Latest #fishingnews - Fish landing obligation approved by EU

Today the Commission adopted a plan to reduce the wasteful practice of discarding – throwing overboard unwanted fish – in the North Sea. This discard plan concerns demersal fisheries, i.e. fish that feed on or near the sea bottom, and is a temporary measure to phase out discarding and gradually put in place the landing obligation, a key component of the EU's reformed Common Fisheries Policy. It follows similar plans for demersal species in the Atlantic earlier this month.

Discarding constitutes a substantial waste of resources that threatens the sustainable exploitation and economic viability of fisheries. The Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations estimates that over 7 million tonnes - 8 % of the total global fish catches - are discarded yearly. The discard plan adopted today determines which demersal fisheries in the North Sea will be subject to the landing obligation, while also setting out certain exemptions. The first group of exemptions, so-called de minimis exemptions, allows discarding a small percentage of catches in fisheries where increasing the selectivity is difficult or where handling costs are disproportionately high. The second, so-called survivability exemption allows discarding species that have a high chance of surviving.

All exemptions have been set taking into account available scientific advice and following discussions with scientific advisory body STECF. Certain exemptions will be reassessed in 2016 taking into account additional supporting information from Member States.

The discard plans will apply from 1 January 2016 for one year, once final adoption takes place. Other discard plans will have to be adopted for 2017 to bring additional fisheries under the landing obligation.

Background:

Background to what is meant by discards and the forthcoming Landing Obligation.

The reformed CFP aims to make EU fisheries more sustainable. Between 2015 and 2019, EU fishermen will therefore gradually be required to land all fish they catch.

The CFP entails several provisions to facilitate the implementation of the landing obligation. They include specific flexibility mechanisms that should be implemented through comprehensive multiannual plans, or, in the absence of multiannual plans, through so-called discard plans. Discard plans are envisaged as a temporary measure with a maximum duration of three years. They are developed as joint recommendations agreed by Member States from the same region or sea basin, in this case Belgium, Germany, Denmark, France, Netherlands, Sweden and the UK.

Today's discard plan is not the first to be adopted: in October 2014 the Commission adopted discard plans for pelagic and industrial fisheries in all EU waters and for fisheries for cod in the Baltic. These plans have been applied since 1 January 2015. On 12 October 2015 two discard plans for demersal species in the Atlantic followed. 


More information:

Discard plan for certain demersal fisheries in the North Sea and in Union waters of ICES Division IIa

Annex

Watch again the FIS Annual Scottish Fisheries Conference

Take another look at the Annual FIS conference by using the chatroom in the viewer and ask questions to the panel or speaker.

Read the agenda below:

Discarding and the landing obligation

Discarding is the practice of returning unwanted catches to the sea, either dead or alive, either because they are too small, the fisherman has no quota, or because of certain catch composition rules. The new CFP does away with the wasteful practice of discarding through the introduction of a landing obligation.  This change in regime serves as a driver for more selectivity, and provides more reliable catch data. To allow fishermen to adapt to the change, the landing obligation will be introduced gradually, between 2015 and 2019 for all commercial fisheries (species under TACs, or under minimum sizes) in European waters.

Under the landing obligation all catches have to be kept on board, landed and counted against the quotas. Undersized fish cannot be marketed for human consumption purposes.

The landing obligation will be applied fishery by fishery. Details of the implementation will be included in multiannual plans or in specific discard plans when no multiannual plan is in place. These details include the species covered, provisions on catch documentation, minimum conservation reference sizes, and exemptions (for fish that may survive after returning them to the sea, and a specific de minimis discard allowance under certain conditions). Quota management will also become more flexible in its application to facilitate the landing obligation.

In October 2014 the Commission has adopted five discard plans (through so-called delegated acts) in preparation of the implementation of the landing obligation that is applicable from 2015 on (pelagic and industrial fisheries in all Union waters, and fisheries for cod in the Baltic).

Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1392/2014 of 20 October 2014 establishing a discard plan for certain small pelagic fisheries in the Mediterranean Sea     

Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1393/2014 of 20 October 2014 establishing a discard plan for certain pelagic fisheries in north-western waters  

Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1394/2014 of 20 October 2014 establishing a discard plan for certain pelagic fisheries in south-western waters     

Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1395/2014 of 20 October 2014 establishing a discard plan for certain small pelagic fisheries and fisheries for industrial purposes in the North Sea  

Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1396/2014 of 20 October 2014 establishing a discard plan in the Baltic Sea

Managing fish stocks - Discarding and the landing obligation

Landing obligation - and ban on discards of catches that it entails - is one of the key elements resulting from the reform of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). The Commission proposal paves way for a speedy implementation of the ban on discards. The PECH Committee will present the draft report on landing obligation at the next committee meeting on 16 October.

