Consultation on the introduction of catch recording for licensed fishing vessels under 10 metres in length

Seeking views on the potential business impacts linked to the introduction of catch recording for all English and Welsh licensed fishing boats under 10 metres in length.

Why We Are Consulting


We want to know your views on how the introduction of catch recording requirements for under 10 metre vessels registered in England or Wales could potentially affect you and your business.

The change in the licence condition will apply to all English and Welsh licensed fishing vessels under 10 metres in length. Scottish licensed vessels already have a licence condition that mandates recording for the under 10 metre fleet and Northern Ireland will be seeking consultation responses at a later date.

The consultation is open to everyone. It will be of particular interest to owners and operators of licensed fishing boats under 10 metres in length licensed in England and Wales.


Please read the consultation below:
Download Catch recording consultation

#FishyFriday from France - Brexit: French fishermen worry about exit without agreement

It doesn't take much to loosely translate what these Breton fishermen are telling the reporter!

Two weeks before Brexit, London and Brussels have not yet reached an agreement. In Brittany, fishermen are worried about their future. Without agreement, the British waters will indeed be inaccessible from March 29, 2019 at midnight. 

In all, 120 ships are involved. A hard Brexit may impact the entire industry. This subject was broadcast in the 13h newscast of 14/03/2019 presented by Jean-Pierre Pernaut on TF1.


Other similar reports from fishing regions along the Channel:

Brexit. In Boulogne-sur-Mer, fishermen in turmoil dread "a catastrophe

Tired, under clouds of greedy seagulls, Boulonnais trawlers return to the port, loaded with soles, mullet or cod. But "strongly dependent" rich British waters and "in the fog" three weeks of Brexit, many fear "a disaster."

"In case of Brexit hard and without agreement, the sea will be brutally divided in two: English fishermen on one side, all Europeans on the other!" Stephane Pinto, a representative of these net fishermen of Boulogne-sur-Mer ( Pas-de-Calais ), reflects the general feeling: three weeks Brexit the fishermen Boulogne feel "in a fog " and many fear a "disaster" .

From the top of the wind-swept wharf, Stéphane Pinto points to the north-west the wide and invisible maritime border located at about twenty kilometres. "From here, you sail less than an hour and you are already in the English zone. We've been fishing 60% of our fish for generations! For trawlers, it's worse, it's 80%, "he says, feverish.

"I can put the key under the door"

In the European Union, the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) allows all European vessels access to the fishing grounds of other Member States, provided that they comply with catch quotas. But with Brexit, the British government intends to recover its maritime sovereignty and the control of its waters, particularly large and full of fish.

A few meters below, at the foot of a wet ladder, five sailors arrive from the Nereids. "I spend half of the year on the English side. If I lose that, I can put the key under the door, " blows the boss, Jeremy Devogel.

In waxed trousers and suspenders, his employees unload their cargo on the pontoon: "100 to 400 kg daily" , depending on the season.

But "there is less and less fish. For four years, it's in free fall , " says Michael Baillet, drawn on the red bow of Providence.

"With electric fishing and all Belgian, Dutch and even Danish boats fishing 24 hours a day, the resource is running out. Imagine if we all have to tighten in an area twice as small ... What will we find in our waters?" , He loose, bitter.

"We will walk on our feet and it may go into a naval battle! " Warns Stéphane Pinto," first between French and foreigners, and even between different trades "Because gillnetters, fish farmers, trawlers or industrial deep-sea fishers, who do not use the same techniques, will be embarrassed "and there will be some breakage" .

"We are not compatible," confirms Christophe Marcq, captain of Don Lubi II, hands screwed on the rudder.

From his wooden cabin, he refers to the stern filled with thousands of square meters of white nets, knotted ropes and anchors: "30 000 euros of equipment, sometimes deposited all night at sea for miles, unattended".

Foreign trawlers, "three times bigger than us, tow their gear all night. If they know there is fish, they will cross our zone, even if it breaks everything , "he says.

"Every minute counts"

If, until now, the fleets had "found compromises and common ground" , the overpopulation "will break the balance and relaunch tensions," feared the captain.

Mareyage, transport, processing of seafood, packaging: for the industrial area of ​​Capécure and its dozens of warehouses, on the other side of the port, a hard Brexit would also be "very problematic" , assures Stéphane Pinto.

Employing "more than 5,000 people," and "processing nearly 400,000 tonnes of goods per year, the fish industry depends here half of the fish passing through England," says Frederic Cuvillier, PS Mayor of Boulogne-sur-Mer Sea. Without a commercial agreement, professionals will have to "deal with customs duties, veterinary and sanitary border checks" on "fresh products for which every minute counts," he adds.

And if the Europeans still hope to negotiate access to fishing areas in a global trade agreement, British Prime Minister Theresa May, pressed by public opinion and supporters of the Leave on this "highly sensitive" issue , will not let go . She "could even use this subject to demonstrate to the English its inflexible side , " fears the former minister of Francois Hollande.

So, between the stalls of the fish market, uncertainty reigns. "We do not know what will fall on us, but we will continue to fight," promises Stephane Pinto, refusing to "see sinking passionate fishermen . "



Brexit. Norman fishermen fear disaster

"The rejection of the UK deal is bad news for fishermen."

Half of the fishing landed in Normandy comes from the English coast. The rejection of the agreement negotiated with the European Union by the British Parliament on Tuesday January 15th makes fear the worst to the profession.

The massive rejection of the British MPs of the agreement negotiated by Theresa May with the European Union anguishes the Norman fishermen. Half of the landings made by the 588 vessels in the region come from English waters. "For fishing, this decision of Brexit without agreement adds an additional concern to the already existing problems. It's going to make things even more complicated, especially for offshore vessels, "said Dimitri Rogoff, chair of the Normandy Regional Fisheries Committee.

