by 2015, while a majority of member states highlight the difficulties of reaching MSY in mixed fisheries and want to set a later date.
Political message to the Parliament
A ‘General approach‘ is not a legally binding document, so there is no obligation for the Council to solve all the details at this stage. The purpose of the General approach is rather to send a political message from the Council to the European Parliament, which will vote on the basic regulation in November.
A ‘General approach‘ is not a legally binding document, so there is no obligation for the Council to solve all the details at this stage. The purpose of the General approach is rather to send a political message from the Council to the European Parliament, which will vote on the basic regulation in November.
With some outstanding issues remaining to be solved, the meeting on 12 June will most likely go on until late in the night. Ministers are likely to reach an agreement, but there is nothing that obliges them to do so. It is possible, however unlikely, that the adoption of the General approach is postponed.
In the morning of 13 June, we will know the outcome.
FIFTY Greenpeace activists today obstructed access to the Council building in Luxembourg to urge EU ministers to re-think a damaging backroom deal. The agreement between ministers could derail any chance of achieving worthwhile improvements to EU fishing rules under a once-in-a-decade reform, warned Greenpeace. Activists locked themselves to heavy obstacles, including fishing buoys and an oversized fish bone made of steel. Some held banners reading “EU ministers, stop overfishing”, while others distributed a five-point-plan for reform.
The five-point-plan calls for actions that must be taken by EU governments to recover fish stocks and achieve sustainable fishing. Greenpeace oceans campaigner Thilo Maack said: “Ministers are acting irresponsibly, endangering the future of our seas. The deal would allow a greedy industry to continue overfishing for the next decade, bank-rolled by millions in EU subsidies. We cannot allow this to happen and this is why we want ministers to find the guts to stop destructive fishing and reward those who fish responsibly.”
A big reason for the action taken by activists was generated partly by this news: In a surprising procedural move by the Danish EU presidency, the EU fisheries Council is due to agree a “general approach” to the reform of the Common Fisheries Policy. This agreement could lock the negotiating mandate of European ministers even before they have consulted with the European Parliament, which is also in the process of reviewing plans to change EU fishing rules. Under EU treaty rules, the Parliament, the only elected EU body, must express its position ahead of the Council.
Story courtesy of FishnewsEU
Outline of the Greenpeace Five-point-plan:
1. RECOVER… … fish stocks to levels that can sustain catches without risk of depletion by 2015 and set catch limits no higher than scientists advise. The EU agreed jointly with many other nations at the 2002 Summit for Sustainable Development to recover fish stocks to levels that can support sustainable catches by 2015. In a reckless departure from this goal, EU fisheries ministers merely plan to progressively reduce the amount of fish that will be caught. Overfishing would be allowed to continue until 2020.
2. REFORM… … requires a transition towards sustainable and low-impact fishing practices, which can be done by allocating quotas and permits preferentially to those fishermen that cause the least environmental damage and provide the biggest social benefits. Rather than rewarding sustainable, low-impact fishermen with priority access to fishing quotas and permits, ministers look set to continue favouring short term economic gains over long-term sustainability and employment. This will disadvantage many of the small-scale and coastal fishermen that employ more selective and less destructive gears.
3. REDUCE… … fishing power to sustainable levels, by scrapping those vessels that contribute most to stock depletion and damage the marine environment. Despite acknowledging that action plans are needed to reduce excessive fleet capacity, ministers seem unwilling to set themselves a deadline to eliminate overcapacity. Commitments should be made to target action at those parts of the fleet that contribute most to overfishing and cause the largest damage.
4. PROTECT… … the marine environment, by minimising impacts from fishing on marine species and habitats. Ministers pay lip service to implementing an ‘ecosystem approach’ to fisheries management, which would require, for example, multi-species management plans and more information on spatial and seasonal catch patterns. To the contrary, they seem eager to push environmental considerations down to the bottom of their list. Even a ban on discards is riddled with loopholes.
5. POLICE… … compliance and make the allocation of quotas and subsidies conditional on meeting the above requirements. Ministers are weak on sanctions, but big on promises to promote the interests of the fishing and aquaculture industry. It seems they don't care about their obligation to secure healthy fish stocks. For further questions please contact Greenpeace oceans campaigner Thilo Maack: thilo.maack@greenpeace.org
Worth following is this live blogging site courtesy of Ron Patz from the Ideas on Europe web site. Setting the context for the meeting RP included this post prior to Monday's meeting:
On Tuesday, the EU Council on Fisheries meets in Luxembourg to discuss its general approach for the reform of the Common Fisheries Policy (agenda, Council background note, Presidency progress report).
CFP Reform Watch has already covered the major issues earlier this week, highlighting division in the Council. Now, a document just published by the Council summarises all the open issues – and this doesn’t look like the general approach will be meaningful in any way.
In short, disagreement is still there for almost all major issues of the reform:
- How to define Commission powers in the fisheries policy?
- What measures are needed to reach Maximum Sustainable Yield, i.e. fishing so that ensures the long-term survival of fish, until 2015 or 2020?
- Where and how to implement a discard ban, that is a ban on throwing already caught fish over board?
- How to handle undersized fish?
- Whether to supervise fisherman with camera equipment?
- How exactly to manage the fisheries resources in multiannual plans?
- How to make decision-making more regional?
- Whether at at all to introduce transferable fishing concessions (TFCs), i.e. long term access rights that can be traded within or between countries?
- Should there be even more advisory councils (currently there are seven), that is stakeholder bodies used to consult industry and the wider civil society in EU fisheries policy?
Basically, this list of open issues looks like the full Common Fisheries Policy. The original Commission proposal is 11 months old, and I wonder whether the Council on Tuesday will actually get to a general approach.
And if they do, will it be worth anything given that the European Parliament only plans to vote in first reading in November? That is still a long time and lots of room for ministers to change minds
The BBC posted a good overview of how consumption and catching of fish have changed since the heyday of fishing when the world's biggest fishing port, Grimsby was home to over 600 vessels in the 1950s.
The BBC posted a good overview of how consumption and catching of fish have changed since the heyday of fishing when the world's biggest fishing port, Grimsby was home to over 600 vessels in the 1950s.