The film explains what discards are and describes different ways of improving selectivity, based on two langoustine fisheries, one in the Bay of Biscay (Brittany, France) and the other in Skagerrak (Gotland, Sweden). It also reveals the most important measures proposed by the European Commission to reduce by-catches and discards.

Discarding is the practice of returning unwanted catches to the sea, either dead or alive, either because they are too small, the fisherman has no quota, or because of certain catch composition rules. The new CFP does away with the wasteful practice of discarding through the introduction of a landing obligation. This change in regime serves as a driver for more selectivity, and provides more reliable catch data. 

To allow fishermen to adapt to the change, the landing obligation will be introduced gradually, between 2015 and 2019 for all commercial fisheries (species under TACs, or under minimum sizes) in European waters. Under the landing obligation all catches have to be kept on board, landed and counted against the quotas. Undersized fish cannot be marketed for human consumption purposes. The landing obligation will be applied fishery by fishery. 

Details of the implementation will be included in multiannual plans or in specific discard plans when no multiannual plan is in place. These details include the species covered, provisions on catch documentation, minimum conservation reference sizes, and exemptions (for fish that may survive after returning them to the sea, and a specific de minimis discard allowance under certain conditions). Quota management will also become more flexible in its application to facilitate the landing obligation.

TtGaps comment:

In the UK the most concerned fishermen are those that operate in what are referred to as 'mixed fisheries' - typically bottom or demersal trawling - where the boat is fishing for a broad range of fish that inhabit the sea bed and not just targeting a single species as many pelagic trawlers or netters might. In a mixed fishery the spectre of 'choke species' looms large - where are single species of fish for which there is a small or non-existent quota is being caught which then prevents the boat from fishing in that area. At certain times of the year and in many areas this will be a constant problem for many vessels - and, as yet, an answer to the problem has yet to be found!

There are many references to be found on the web relating to this thorny subject:

http://www.fishermensvoice.com/archives/0311GroundfishermenFaceEconomicDisaster.html  

http://en.fvm.dk/fileadmin/user_upload/ENGLISH_FVM.DK/Themes/Yield_of_fish/Calculating_effects_of_choked_species.pdf 

http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100602/full/465540a.html 

https://www.linkedin.com/groups/ON-CHOKE-SPECIES-3971738.S.106903949 

http://www.clientearth.org/reports/simply-mixed-fisheries.pdf 

Client Earth Paper 

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/faf.12079/abstract

"The entire species of fish are in danger........."

We could really do without this level of hype when introducing your show Martha!.

Memory studies are often some version of a phenomena known as primacy-recency - most people during a given period will remember the first things they are told and the last.  In this TV lifestyle/cooking show from the USA, host Martha Stewart talks in the following apocalyptic terms:


"...that one day we might not be able to catch, or eat eat any fish any more"

Dear Martha, do we really need this degree of dramatisation in order to talk about buying fish to cook at home?!

This is exactly the reason skipper Peter Bruce threw down the gauntlet to journalist-come-chef Hugh Fearnely-Whittingstall to come out on the boat and see at first hand the results of years of stringent gear modifications, restricted areas and the positive effects of intiatives like the Responsible Fishing Scheme of which he was a pioneer for Seafish.

Escaping the cod in the North Sea - Rockall update from the Reliance III

Update from Reliance III via satellite link:- now with her gear in the water south west of the Rock!

Twin rig trawls streaming away from the stern of the boat

"Well after steaming near 62 hours and covering 460 miles in some pretty crap weather that's finally gotten my fishing gear shot 50miles sw of Rockall.  In all that time steaming I pass 1 Scottish fishing boat and 16 foreign fishing boats. 
If anything its not the fish that's going extinct is fishermen. 
Anyway its a great day at Rockall flat calm and light winds and you dont get many days like this out here so we will enjoy our day fishing and heres hoping we nail some fish"........jc

You dinna get a lot of Cod out at Rockall but when you do there all this size,we call them Bull Cod..
Will get a couple Cod steaks out of him for our supper tonight.....jc

 You would think that catching a cod this size might just put a smile on the skipper's face - but look at the consequences!

• Robert James Scally Heeds 'ats fit we also called them used to love a haul of heeds now we all this leasing there is no enjoyment in seeing them

  Like · Reply · 1 · 58 minutes ago via mobile
• 

  Realfishfight SOFC ats something on the west coast and oot here y dinna have to worry about with cod..1.5% bycatch for cod so for every say 6of that big cod you have to have arun 100boxs of other fish to meet your legal bycatch,whiting the same 1.5% bycatch....jc

Latest animation seeks to explain the discard debacle

Every year in the EU, 1.7 million tonnes of fish are thrown back into the sea after being caught. This wasteful practice is widely criticised and negotiations between the Council and the European Parliament over the reform of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) are seeking to address the problem. This video explores the reasons for discards in the EU, their implications and the current efforts to end the practice.