Without agreement, the 1,500 fishermen from Normandy will lose half of the Channel. "It would be a disaster! " Confides Dimitri Rogoff. But a glimmer of hope remains. "The anglers across the Channel would have the same problems to come on our side. " And the area interests them: the naval battle last summer around the scallop shells is still in everyone's mind ...

For Dimitri Rogoff, "nothing is fixed or recorded yet for fishing. It is a small subject compared to the others but which can condition other negotiations ", he likes to recall.

The invasion of the Britons?

The Norman sees another pressure coming from Brittany that one. "The Bretons want permission to come to work in the East Channel. We are already saturated in number of fishermen." Do the Normans have to fear an invasion of their waters by the Bretons? "This is not the subject," says Olivier Le Nézet, the chairman of the Brittany Fisheries Committee. The main species caught in Normandy is the shell. It is not an economically profitable fishery for boats of 25 or 30 m. We are not going to replace the English with the Bretons. "

The 800 Breton fishermen also make 50% of their turnover in British waters. Without agreement, "with the Hauts-de-France and Normandy, at least 500 ships will return home," said Olivier Nezet. Forced to retreat to French waters, these deep-sea vessels will not benefit from fishing rights, that is to say rights to fish species under quota. They may therefore have to disarm. Their return would play a destabilizing role for the fleets already fishing off the French coast.


The chairman of the regional fisheries committee wants to believe that the sector can still escape the cataclysm. "If there is a new British government, nothing will prevent it from holding a second referendum, which will give another result."

Revealed: the millionaires hoarding UK fishing rights

A painstaking five-month long investigation shows that a small group of wealthy families control huge swathes of the country’s fishing quota

Small-scale fishers have long hoped for a greater share of UK fishing quota. 

More than a quarter of the United Kingdom’s fishing quota is in the hands of a tiny group of the country’s wealthiest families, an Unearthed investigation has found.

Just five families on the Sunday Times Rich List hold or control 29% of the UK’s fishing quota.

The finding comes from a new Unearthed investigation that traced the owners of more than 95% of UK quota holdings – including, for the first time, those of Scotland, the UK’s biggest fishing nation.

It reveals that more than two-thirds of the UK’s fishing quota is controlled by just 25 businesses – and more than half of those are linked to one of the biggest criminal overfishing scams ever to reach the British courts.

Meanwhile, in England nearly 80% of fishing quota is held by foreign owners or domestic Rich List families, and more than half of Northern Ireland’s quota is hoarded onto a single trawler.

The news comes as the government is preparing to publish a new fisheries bill, which will set the legal foundations for the UK’s fishing industry after Brexit. But while the government is hoping it can net access to more fishing rights in the Brexit negotiations, it has said the new bill will not see any redistribution of the UK’s existing quota rights.

As Unearthed’s investigation reveals, this would leave the bulk of UK fishing rights in the hands of a small domestic elite and a handful of foreign multinationals.

Responding to Unearthed’s findings, shadow environment secretary Sue Hayman said ministers needed to take “urgent action to use the powers that they have domestically to redistribute fishing quota to deliver a fairer deal for smaller boats”.

“Fishing was the poster child of the Leave campaign and [environment secretary Michael] Gove has already broken promises he made to the industry to secure full control of our waters during the transition,” she continued. “With all the talk of ‘take back control’, ministers have the power to distribute UK quota now and put the smaller-scale fleet first. So why wasn’t it mentioned in their white paper?

“This [Unearthed story] shows that, while it points the fingers at others, this government is to blame for a sector rigged in the interests of the super-rich. Any future fishing policy must consider how new and existing quota can be more fairly distributed and we will treat this as a priority in the upcoming fisheries bill.”

The investigation found:

• The five largest quota-holders control more than a third of UK fishing quota
• Four of the top five belong to families on the Sunday Times Rich List
• The fifth is a Dutch multinational whose UK subsidiary – North Atlantic Fishing Company – controls around a quarter of England’s fishing quota
• Around half of England’s quota is ultimately owned by Dutch, Icelandic, or Spanish interests
• More than half (13) of the top 25 quota holders have directors, shareholders, or vessel partners who were convicted of offences in Scotland’s £63m “black fish” scam – a huge, sophisticated fraud that saw trawlermen and fish processors working together to evade quota limits and land 170,000 tonnes of undeclared herring and mackerel
• One of the flagships of the “Brexit flotilla” – which sailed up the Thames in 2016 to demand the UK’s exit from the EU – is among the UK’s 10 biggest quota-holders
• Around 29% of UK fishing quota is directly controlled by Rich List families. Some of these families have investments in dozens of other fishing companies, meaning companies holding 37% of UK quota are wholly or partly owned by these Rich List families.

Who owns the UK's fishing quota? from Greenpeace Unearthed on Vimeo.

What is a fixed quota allocation?

Most fishing rights in the UK are distributed by fixed quota allocations (FQAs). An FQA gives the holder the right to land a certain share of the UK’s “total allowable catch” (TAC) of a particular stock. The TAC for each stock varies from year to year, based on scientific advice and negotiations in Brussels. There is an active market in the trading and leasing of FQAs.

The latest revelations follow Unearthed’s 2016 investigation into English quota holdings which revealed that a tiny fiberglass dinghy apparently “held” more than a fifth of the fishing quota for the entire South-West.

Now, Unearthed’s first UK-wide dive into the opaque world of fishing rights has uncovered further striking statistics.

Those with the biggest hoards of quota can earn millions leasing it to others without casting a net. In one recent case a company got rid of its boat and – while waiting for a new one – carried on earning millions from its quota alone.

That boat, the Voyager, holds more than half (55%) of Northern Ireland’s fishing quota. In late 2015 the owners disposed of their old, 76m trawler and ordered a replacement . Company accounts show that the new Voyager was not delivered until September 2017, and in the meantime, the company made money by leasing out the quota.

In 2016-17 the company made an income of nearly £7m from its quota – reporting an operating profit of £2.5m – despite having no vessel for the full financial year.