This video can be viewed on the IIEA website:http://www.iiea.com/blogosphere/video...

It forms part of The Environment Nexus -- your digital ecosystem.
http://www.iiea.com/environmentnexus

Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall praised North Sea fishermen after The Real Fish Fight was launched

Celebrity chef Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall says he is listening to Peterhead skippers angered that his TV show misrepresented them and the UK fishing industry.

Hugh’s Fish Fight dumped the reality of discards right into the living rooms of the public; highlighting the merits of sustainable fishing and calling for action to be taken to ‘save our seas’.

His methods however, angered a group of trawlermen who fought back with The Real Fish Fight campaign.

The campaigners voiced concerns that the series did not differentiate between the healthy North East sector and troubled markets elsewhere in the country.

They also argued that "there are plenty of fish in the sea".

Now Hugh says he has been listening to the campaigners' arguments and says he recognises how healthy the north-east industry is.

And he has heaped praise on campaign leader Peter Bruce, calling him a "top skipper" and someone who could "lead the UK fishing industry".

Speaking to STV, Hugh said: "I know that Peter Bruce of the Real Fish Fight is one of the top skippers in Scotland and catches great quality fish. He is on the innovative catch-quota system and so doesn’t discard any cod and has an MSC certificate of sustainability for his haddock.

"He’s the sort of fisherman to lead the UK fishing industry in the right direction. I think we’ve got a lot in common and I am listening to what the Real Fish Fight has to say.

"I do acknowledge that cod stocks are doing well in the North Sea from their all-time low point in 2006 and applaud fishermen and fishery managers for their hard work to make that happen. But looking at all stocks, across the whole UK, it’s a complicated situation.

"Our latest series of Fish Fight focused on Marine Protected Areas, and did not discuss fish stocks in the North Sea. We filmed on the Isle of Man – in the Irish Sea – where cod stocks are still in dire straits, and scientists advise that we shouldn’t catch any cod if we can help it. It’s the same in coastal areas of West Scotland."

A recent haul of cod from Peter Bruce's boat - the Budding Rose

The fishing industry was dealt a heavily blow when, earlier this year, the Marine Conservation Society demoted mackerel on its list of ethical fish to eat, causing Hugh to ditch his campaign to get "mac baps" into Britain’s chippys.

North Sea fishermen met with green groups, WWF, Marine Scotland and fisheries scientists, to find a solution to the depleting stocks and have swapped their nets for different mesh sizes to allow younger fish to escape.

Campaign founder and skipper, Peter Bruce, said: "We’re not happy with the way that we have been portrayed. What the programme called facts were just lies. We thought there was such a misrepresentation of the situation; we had to set up on our own.

"There are plenty of fish in our seas. His campaign is all about scaremongering and I know that to be true because every time we take the boat out we can see for ourselves on our equipment just how many fish there are out there.

"Fishermen haven't been given any credit for their efforts, and there is no evidence to suggest that by banning fishing in certain areas that fish numbers will increase, or that this will be the best way to conserve."

The fishing fleet at Petehead has fallen from 120 vessels in the 1990s to only 30. Two weeks ago, Peter’s boat, The Budding Rose, hauled her largest ever catch of cod - 30 tonnes in a single net.

The Budding Rose recently landed 30 tonnes of of cod in a single net in Peterhead

Peter added: "I had never seen a catch like that in all my 30 years at sea. The boat’s ram was completely bent out of shape by the weight of the catch - so much so it has had to be removed for repairs to be carried out.

"It was taken around 20 miles from closed cod spawning grounds; I had been fishing for haddock. I was in contact with a fellow skipper who was 75 miles away and he was having a similar experience."

Peterhead is the UK’s largest white fish and pelagic (mackerel and herring) port and runs an on-site fish market from Monday to Friday.

The fishermen claim that cod stocks in the North Atlantic have reached their highest levels for almost 20 years and ships such as the Budding Rose require only a relatively short time at sea to fill their holds.

Peter Bruce shows off some of his prized cod to promote The Real Fish Fight

Peter added: "Some people want the North Sea left as an aquarium and we just can't have that. We would like the scientists to come out with us and see what we are seeing on the grounds.

"Hugh’s Fish Fight seems to be motivated by raising his profile and bank balance. In the first series, he did a great job of highlighting the issue and we were all for it but we are not happy at his more recent claims about fish stocks."

"The money spent on his campaign should have been spent on scientific research; his measures will not provide a solution, it will only flood the market with products from overseas which have a high carbon footprint."

Hugh’s Fish Fight production company, KEO Films, are currently reviewing their options for a follow-up episode of the series, but have not ruled out a meeting between the two fish crusaders.

MEP Julie Girling's fishing forum in Newlyn Friday 8th March 2013

L-R:Larry Hartwell (ex-skipper/Through the Gaps) - David Stephens (skipper/boat owner) MEP Julie Girling - Nick Howell (ex-Fish Merchant)  - Dave Muirhead (Solicitor/ SWHL Secretary)

A handful of Newlyn's fishing community met with MEP Julie Girling at The Centre last Friday. The open agenda included discussion on quotas, discards and protected areas.  Given Julie's position on the Eurpoean Fishereies Committe this represented a very real opportunity to engage with the fishing community in the area.  Like it or lump it, the UK IS in the EU and IS directly affected by decisions drafted and made in Brussels - this meeting was a rare opportunity to speak directly with an MEP who sits on the Fisheries Committee. 

Those present (including Andy Manza/Stevensons) were very positive in their opinion of Julie whom they felt gave honest and open answers to the points and issues raised. In the light of the poor attendance which in itself might suggest a disenfranchisement from EU representation by the very people Julie has been elected to serve the office team will be looking at ways to better inform, involve and elicit help and useful communications with the fishing community.  Given that almost every fisherman now carries a mobile and most are connected to the internet it seems these services might be better employed to stay in touch.

Below is the Jukie Girling manifesto taking from the web site:

Our manifesto commitments for Fisheries. We will:

Fight for wholesale reform of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) to make it more efficient, and address the failings of the current policy.

Encourage sustainable practices so that they benefit both the environment and those whose livelihood depends upon the industry.

Give communities a greater say over the future of their fishing industries, enabling those with specific knowledge of the local fisheries sector to provide input into fisheries policy and take charge of their own local resources.

Bring an end to the scandal of fish discards.

Take forward the marine and Coastal access act and ensure that its conservation measures are implemented effectively, including the creation of marine conservation zones.

Norwegian fi sheries management, our approach on discard of fi sh

The point of this report is to highlight the need for an integrated and flexible approach to managing mixed fisheries - which in the case of many UK fisheries are extremely mixed.

Sustainable management of modern fisheries:

The management of modern fisheries has a number of objectives. The most basic 
objective, upon which the others must be based, is to manage the fisheries in such a way that the fish resources can be sustained at a viable level both biologically and economically. In order to achieve a sustainable harvest, the Norwegian management of living marine resources is based on the best available scientific advice. The International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) plays a critical role in assembling and analysing information about the status of fish stocks and the provision of scientific advice on management measures.

Mackerel scene and Hugh's new Fish Fight

HFW on the One Show gives the low down on the latest news from the 'mackerel war' being waged in northern waters. The clip also included out-takes from the new 3 series of Hugh's Fish Fight starting next week.

Last–ditch effort to save EU fisheries approved by Parliament - discards no more! - will this be enough save the fish stocks in Europe?

 

Today,the European Parliament voted for the largest overhaul of EU fisheries policy in decades, designed to cut fishing to sustainable levels and ending the practice of throwing away fish that is over quota.

Find more details in this press release @ http://eplinkedin.eu/CFP_Vote.

The new rules will set catch limits in line with maximum sustainable yields, meaning vessels won't harvest more fish than a stock can reproduce. They will also ban fishing discards and ensure better long–term planning based on reliable scientific data.

A major reform of the EU's Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) which aims to cut fishing to sustainable stock levels, end dumping at sea, and base long-term planning on sound scientific data, was approved by Parliament on Wednesday. Overfishing is widely seen as the worst failure of the current CFP, dating from 2002. The new one is to take effect in 2014.

For a more in–depth look into the new EU Common Fisheries Policy, check the EP Library briefings @

http://eplinkedin.eu/cfpreform_1

http://eplinkedin.eu/cfpreform_2.

Parliament now has to negotiate with member states – this time as full co–legislator – before the changes can become EU law.

This is the fourth round of fishery reform since 1983, aiming to close the growing gap between fishing capacity and resources. Check out what Members say about it on the EP Newshub @ http://eplinkedin.eu/cfpreform :

will this be enough save the fish stocks in Europe?

Plenty more fish in the sea? MEPs to decide on best way to tackle...

europarl.europa.eu

 

All the latest news from the Press Service of the European Parliament: votes, resolutions, debates, parliamentary committees and the plenary.