Despite holding more than half of the country’s quota, the new 86m-long Voyager has not landed its catches in Northern Ireland, because it is too big for Kilkeel Harbour. Instead the vessel operates out of the Republic of Ireland port of Killybegs.

Unearthed approached Voyager Fishing Company and its owners, but they were unavailable for comment.

The black fish millionaires

In Scotland – the biggest fishing nation in the UK, with two-thirds of the quota – the domination of the fishing industry by Rich List families is most pronounced.

Five Rich List families control a third of Scottish quota and have minority investments in companies that hold a further 11%. This means, in total, companies holding close to half (45%) of all Scottish fishing quotas are wholly or partly owned by five wealthy families.

But the investigation also reveals how many of those at the centre of one of Scottish fishing’s most infamous episodes – the black fish scandal – continue to dominate the industry.

Grimsby town was once home to the largest fleet of fishing trawlers in the UK. 

The scandal came to light in 2005, when Scottish officials raided fish factories to uncover “serious and organised” schemes to systematically evade quota restrictions for mackerel and herring, using underground pipes, secret weighing machines, and extra conveyor belts to land 170,000 tonnes of over-quota fish over several years.

A multi-year police investigation followed, resulting in a series of court cases over 2011 and 2012 in which three fish factories and more than two dozen skippers were hit with fines and confiscation orders for “black landings” of undeclared fish.

Unearthed’s investigation found that of the 20 biggest holders of Scottish quota, 13 have directors, shareholders, or vessel partners who were convicted of sea fishing offences in the black fish scandal.

Among those prosecuted were four members of the Tait family – worth £115m according to the Rich List – whose Klondyke Fishing Company is the second-largest quota holder in Scotland.

The four men – all skippers on its vessels – were hit with fines and confiscation orders of more than £800,000 for their part in the scam.

Two years later, one of those skippers, Peter Tait, 50, reportedly bought the most expensive house sold in Scotland that year. Over the past five years Klondyke has paid out shareholder dividends totalling £56m.

Unearthed has reached out to Klondyke but the company declined to comment.

The Scottish top 10 also includes the vessel partnership that runs the trawler Christina S. In 2012, two men involved in that partnership – Ernest Simpson, 71, and his son Allan Simpson, 49, both of Aberdeenshire – were handed fines and confiscation orders totalling more than £800,000 for their involvement in the black fish scam.

Four years later, the Christina S was among the flotilla of vessels that sailed up the Thames with Nigel Farage, to protest EU fisheries policy weeks before the Brexit referendum.

John Anderson is chief executive of the Scottish Fishermen’s Organisation, a huge fish producer organisation which has several members – including the Christina S – that were involved in the black fish scandal.

He told Unearthed: “The pelagic fishermen and processors involved will be the first to acknowledge that, in the past, mistakes were made.”

As a result, he continued, the sector had founded the Scottish Pelagic Sustainability Group to oversee the certification of its main fisheries to Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) standards. Since that time, he added, “98% of the group’s stocks have been certified as sustainable and well managed by the MSC.”

Foreign flagships

In England, the UK’s second largest fishing nation, three Rich List families control around 30% of the quota.

A further 49% is ultimately held by Dutch, Spanish and Icelandic interests who have bought up English vessels and quota.

The most significant of these interests is Cornelis Vrolijk Holding, a Dutch multinational whose UK subsidiary alone holds 24% of English quota, making it the biggest quota-holder in England, and one of the five biggest in the UK.

Matthew Cox, chief executive of North Atlantic Fishing Company, Cornelis Vroljik’s UK subsidiary, said the company had been established in the UK since 1984, employed around 60 UK fishermen, had two UK offices, and had launched a UK apprenticeship scheme. He also suggested that the type of fishing his company does is not well suited for small-scale fishermen.

He added: “North Atlantic does not operate at the expense of small-scale fishermen. Pelagic [midwater fish such as mackerel and herring] and whitefish fishing are very different and a simple comparison/substitution between each is not possible.

“The deep sea nature of the environment make pelagic fishing difficult, dangerous and not very attractive for artisanal fishermen who tend to focus on low volume, high value fish such as cod or monkfish.”

The bulk of the company’s quota is for pelagic fish – which swim at midwater – and it has always emphasised the fact that its nets do not damage the sea bed.

However, after the Brexit vote in 2016 the company bought a beam trawler – with nets attached to a heavy beam designed to trawl for “demersal fish” that are found close to the sea bed – and bought up quotas for plaice and sole.

Mr Cox said: “Following the 2016 decision for the UK to leave the EU it was very clear early on, to the directors of North Atlantic Fishing, that there would be changes to the UK fishing industry. North Atlantic had always focused on pelagic fishing and it was therefore decided that the company should spread its risk in the interests of the company and its workforce and enter the demersal fishing industry in a very limited manner.”

Privatising a public resource

Small scale fishermen told Unearthed that successive governments had mismanaged fishing rights, allowing quota to be consolidated on a handful of supertrawlers while smaller, low impact fishermen had been progressively starved of access.

Jerry Percy, director of the New Under Ten Fishermen’s Association, told Unearthed this had resulted in a situation where the smaller inshore vessels that make up 77% of the fleet had ended up with “less than 4% of the quota”.

“This is privatisation of a public resource,” added Mr Percy, who campaigns on behalf of fishermen with smaller, under-10m long, vessels.

Large scale fishing interests contacted for this piece argued that their businesses generated hundreds of direct and indirect jobs, and that it was misleading to rank businesses by quota holdings alone, when the amount and value of fish that can be landed against those holdings varies between species, and area, and from year to year.

Several also pointed out that many of the biggest quota holders identified by Unearthed were trawlers focused on midwater pelagic stocks, like mackerel and herring.

These fisheries, they claimed, were environmentally friendly – with a low carbon footprint and no impact on the seabed – but the fish were too low-value and far from the coast to be attractive to small-scale fishermen.