HFW and MPAs - your country needs you and your comments!

Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall is in the process of launching a new campaign to highlight the discards issue.  He has commissioned a short video that explains what he wants the fishermen of the UK to tell him - read on for the full story:

My new series of Fish Fight is coming to Channel 4 in early 2013. I look at Marine Protected Areas in the UK and in other parts of the world, how they have benefited marine life and fish stocks, and what fishermen think of them. 

Now, I want to hear from more fishermen, from every part of the country. 

I want to know what you think about marine protected areas (also called 'marine conservation zones' in England and Wales). If you're a fisherman, do you support Marine Protected Areas? Do you think there are too many around the UK, or not enough? Do you have any questions you'd like the answer to? 

Please record a short video comment or question, and post it below by clicking 'Create a video response'. You'll need to create a Youtube account if you don't have one already. You can film yourself on a mobile phone, webcam, or camera. Please keep it short and snappy. Feel free to film yourself at sea, or with an interesting background, but make sure we can hear you clearly. Please state your name and where you are from at the start of the message. Videos will be moderated so please avoid swearing.  

Your video could make it into the new series of Fish Fight on Channel 4. I'm also going to be inviting a few of you to join me for a Google Hangout to discuss the issues in more detail. We need to be able to get in touch with you. 

Once you've uploaded a video, please send a quick email to 'hello@fishfight.net' with the subject line 'Video Response', including your name, address, phone number, and the title of the video you uploaded. 

You can also send me a comment or question by email if you are unable to upload a video. Thank you 

Please see our Privacy Policy here: http://www.fishfight.net/privacy-policy Category: Film & Animation License: Standard YouTube License

If anyone wants some adive or guidance on using Google+ which is a superb free service from Google - email me (Laurence Hartwell) at info@newlynharbour.co.uk

No messing with Maria

Maria Damanki, the European Union’s fisheries commissioner intends to ban industrial trawlers that devastate the sea bed in the deep-sea fisheries off Britain. 


Conservation groups warn that bottom trawling in the northeast Atlantic threatens deep-sea fish species such as blue ling and orange roughy, and destroys coral reef and other ecosystems. In an interview with The Sunday Times, Maria Damanaki said proposed new regulations would stop the fleet plundering the fish stocks. They would set out a timetable under which bottom trawling in the deep-sea fisheries would be phased out. Damanaki admitted that misguided EU policies had contributed to the fish crisis. She said legislators and regulators had been too easily swayed by the fishing industry despite the mounting evidence of dwindling stocks. In what will be seen as a broadside against the industry, Damanaki wants to phase out deep-sea trawling in the northeast Atlantic. 


Most fish are caught in relatively shallow waters on the continental shelf, but the deep-sea trawlers operate at depths of more than 1,300ft. Recent research has found the catches are up to eight times higher than the limits recommended by marine scientists. Conservationists say the bottom trawlers with chain nets weighing several tons wreck the deep-sea marine ecosystems.  


The French, Spanish and Portuguese fleets account for about 90% of the deep-sea fisheries quota. UK fishing vessels account for only a small proportion of the catch. Under the proposed rules, trawlers will have to acquire special licences for deep-water fishing in the region and will be allowed to land their catch only in designated ports that will have strict controls on the fish caught.  


Damanaki’s tough proposals come after a Sunday Times campaign has highlighted how fishing fleets funded with EU subsidies have contributed to this fishing crisis. Damanaki has devised the rules as part of a campaign to reform an EU fishing policy that has led to the depletion of many fish stocks. She faces fierce resistance from the fishing lobby. EU ministers and the European parliament will both have to adopt the new legislation. Damanaki believes she would be able to secure a majority vote in both because of the increased public pressure on national governments to stop the destruction of sea life before it becomes irreversible. 


Other changes being drafted by Damanaki’s cabinet include the compulsory labelling of fish by fishermen and a requirement on retailers to state the origin and date of catches, as well as whether the fish are fresh or defrosted. Damanaki admitted that in past decades the fisheries policy of the EU has been “unreasonable” and devoid of “logic”. 


She said the industry influenced regulators too easily. “We were not good managers, this was our problem,” Damanaki said. “We were pushed by the interest [groups] as politicians and we could not resist.” She also conceded that the EU subsidies for fisheries, worth about €1 billion a year, offered no “value for money” to the European taxpayer and large, profitable corporations were able to extract more funds than working fishermen. “We have two problems: one is that the taxpayers’ money is spent in a way that doesn’t give enough in return and the other is that it is spent in a way which is rather unfair since the biggest vessels can get more,” she said. 


Damanaki’s department has drafted detailed proposals for reforming the fisheries policy that include banning the so-called discards or throwing fish overboard. Other key changes in the proposals include the non-payment of subsidies to fishermen found guilty of illegal fishing and setting fishing quotas according to scientific data, not political decisions. Her proposals are being keenly fought. 


It has long been known that France and Spain, among others, have a vested interest in maintaining a status quo because of their vast fishing fleets, including factory vessels — 450ft ships that catch, package and freeze fish in massive quantities. 


Damanaki refuses to identify those hampering her reform agenda, but spoke of a group of “Mediterranean countries”. She is ready for the battle. “We have to change the rules. We need a radical reform. Of course, it takes time,” Damanaki said. 


A shark biting from the start Maria Damanaki, the commissioner confronting Europe’s powerful fishing industry, signalled her agenda from the outset — by banning endangered bluefin tuna from the European commission’s restaurants. She was shocked that the threatened fish were being consumed by the bureaucrats while they tried to devise policies to protect the marine environment. 


Damanaki, 59, a former engineer who was appointed fisheries commissioner in 2010, is steeled for a radical reform of the European Union’s fishing policy. Despite a gentle demeanour, she will relish the battle. A former left-wing activist who was born in Crete, she endured imprisonment and torture at the hands of the military dictatorship in Greece during the 1970s before embarking on a career as a socialist MP. She is an astute and determined operator and has already removed officials in her department felt to be too close to the fishing industry.

Q&A: Eat that fish! When overfishing is also sustainable

Many of us think that if a fish species is overfished we probably should be wary about choosing it at the supermarket or on the restaurant menu. But the opposite may be true. Our boycotting of some overfished species may be hurting us and the American fish industry, not the fish. This counterintuitive opinion is laid out by Ray Hilborn, professor of aquatic and fishery sciences at the University of Washington, and co-author of Overfishing: What Everyone Needs to Know. Hilborn holds that the public, food retailers, NGOs and congress have misunderstood what defines a sustainable fishery. In fact overfishing and sustainable can, oddly enough, go together. SmartPlanet caught up with Hilborn in Seattle, WA to get a better understanding of this paradox and why he thinks a fish boycott doesn’t make sense. 


 SmartPlanet: What are red listed fish? Ray Hilborn: Red lists are advice that a number of NGOs provide on what species of fish one should avoid eating. 


 SP: And Whole Foods stopped selling such fish based on these red lists? RH: Yes Whole Foods made a commitment to not sell any food that’s on the red list of the Monterey Bay Aquarium and the Blue Oceans Institute. 


 SP: And other stores and restaurants have done similar things? RH: Yes red lists are widely used. 


 SP: What are the criteria for red-listed fish? RH: The three criteria that most NGOs use. One is status with respect to overfishing. The second is concerns about bycatch. So if you have a fishery that is catching a significant number of turtles, or sharks, or other species they’ll often get red-listed. Finally there are concerns about the environmental impacts of fishing, particularly concerns about trawl nets, or nets that touch the bottom and change bottom habitat. 


 SP: But you have made the point recently that if a species is overfished it doesn’t necessarily mean that it can’t be sustainable. And this seems counterintuitive. People might say well red lists sound more like the right thing to do. RH: There’s an enormous lack of understanding about what sustainability really is. Essentially sustainability has nothing to do with the abundance of the fish and much more about the management system. So if you’re managing it in a way where if it gets to low abundance you’ll reduce catches and let it rebuild. That’s clearly sustainable. You can have fish that are overfished for decades but still be sustainable. As long as their numbers are not going down they are sustainable. Some of it is “overfished” with reference to the production of long-term maximum yield. It doesn’t imply declining and it doesn’t imply threat of extinction. 


 SP: And even if it falls into this latter category that you just described it should be safe for consumers to eat? RH: So long as it’s in a management system like the U.S. where when stocks get to low abundance we dramatically reduce catches, and the evidence is they then rebuild. Then yes, those stocks are perfectly sustainable. 


 SP: What about this issue of bycatch? RH: OK, so the NGOs will say, “Oh this stock is not sustainable because there is bycatch of sharks.” Well the stock is sustainable. Every form of food production has negative impacts on other species. And that’s where there’s an enormous double standard applied to fish. For instance, I guarantee you there’s a big environmental impact of buying soybeans that come from cutting down rainforest. There’s a much higher standard applied to fisheries than almost anything else we eat. 


 SP: What goes into creating a sustainable fishery? RH: The first thing is you have to monitor the trend in the stock. You have to have a system based in good science, that says this stock is going down. Then your management actions have to respond to the trend. 