John Anderson is chief executive of the Scottish Fishermen’s Organisation – a huge fish producer organisation with several of the top 25 in its membership.

He told Unearthed: “While it is true that there has been considerable consolidation within the pelagic catching sector over the past 20 years, with a trend towards fewer, more efficient vessels each with a greater concentration of fishing opportunity, the economic reality is that small-scale, inshore fishermen, many of whom are also members of the SFO, do not have the necessary capacity or markets needed to fully utilise the pelagic quotas that are already available to them.”

Mr Percy retorted: “If you go back years ago, there was any number of smaller inshore boats that were reliant on mackerel and especially herring in the North Sea before the inshore herring fisheries were decimated by overfishing by larger-scale interests.”

Nick Underdown, of the Scottish campaign group Open Seas, said it was hard for smaller boats to take up mackerel quota without investment in onshore facilities to support them. “At the moment, the supply chain infrastructure favours bigger boats,” he told Unearthed.

“But if we invest in processing with the strategic intention to help the smaller-scale fleet, then inshore fishery could bounce back.

“This would be a lifeline for those harbours where fishing has declined due to consolidation.”

A spokeswoman for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said: “We are clear fishing communities and our wider economy should benefit as much as possible from those fishing the UK’s quota, and we are working closely with fishermen to review and reform the rules around the economic link condition.”

Who are the families on fishing's Rich List?

• Alexander Buchan and family are ranked 804 in the 2018 Sunday Times Rich List, with an estimated net worth of £147m. The family’s Peterhead-based Lunar Fishing Company owns or controls 8.9% of the UK’s quota holdings (739,153 FQAs), making it the biggest quota holder in the UK.

• Jan Colam and family are ranked 882 on the Rich List (estimated worth: £130m). The Colam family-owned company Interfish is the second largest quota holder, with 7.8% of the UK total (643,927 FQAs)

• Robert Tait and family are ranked 980 on the Rich List (estimated worth: £115m). The family’s Klondyke Fishing Company is the UK’s third-largest quota holder, with 6.1% of the UK total (506,953 FQAs).

• Andrew Marr and family are ranked 567 on the Rich List (estimated worth: £209m). The family’s Hull-based Andrew Marr International owns or controls 5.1% of UK quota holdings (419,937 FQAs), making it the UK’s 5th largest quota holder. It also has minority stakes in companies and vessel partnerships that hold a further 5.4% of UK quota (445,981 FQAS).

• Sir Ian Wood and family are ranked 77 on the Rich List, with an estimated worth of £1.7bn (a fortune built largely on oil and gas services). Sir Ian’s fishing business, JW Holdings, holds 1% of the UK’s fishing quota (83,463 FQAs) and has minority investments in businesses/partnerships that hold a further 2.3% (192,169 FQAs).

Full story courtesy of Crispin Dowler @CrispinDowler 



The extent of ownership was brought to the attention of MP Michael Gove at the end of last year in a previous Unearthed article:

Michael Gove criticised over ‘gross inequality’ of fishing quota system
Labour calls for an end to 'deeply unjust monopolies' in response to Unearthed investigation

Opposition parties have called for the government to take “urgent action” to redistribute UK fishing rights and end “deeply unjust monopolies” of fishing quota by a wealthy elite.

The calls came after an Unearthed investigation revealed this morning that five of the UK’s wealthiest families control more than a quarter of the country’s fishing quota.

Responding to the investigation, shadow environment secretary Sue Hayman told Unearthed: “The findings of this investigation highlight the hypocrisy and betrayal that this government continues to inflict upon British fishers in coastal communities right across the UK.

“We have known for years that ministers need to take urgent action to use the powers that they have domestically to redistribute fishing quota to deliver a fairer deal for smaller boats.

“But instead this government prefers to blame others and turn the other way as access to quota continues to be restricted for small boats and controlled by huge commercial boats and some of the wealthiest families in the UK.”

The government is poised to publish a new fisheries bill, which will set the legal framework for the UK fishing industry after Brexit. The government hopes to secure a greater share of the catch from British waters in the Brexit negotiations – but it has said it does not plan any changes to the way existing UK quotas are distributed.

As Unearthed’s investigation revealed today, that would leave 29% of the UK’s fishing quota in the hands of just five families on the Sunday Times Rich List – and around half of England’s quota in the hands of overseas interests.


Shadow environment secretary Sue Hayman called on ministers to "deliver a fairer deal for smaller boats".

Ms Hayman continued: “Labour is not surprised by this report that highlights the gross inequality of the fishing sector. We already know despite making up the majority of the British fishing fleet, smaller boats have just four per cent of the total quota.

“We know the Dutch-owned trawler, the Cornelis Vrolijk, controls more than a fifth of England’s entire quota allocation, and about two-thirds of England’s quota is awarded to three multi-national companies.

“But we are outraged at the lack of action from government to fix this. Fishing was the poster child of the Leave campaign and Gove has already broken promises he made to the industry to secure full control of our waters during the transition. With all the talk of ‘take back control’, Ministers have the power to distribute UK quota now and put the smaller-scale fleet first. So why wasn’t it mentioned in their white paper?

“This report shows while it points the fingers at others, this government is to blame for a sector rigged in the interests of the super-rich. Any future fishing policy must consider how new and existing quota can be more fairly distributed and we will treat this as a priority in the upcoming fisheries bill.”

Green Party MP Caroline Lucas told Unearthed: “This is a timely reminder that the health of our seas and oceans is being decimated to make profits for an already ultra-rich elite. If this government was serious about giving power back to local communities, they would act to end these deeply unjust monopolies right away.

“At the heart of our future fisheries policy needs to be a legally binding commitment to restoring our depleted seas, while at the same time providing secure jobs in sustainable fishing for coastal communities around the UK.”

A spokeswoman for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs told Unearthed the department was reviewing rules around the “economic link” that foreign-owned flagships must have with the UK in order to hold UK quota.

She said: “We are clear fishing communities and our wider economy should benefit as much as possible from those fishing the UK’s quota, and we are working closely with fishermen to review and reform the rules around the economic link condition.”

See the a previous article, "How Privatising the seas: how the UK turned fishing rights into a commodity"

Full story courtesy of Crispin Dowler @CrispinDowler

Fish exporters urged to register now to use new digital exports services

Fish exporters urged to register now to use new digital exports services
A new digital catch certificate service has been launched as part of contingency planning for fish exporters in a no-deal Brexit.

Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs

Businesses wanting to export fish to the EU after 29 March 2019 should sign up to the new digital services to make sure they are able to continue trading fish with the EU in the event of no deal.

Leaving the EU with a deal remains the Government’s top priority. This has not changed. However, should the UK leave the EU without a deal, UK exporters will be required to obtain a validated catch certificate for most fish and fish products exported to the EU (excluding some aquaculture products, freshwater fish, some molluscs, fish fry or larvae).

Catch certificates prove that fish has been caught in line with established conservation and management measures. All non-EU countries are required to present catch certificates when trading with the EU.

To be ready for leaving the EU, fish exporters should familiarise themselves with the new services to generate the necessary export documentation, including:

• catch certificates
• processing statement
• storage document
• prior notification form
• pre-landing declaration

To access the service you’ll need to sign in or create a new Government Gateway user ID. Make a note of your Government Gateway user ID and password so you can sign in next time. You’ll then need to create a business Defra account using your business contact details. You’ll only need to register once.

To register, visit the gov.uk guidance page on creating a UK catch certificate.

Registering early gives exporters time to test the new service before the UK leaves the EU. Any sample documents created before 29 March 2019 will not be valid for export.

To check what documents you need to export fish to the EU if there’s no Brexit deal, visit the gov.uk guidance page on exporting and importing fish if there’s no Brexit deal.

What you need

To create a processing statement, you’ll need:

• a Government Gateway user ID and password

• the company name and address of the exporter

• to say what is in the consignment (and include the EU tariff commodity codes)

• a health certificate number for the export

• the species, catch certificate number and total weight from each catch being used in the consignment

• the before and after processing weights of the export

• the name, address and plant approval number of the processing plant used (and the name of the person responsible for the consignment)

START NOW

Before you start

You need to get an export health certificate (EHC) for your export.

Check the EU tariff commodity codes of your fishery products in the trade tariff.

If you haven’t already, create Government Gateway sign in details for the business or organisation you represent.

Defra service registrations need you to provide some extra details about yourself and the business (for example, the Companies House registration number).

Registration should take around 5 minutes.

START NOW

Published 5 March 2019

Brexit without agreement - from Boulogne and Dutch fishermen, merchants and families.

The idea of ​​a "hard" Brexit, without an agreement being reached between the British and the Europeans, is becoming a little more credible every day. In the largest French fishing port in Boulogne-sur-Mer, the fish industry is anticipated by many..

It is 1 am, the city is quiet but the port is active. Trawlers return from fishing and unload their goods, Loubet basin in Boulogne-sur-Mer (Pas-de-Calais). "We land fishing 48 hours, in forty minutes we left," says Nicolas Margollé, owner of the trawler Nicolas and Jérémy. Stacks of crates of fish are carried by a crane, from the boat 24 meters to the dock. It's a race against the clock, everyone performs his task accurately and efficiently in the unloading.

The pace is formidable: Nicolas and the six other men aboard have slept ten hours in 48 hours. Their fishing area? Between Great Britain and France, everything depends on the season and schools of fish. "At the moment, I am mainly targeting squid and a little whiting, this is the period." The fisherman makes 65% of his turnover in the British zone. But tomorrow, this whole organisation could collapse like a house of cards.

Fishermen "in complete helplessness"

If no agreement is reached on March 29th, the official date of the beginning of Brexit (and if this date is not postponed ), the British will be able to ban their territorial waters to foreigners. Result: a considerable loss of playing field for the French on the one hand. On the other hand, the Belgians and Dutch will also fall back on the French waters full of fish. Result: a large concentration of fishermen in a small area. "This would cause problems of cohabitation, resources and everything that goes with it," says the professional. It's like having a smaller cake to share among more people.

We hope that there will be an agreement, deep within ourselves.

So Nicolas Margollé is not in the half-measure: "It will be death," he asserts. "The death of a die, whether at sea or on land, the death of a coastline is a disaster." He also bemoans a crying lack of information: "There is nothing that filters, we know nothing, for the moment we are in complete helplessness." Does he feel defended by the politicians? "No, no, when you ask for news, they know nothing, or you have to wait for the English to answer."

At sea or on land, same fight

It's not just fishermen who are worried. "We are in a complete artistic vagueness, we do not know where we are going," said Marc Salmon, the boss of Whitelinks Seafood, a fish processing company. In the area of ​​the port of Boulogne-sur-Mer, in Capécure, he works the product of the local fishery, but also imports fish from abroad, particularly from the United Kingdom (the British export 75% of their catch). In his workshop, the monkfish, squid, coley, hake, halibut, rockfish turn into beautiful fillets at an impressive speed, thanks to the hands of a dozen men.

Boulogne-sur-Mer is a stronghold in the sector, if 32,000 tonnes of fish are landed each year, between 350,000 and 400,000 tonnes are processed here, much of which actually arrives by truck. A Brexit without agreement would result in a return of customs duties. But what Marc especially dreads is the sanitary and veterinary controls that could revive the day. Who says additional checks means extra time.

The risk, in case of Brexit without agreement, is that some controls a hit hard, we lose time and time is something that we do not have today.

An unbearable backlash for the boss: "All operators in the industry have been working for decades to improve this logistics, which allows us today to be able to deliver a product landed in Scotland for example, in less than 48 years. hours everywhere in France, even in the north of Spain and Italy. " If the inspections multiply, "it would force us to be less efficient in terms of delivery, to take one more day to deliver the goods, which goes against our daily work, that is to say say quality. "

To try to organise this at best, a Sivep (veterinary and phytosanitary inspection service at the borders) was obtained by local elected officials, including the mayor of Boulogne, in the port area, so that the trucks can establish their formalities on the spot.