 SP: What about foreign fish? Which ones can we eat? RH: Much of the fish of the world do not qualify as sustainable because we just don’t know what’s happening in other countries like Africa or Asia. Now, very few fish from those markets makes their way to the U.S. market. But some of the Atlantic cod populations in Europe are still fished much too hard. But the big propulsions in Europe are actually quite sustainable. Much of the cod that make it to the U.S. are coming from Iceland or Norway where the stocks are in good shape. 


 SP: But how do you tell the difference if it’s cod coming from an overfished area? RH: Well, that is a major problem. But if it’s Marine Stewardship Council certified you can be pretty sure that it’s what it claims to be. Personally, I tend to buy a pretty narrow range of fish that come from my region, like salmon, halibut, and black cod. And pretty much all of those are MSC certified. 


 SP: You mention that the boycott on sustainably caught fish does nothing for conservation. RH: You can boycott this all you want, it’s not going to affect what’s caught. Because for these overfished stocks enormous effort is being taken to catch as little as possible and it’s not the consumer market that drives the amount of catch. Those fish are going to be caught and they’re going to be sold because there are a lot of markets in the world that don’t care about classification and red lists, essentially all of Asia, which is the world’s biggest seafood consuming market. The places that consumer boycotts might have an effect is for fish like bluefin tuna or swordfish. 


 SP: Well if boycotting makes no difference, is there a negative side to boycotting? RH: My real target is to tell retailers and the NGOs, “Look, let’s get more reasonable about what we mean by sustainability.” 


 SP: And we need to get more reasonable about the definition of “sustainability” because there are real economic dangers to the fishing industry? Or is it because of something else? RH: Yes, that’s certainly one of the issues. Let’s not punish these fishermen who have paid a very high price to rebuild these stocks. Let’s let them sell what they’re currently catching. 


 SP: So it seems the word “overfished” is also more nuanced? RH: Well I think Congress had this very naïve view that somehow you could manage every stock separately and if cod is depleted, at low abundance well we stop fishing it, but they don’t appreciate the cost of all the other species that we could not catch because we can’t catch those species without also catching some cod as bycatch. Now, there’s a lot of work going on to try to solve that problem. But I it’s important to convince people that we will always have some overfished stocks. And if we continue with our current U.S. statement that ‘no stock shall be overfished’ we’re going to have to give up a lot of food production. We’re certainly doing that now. 


SP: You’ve also argued that fish is a food we need? RH: If we don’t catch certain fish with trawl nets, and let’s say it’s twenty million tons, then that food is going to be made up some other way. And what’s the environmental cost of the other ways of producing the food? My initial calculations suggest that it is quite a bit higher. We should always be saying, “Well if we don’t eat this, where else is the food going to come from, and what’s the environmental cost of that?” 


 SP: So you ultimately feel that the marketing of these red lists has gotten to the point where it’s lost rational sense? RH: Yes. I’m pretty convinced that seafood production is more sustainable than growing corn in Iowa or wheat in Kansas. Because growing corn in Iowa forces us to lose topsoil every year. In another 200 years the topsoil will be be largely gone. Is that sustainable?

By Christie Nicholson | May 30, 2012, 7:17 AM PDT

Dumped cod - what a waste! - a united UK front is needed say MPs

Dumped dead cod

The picture as it is today: 


Four dead cod float away from the boat. Each cod is around 5Kg.
Four times 5 = 20Kg.


That scene is repeated daily for the net boats and trawlers working in Area VIIg - see below......

Cod quota for ICES Area VIIg which is where the Ajax and other Newlyn boats will be fishing this tide is currently 300Kg per month per boat. 


20Kg is 20/300X100 = 6.6% of a month's quota caught and then dumped, dead, back into the sea - at least the crabs get a meal out of the waste.


And a timely article appeared on the BBC's web site today:



The whole of the UK needs to present a "united front" to the European Union to protect the future of fishing fleets, MPs have said. The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee accused Brussels of "micro-management" in setting catch quotas. It said EU member states should decide them "as locally as possible". The MPs urged ministers in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland to work together to ensure UK views are heard when new EU rules are introduced. 


The European Commission says the existing system of fishing quotas - which often leads to tonnes of good fish being dumped at sea - will be changed over the next couple of years.


The major headache for the boats fishing in Area VII today is that the quota was introduced way back in 1983. At that time, the TAC (Total Allowable Catch) was set based on catch returns from the late 1970s. Unsurprisingly, the fishing fleet of Cornwall had changed significantly in that time. Most of the bigger boats in Newlyn caught very little cod - they were long lining for ling and skate at the time and there were very few trawlers working the grounds where cod habited. As a result, when the quotas were set the UK ended up with around 1200 tonnes and the French around 14000 tonnes - simply because they had a growing fleet of trawlers catching whitefish including cod. Even if the UK's quota was doubled today it would still not reflect the catching capacity of the fleet. Cod do not move far - a fact proved by tagging fish - not one cod tagged in Area VII has been recoverd in any other ICES area suggesting that the stock of cod is entirely located here in and around the Western approaches.