"The fact that we are returning to a situation that predates Britain's entry into the European Union, ie the pooling of the sea for fishing activities is a foolish risk. " , said Frédéric Cuvillier, also socialist president of the Agglomeration Community of Boulonnais, who also was in charge of fishing under the presidency of François Hollande, between 2012 and 2014.

The issue of this Brexit is obviously a major issue for the region, the port of Boulogne employs 5,000 people, all sectors mixed (fishing, processing, logistics). "I'm not optimistic, especially since we are used to the British fog, but for this issue, this fog is particularly dense and it raises questions."

Courtesy of a story from France TV - translated by Google.


Similar concerns are being expressed throughout social media throughout EU fishing communities that rely on the freedom to fish in UK waters. Here is the view of a Dutch fishing family and their two seiner/trawlers.

Living between hope and fear:

Anne Marie van Seters (51, Stellendam) and Anita Poel (48, Den Helder) arrange 'everything' for fishermen at sea. Van Seters for relatives and other crew on the SL-27 and the SL-28. Anita Poel provides the administration at the local fishery cooperative (CIV). Her three brothers, husband and son sail on the BRA-5 and BRA-7. How do they experience the uncertainties in fishing?

The SL-27 Johannes fishes in the winter with the flyshoot method on squid, red mullet and mullet. Fishing area is the English Channel, right under England in British water. "Will it remain so, or will we be banned later, now that a no-deal Brexit is lurking", asks Anne Marie Van Seters. As a fisherman, Van Seters does all the bookwork full-time. At least forty hours a week she is busy with the administration, banking, management functions, crew affairs, communication with the fish auction and suppliers. She also cleans the vessels with two other women when they are back in the harbour. "In fact, I am available for the company 24 hours a day, seven days a week."

Tensions

In Den Helder, Anita Poel is also busy with fishing affairs on a daily basis. As an administrative force at the local fishery cooperative, she is well aware of the threats that fishermen face. When her family members are at home, everything comes unfiltered. "There have been a lot of tensions in the sector lately. 'What will happen next, what about our income and what remains of fishing space', are questions that regularly concern us. Our young son has already obtained his fishing papers and is already sailing, but will it stay that way and will there be a future for him? "

Politics

But there is always more fear. Fear that it is not at all bad and that it might turn out worse; that the golden times that many fishermen experienced for a short time thanks to excellent fish stocks, low fishing pressure and manageable expenses, is coming to an end. That it never really gets better again. And then? Van Seters: "There was always some commotion in the fishing industry. Fishing threats are always there, but it is now extreme. "Van Seters also likes to look beyond the family interests. "The world population is increasing, we must be able to continue to eat healthy. Fishermen provide the healthiest food imaginable for millions of people. If it continues this way in the fishing industry, will that soon be over? You can hardly believe it anyway, the way in which politicians now deal with food producers. " 

Positive attitude

Fishermen are naturally flexible and positive, says Van Seters, who grew up with the fishery. Normally, that attitude is obvious, but I do not know whether that institution will stand the test of time. "Anita Poel:" Once a week we meet in Den Helder with all the local fishermen. Then you hear and feel that the worries increase with the week. Fishermen who fish with the pulse are occasionally the saddest. Now, thanks to the energy-efficient fishing method, half less gas oil per fishing trip is used. If pulses will soon no longer be allowed in Europe, and we have to switch to the beam trawl, the costs will increase enormously and perhaps no longer catch up. The least setback can then be fatal. My husband and brothers are fishing for the smaller Eurokotters. They are vulnerable in strong winds. When the wind blows more than wind force seven, they prefer to stay in the harbour for safety reasons and leave a few days later when the wind is gone. Then there is no income and we are extra vulnerable if the expenses continue to rise."

Lay awake 

How does family business Van Seters respond to uncertainties? "By fitting extra well at the store now. We have the advantage that we do not use the pulse technique, but Brexit, wind farms at sea and marine reserves also affect us, and who says that our fishing method will not come under fire in the long term. You can now expect almost everything. Pulse fishermen, who care for the income of 500 families, have to return to the trawl method. You hear noises that even that beam trawl will endure a lot of time. The pulsers that have to switch are already awake. Keeping well on the store is therefore what we as flyshooters can do to keep a view of the future. So we look to set bigger investments, and we save a bit more than usual. Then hopefully there will soon be enough room to possibly make a necessary turn without the approval of a bank. "

What does a no deal Brexit look like for fishing?

Despite its small size relative to the rest of the UK’s economy, fishing has dominated the Brexit debate. Many in the fishing industry have long been critical of the EU’s Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) and opinion polling before the referendum shows that fishers intended to overwhelmingly vote Leave.

93% of them felt that leaving the EU would increase the fortunes of their industry, with 77% believing that Brexit would be an opportunity to catch more fish. In terms of trade, the perception in 2016 was that Brexit would have little impact on seafood trade, with 77% believing it would have no impact at all.

Since the referendum attention has increasingly focused on the complexity and diversity of the fishing industry and how this might be reflected in the eventual Brexit deal with the EU.

Given differences in the nature of fishing across the UK’s four nations, as well as wider debates about the ownership of fishing rights coupled with the UK government’s commitments to a ‘green Brexit’, reaching a deal which pleases everyone across fishing sectors is akin to finding the holy grail.

However, following the rejection of the Withdrawal Agreement by MPs in January, the prospect of a ‘no deal’ Brexit has risen up the agenda. It has been highlighted that such a scenario will lead to short-term disruption and uncertainty.

Fishing wouldn’t be excluded from this. Indeed, the instability of no deal is acknowledged by some in the fishing industry itself. For example, Bertie Armstrong of the Scottish Fishermen’s Association suggests that, in the event of a no deal, UK vessels could just tie up and “temporarily fish less” until either governance and policy process catch up, or the UK and EU come to agreement at some point after 29 March.

But a closer inspection of what a no deal Brexit means for fishing suggest its impact goes beyond just sitting back and weathering the storm.

Firstly, even in a no deal scenario, the UK doesn’t get to go it alone in fisheries policy. The much banded about phrase ‘independent coastal state’ suggests the UK will have unprecedented freedom, but this comes with significant obligations. Many of the fish stocks in the UK’s exclusive economic zone (EEZ) are shared.

This means the UK would still have to cooperate with the EU, and other coastal states (such as Norway and the Faroe Islands) in managing those stocks.

Also, given that the UK fishing fleet currently lacks the necessary capacity to catch all the fish in the UK EEZ, it would still likely have to permit foreign vessels access to catch any surplus fish stocks.

Secondly, there is the question of what fisheries policy would look like under no deal. The UK doesn’t have a new fisheries policy ready to go at the push of a button in the event of no deal: the fisheries white paper, published last year, contained many laudable aims but remained light on detail.

The Fisheries Bill only provides a legislative framework, and is still the subject of ongoing parliamentary deliberation.

One provision in the Withdrawal Agreement sees the UK effectively remaining in the CFP until the end of 2020. This faced much criticism at the time it was announced, but one of the reasons for this transition period is because it gives the UK and its devolved administrations time and space to develop their own approach to fisheries policy which meet the diverse needs of the fishing industry.

It also provides administrations across the UK, who already have devolved responsibility for fisheries management, to evaluate their capacities for engaging in more activities that were previously done for them via the CFP (including the potential to engage more in international negotiations).

A no deal Brexit means no transition arrangement, and this brings one of two risks. On the one hand the absence of any alternative approach to fisheries policy will simply mean the status quo will continue.

All the rules and regulations of the CFP will effectively remain in place (having been rolled over by the EU Withdrawal Act), while the government remains distracted dealing with the day-to-day fallout of a no deal.

On the other hand, the UK may choose to make sudden sweeping changes in order to signal its independent coastal state status. But this carries a risk too.

Such a rushed approach to policy design leaves little room for engagement with those working in the industry who will be affected, resulting in an approach which fails to work at sea.

This also comes at a time when trust between fishers and the government is low. Moreover, any sudden changes to access are likely to affect the UK’s standing on the international stage too.

The third significant issue with a no deal Brexit relates to trade. The majority of what the UK catches is exported, with most of that going to the EU. Tariffs aren’t the main concern though.

Rather it is non-tariff barriers, such as customs checks, which represent the largest risk, particularly as they threaten to cause delays to the transport of perishable seafood products.

The notion that vessels could simply “temporarily fish less” until such practicalities are sorted out will do little to reassure skippers of smaller vessels. They make up 78% of the UK’s fishing fleet, have tighter profit margins, and are most exposed to the effects of trade disruptions.

This is especially the case for shellfishing (the largest of the UK’s catching sectors), which a recent report commissioned by the Shellfish Association, National Federation of Fishermen’s Organisations and the Scottish Fishermen’s Federation found would be significantly impacted under a no deal scenario.

On top of all of this are several more ‘practical’ issues. A recent report by the National Audit Office found Defra doesn’t yet have the necessary capacity to enforce fisheries regulations out at sea, and most fish will require catch certificates for importing and exporting.

This process may lead to delays and capacity challenges for authorities who will have to approve them, while also placing a significant administrative burden placed on skippers and seafood exporters. The necessary IT systems to facilitate this are still in development.

Finally, a no deal Brexit would mean that British fishing vessels would have no automatic right to access to the EEZs of other EU member states, where 94,000 tonnes of fish worth £88 million were caught in 2017.

For many fishers, EU membership and the CFP have been detrimental to the fortunes of their industry. Some of the issues raised in the debate (such as quota distribution across the UK’s fleet) have always been within the UK government’s gift to address.

Nevertheless, Brexit arguably presents an opportunity for the UK to rethink its approach to fisheries policy.

However, a no deal outcome does little to address the concerns that led many fishers and coastal communities to vote for Brexit in the first place and, if anything, it could make things worse.

Full article by Dr Christopher Huggins, University of Suffolk, and Drs Arno van der Zwet, John Connolly and Craig McAngus, University of the West of Scotland published by the UK in a Changing Europe.  
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this analysis post are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the UK in a Changing Europe initiative

With an eye on the past - looking to a post-Brexit future.

The Food Research Collaboration for integrated and inclusive food policy has produced this look at the pre-Brexit Fishing Industry trying to get a handle on where the Government might take the industry post-Brexit in light of its past record with quota allocation and management:

UK fishers were vocal in their support for leaving the EU, believing that the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) has been the cause of the difficulties that have beset their industry over the last 40 years — difficulties that many still suffer. But this Brexit Briefing, from fisheries analyst Dr Miriam Greenwood, argues that it was UK (rather than EU) decision-making, allied to stock collapse due to overfishing, that drove the decline of Britain’s once mighty fishing fleet. And leaving the EU, of itself, will not solve the sector’s problems.

The report examines the development of UK fisheries policy before and under the Common Fisheries Policy. It shows how the allocation of quotas by the UK government has persistently disadvantaged the small and arguably more sustainable small-scale fishers that dominate the British fleet; and how quota was quietly privatised to allow it to be bought and sold by non-fishers. Over the years, under this regime, the sector ceased to be primarily a source of food for the domestic supply chain and became geared to exports, while much domestic consumption depends on imports.

The Briefing concludes that it is essential that any new UK fisheries policy must stick to the evidence-based sustainability approach developed by the CFP. And whatever happens with Brexit, the UK should conduct a comprehensive review of quota allocation. This should be based on fair distribution across all sectors of the fleet, and should reward the most sustainable forms of fishing.