See the rest of the story here.

Discards - how do fishermen feel about the official view from Defra?

A ‘discard’ is any type of animal caught by fishing gear and thrown back into the sea, alive or dead.  Discarded unwanted catch (often referred to as by-catch) can be any commercially valuable marine species, such as commonly eaten fish, or any other marine animal which is caught accidentally.

Discarding is not good for the environment and is costly for fishermen.  It is also seen as a destructive and wasteful practice.

Why are there discards?

Discarding is a complex issue occurring for a number of reasons:

• Quota restrictions: quota limits are in place to protect fish stocksfrom overfishing.  Fishermen, who run out of quota for one species, may continue to fish for other species for which they still have quota and discard fish where their quota has been exhausted. These ‘over-quota’ discards (quota species discarded above the legal minimum landing size) are estimated to account for around 22% of English and Welsh discards. Catch quotas offer a potential solution to this problem (see ‘Tackling the discard problem’ section below).
• High grading: where fishermen discard fish that is worth less money in order to optimise the value of their catches. The UK is operating a European high grading ban in seas around the UK to stop this behaviour.
• Under the legal Minimum Landing Size: a Minimum Landing Size (MLS) is technical rule that aims to protect small/juvenile commercial fish from being targeted and sold by fishermen. The mixed nature of species found in most European fisheries means that one size of net mesh is rarely suitable for all species.  As a consequence many fish below the MLS may be caught and then discarded. Around 24% of estimated discards are quota species below the legal MLS and were too small to land. Much work has taken place in the UK to improve the selectivity of fishing nets/gears.
• Market conditions: some species will be discarded because they are not popular to eat and so unlikely to sell in fish markets. An estimated 54% of discards (2008) are discarded for reasons relating to weak/absent markets. The Fishing for the Markets project aims to address this issue (see section below).
• By-catch of protected species: species that are listed as a priority for conservation (e.g. whales and dolphins, seabirds and some sharks) may be accidently caught by  fishermen, and some can die before or after being returned to the sea.
• Unwanted benthos: some species (for example, starfish, seaweed, worms, anemones) that live on, in or near the ocean floor are not intentionally targeted by fisheries but may be discarded if they are tangled in fishing nets.

Tackling the discard problem

Defra is working to reduce discards through various initiatives:

At a European Level: We are involved in discussions with the European Commission and other Member States to ensure that new ways of reducing discards can be taken up at European Community level.

• The reform of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) in 2012 provides us with an important opportunity to reduce discards.  We want to encourage and enable commercial fishermen to make long-term business decisions though giving them greater responsibility to safeguard fish stocks and reduce discards.
• UK and Denmark Fully Documented Catch Quota Pilots. The UK Government, in partnership with Denmark, is trialling an alternative system of managing fish stocks in the North Sea. Rather than using the traditional method of counting catches on land, this alternative method counts catches at sea.  The aim of the trial is to understand whether this type of management system is possible in EU fisheries, if it can reduce discards, and encourage fishermen to fish more selectively. Interim results look promising and we aim to extend the trials in 2011 to gather more evidence for CFP reform.

In the UK: Defra is using fresh approaches and ideas to reduce discards. Projects include:

• Social marketing research studies to understand and change discard behaviours of fishermen, e.g. Project 50% in 2009, in which scientists and fishermen working together reduced discards in the Brixham trawl fleet by 52%; and a current project on trawlers in the Irish Sea.
• Gear modifications trials that try to reduce the capture of unwanted marine species, such as the current Looe (South West) otter trawl pilot.
• The Fishing for the markets project, a new initiative looking to encourage consumption of under-utilised, sustainable species that are often discarded.  The project aims to gather knowledge and experience from a range of individuals and organisations along the supply chain about existing market practices and un-tapped potential for under-utilised species. See Eating a wider range of fish.

For more information

Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (Cefas)
Discards and gear selectivity:

• Fishing gear technology - Improving selectivity – reducing discards(Link to CEFAS website)

European Commission
Discards and catch records:

• Unwanted catches and discards (Link to the EC website)
• Electronic recording and reporting system (Link to the EC website)

Seafish
Discards and Electronic Monitoring systems:

• Discards in fishing
• Catch Quota Management (Link to Danish Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Fisheries website)