Exporting and importing fish if there’s no Brexit deal

Prepare for rules and processes for exporting and importing wild-caught marine fish if we leave the EU with no deal.

The MMO and Defra have just published the rules and procedures which will be faced by those wishing to export fish from the UK post March 30th 2019.


Marine Management Organisation and Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs

Contents

• Exporting fish to the EU from 30 March 2019
• Catch certificate
• Export health certificate
• Direct landing documents
• Storage document - for fish stored in the UK but not processed
• Processing statement - for fish processed in the UK
• Method of transport
• Exporting fish to non-EU countries
• Importing fish from the EU from 30 March 2019
• Exporting fish to the EU from 30 March 2019
• To export wild-caught marine fish to the EU if there’s no Brexit deal you’ll need :
• a catch certificate
• an export health certificate, except for direct landings from UK-flagged fishing vessels

You may also need:

• a prior notification form
• a pre-landing declaration
• a storage document
• a processing statement

The EU uses these documents to monitor fishing activity and to detect illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing.

You’ll need to create these documents using forms on GOV.UK. This page will include guidance on how to create the documents and a helpline number before the end of March.

New rules will apply to:

• exports to the EU of fish caught by a UK flagged fishing vessel
• exports to the EU of fish imported from another country that have been stored or processed in the UK
• direct landings in EU ports by a UK flagged fishing vessel
• Send fish to an EU border inspection post
• You’ll need to send all consignments of UK-caught fish and fishery products by sea, air, road or rail to the EU through a border inspection post (BIP) only.

Catch certificate

You’ll need a catch certificate for most exports of fish to the EU. The catch certificate shows that the fish was caught legally. It includes:

• details about the catching vessels
• amount of fish by species and weight
• presentation and state, such as whole or filleted, fresh or frozen
• commodity code
• when and where the fish was caught
• To get a catch certificate to export a consignment of fish from the UK to the EU, you’ll need to follow these steps:

You’ll complete an online catch certificate form for each consignment of fish. If you’re exporting fish that came from multiple vessels, you’ll need to specify quantities from each vessel.

The UK fisheries authority will validate your catch certificate.

Send the validated catch certificate to your EU importer to complete their sections.

The importer will present the certificate to their competent authority.


You won’t need a catch certificate to export:

• farmed fish and farmed shellfish
• freshwater fish or freshwater shellfish
• fish fry or larvae
• some molluscs including mussels, cockles, oysters and scallops, but you’ll still need a live shellfish registration document - for more information contact your local council
• Export health certificate
• You’ll need an export health certificate (EHC) for all exports of fish to the EU, including farmed fish and shellfish. You won’t need an EHC for direct landings from a UK flagged fishing vessel.
• 
  
• An official vet or local authority environmental health officer will sign the EHC to confirm the quality and health of the export. There is no fee for the EHC, but you may need to pay for the services of the vet or local authority.
• 
  
• EHC forms for fish exports will be available before the UK leaves the EU.

Direct landing documents

To land your catch from your UK flagged fishing vessel directly in the EU you’ll need to land in a designated EU port

Fishery enforcement officers may inspect your fish when you arrive. You’ll need to show them the catch certificate.

You’ll need to complete a:

• prior notification form
• pre-landing declaration
• Prior notification form

You’ll need to give EU designated ports prior notification of your arrival:

• for frozen fish, at least 72 hours before landing
• for fresh fish, at least 4 hours before landing
• Pre-landing declaration

You’ll need to submit a pre-landing declaration 4 hours before landing. You’ll need to give details of the:

• area fished
• quantity of fish by species on board the vessel
• North East Atlantic Fisheries Commission (NEAFC) Port State Control forms
• You’ll need to submit NEAFC Port State Control forms PSC1 and PSC2 24 hours before landing.
• Storage document - for fish stored in the UK but not processed

If you’re exporting to the EU fish sourced from another country that have been stored in the UK, but not processed in any way, you’ll need to apply for a storage document.

In your application, you’ll need to provide:

• a description of the product and commodity code
• export weight of the product
• date and place the product entered the UK
• description of the storage facility and conditions the fish was kept in
• transport details - the registration number of the vehicle or CMR note
• Keep a copy of the catch certificate from the original consignment with the storage document.

Processing statement - for fish processed in the UK

If you’re exporting to the EU fish sourced from another country that has been processed in the UK, you’ll need to apply for a processing statement.

In your application, you’ll need to provide:

• a description of the product and commodity code
• species and weight of the fish landed
• the net weight of the fish used for processing
• the weight of the product after processing
• processing plant details, including approval number
• export health certificate number and date
• Include a copy of the catch certificate from the original consignment with the processing statement.

Method of transport

You’ll need to include transport details on the catch certificate. These will include:

• by sea: the container numbers and the name and flag of the container vessel
• by air: the airway bill or flight number
• by road: the registration number of the vehicle or CMR note
• by rail: the railway bill number

You’ll need to give these details to the importer so they can give them to the receiving member state’s competent authority. You must do this for exports:

• by sea: 72 hours before landing
• by air and rail: 4 hours before arriving
• by road: 2 hours before arriving
• Exporting fish to non-EU countries

See guidance on catch certificates for non-EU imports and exports of fish.

Importing fish from the EU from 30 March 2019

If you import fish to the UK from the EU you’ll need a catch certificate and supporting documents validated by the country of export. These will vary as they are produced by the exporting country.

UK port health authorities (fisheries authorities in Northern Ireland) will check these documents on imports to the UK of containerised fish by sea, air, road or rail.

EU fishing vessels must land fish into a designated UK port

If the fish you’re importing to the UK have been:

• stored, you’ll need a storage document from the exporter
• processed, you’ll need a processing statement from the exporter - this must be filled in by the processor and endorsed by the authority in the country of processing

If you re-export fish imported from the EU you’ll need to complete the re-export section on the catch certificate.

Published 4 February 2019
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/exporting-and-importing-fish-if-theres-no-brexit-deal