2 Recovery of Northern hake stock
| (24692)
10980/03
COM(03) 374
| Draft Council Regulation establishing measures for the recovery of the Northern hake stock.
|
| Legal base | Article 37 EC; consultation; QMV
|
| Document originated | 27 June 2003
|
| Deposited in Parliament | 2 July 2003
|
| Department | Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
|
| Basis of consideration | EM of 27 August 2003
|
| Previous Committee Report | None, but see footnotes
|
| To be discussed in Council | 13-14 October 2003
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | For debate in European Standing Committee A (see paragraph 2.10 below)
|
Background
2.1 While the general state of the fish stocks in Community waters
has given rise to concern, the International Council for the Exploration
of the Sea (ICES) identified in November 2000 particular problems
in respect of the cod stocks in the North Sea and West of Scotland
and the Northern hake stock. The Fisheries Council therefore agreed
in December 2000 that the Community should establish a recovery
plan for these stocks.
2.2 The Commission accordingly put forward in December
2001 proposals[1] which
included the setting of quantitative targets for the adult populations
in question, and of multi-annual total allowable catches (TACs)
aimed at assisting biomass to increase annually by 30% in the
case of cod and 15% in the case of hake. At the same time, effort
limits would be applied to all fishing vessels authorised to land
cod and/or hake, linked to their average catch of those species
in the period 1998-2000. These were discussed by the Council
at various times in 2002, but, in the event, it only proved possible
to decide at the end of the year, in the context of the overall
agreement on TACs and quotas for 2003, a temporary measure covering
the period from 1 February to 31 December 2003. This was, however,
coupled with the intention to put in place after 1 July 2003 a
more sophisticated regime, based on a proposal to be brought forward
by the Commission by 15 February, and agreed by the Council by
the end of March.
The current proposal
2.3 Notwithstanding this intended timetable, the
Commission came forward with such a proposal only in May 2003,
which was moreover confined to cod.[2]
It has now produced in the current document a separate proposal
for Northern hake, covering the North Sea, Skagerrak and Kattegat,
English Channel, west of Scotland, Irish and Celtic Seas, west
of Ireland, and Bay of Biscay. As with the proposal for cod,
there would be two guideline figures — the first (143,000
tonnes) representing the lowest size of adult stock consistent
with a precautionary approach, whilst the second (103,000 tonnes)
would specify the absolute minimum level below which the stock
would be in significant danger of total collapse.
2.4 If the estimated stock level is below the recommended
level, but above or only slightly above the minimum level, the
total allowable catch (TAC) will be set so as to aim for a 10%
increase in stock size the following year. In addition, this arrangement
would be subject to the principle that the largest annual change,
in either direction, in any TAC from one year to the next should
not be greater than 15% after the first year of implementation
of the plan, though the setting of TACs would also be subject
to the proviso that the precautionary fishing mortality rate recommended
by the scientists as being the maximum compatible with sustainable
exploitation should not be exceeded. More severe measures are
proposed if the estimated stock is well below the minimum level.
On the other hand, once a stock has been restored to the precautionary
target level for two consecutive years, it would be open to the
Council to adopt a different management plan of the kind provided
for more generally under Council Regulation 2371/2002.
2.5 The proposal also deals with the management
of fishing effort in those areas containing the majority of
the hake stock (west of Scotland, Celtic Sea, Bay of Biscay and
western Channel), the Commission taking the view that, in the
other areas, the measures already proposed for cod will provide
sufficient protection for the small quantities of Northern hake
found there. The Commission says that it is now proposing a considerably
simpler approach than in its earlier proposals, and one which
also differs from the interim measure (under which a fixed number
of days at sea per month was specified for each vessel in different
categories, depending on the gear used). The overall historical
fishing effort of all vessels catching hake in the areas in question
would be calculated, the reduction required to match the selected
TAC would be determined, and this reduction distributed across
Member States in proportion to how much hake they have landed
during the relevant reference period as compared with total Community
landings. Member States would then be free to distribute these
efforts limits (expressed in kilowatt-days) among their vessels
on a fully transferable basis within the geographical area to
which they apply. The approach proposed would also include a
number of features eventually incorporated in the interim scheme,
such as the exact definition of what constitutes a day absent
from port, and the way in which exemptions under exceptional circumstances
should be calculated.
2.6 As regards monitoring and control, the
Commission says that the current proposal remains largely unchanged
from the earlier proposal, and includes details of prior notification,
the requirement to land Northern hake at designated ports, and
stowage and transport conditions. However, the previous proposal
regarding the use of the satellite-based vessel monitoring system
has been removed, as this will be addressed in a new Regulation
on this issue, to be adopted as part of the reform of the CFP.
Similarly, technical conservation measures are being dealt with
in a separate proposal.[3]
2.7 Finally, the Commission notes that, if implemented,
the effort limitation measures in this proposal would directly
affect those vessels fishing for species other than hake, and
that there will also be implications for the TACs set for such
species.
The Government's view
2.8 In his Explanatory Memorandum of 27 August 2003,
the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Commons) at the Department
for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mr Ben Bradshaw) says
that the UK accepts the need to bring fishing effort into better
balance with the available hake stocks, but that the Government
will wish to consider very carefully how to balance the action
required to conserve stocks with the need to minimise the adverse
economic impact of restrictions on fishing operations. He adds
that other issues which will need careful study include:
- the likely effectiveness of
the mechanisms proposed in achieving a recovery of the stocks;
- the extent to which the methodology envisaged
will ensure a balanced impact between the various Member States
whose fleets would be affected;
- the need to ensure than the means of applying
effort control do not impose unnecessary bureaucracy and cost
on either the UK industry or the Fisheries Departments;
- the need to identify, in consultation with the
industry, how effort would most appropriately be allocated among
the relevant vessels, and what would be a realistic timescale
for implementing the measure.
2.9 More specifically, the Minister says that the
proposal would potentially impose new costs on hake fishermen
operating in Northern waters, but that the level of these costs
will depend upon the extent of the cuts required in current effort
levels, and the method chosen to administer the arrangements.
He adds that the Fisheries Departments are consulting representatives
of the catching sector, and that a Regulatory Impact Assessment
will be provided.
Conclusion
2.10 As was perhaps to be expected, the form of
this proposal, and indeed much of its content, is similar to that
of the recovery plan already put forward for cod (on which we
reported on 18 June, recommending a debate in European Standing
Committee A). It is therefore likely to raise much the same issues,
and consequently we believe that it too should be debated in European
Standing Committee A. We suggest that, if the necessary arrangements
can be made in time, it should be debated together with the recovery
plan for cod, which the Standing Committee is to consider on 18
September.
1 (23079) 15245/01; see HC 152-xxii (2001-02), paragraph
13 (20 March 2002), HC 152-xxxvii (2001-02), paragraph 2 (17 July
2002), HC 63-v (2002-03), paragraph 3 (18 December 2002), HC 63-vii
(2002-03), paragraph 1 (15 January 2003) and HC 63-xvi (2002-03),
paragraph 3 (26 March 2003). Back
2
(24515) 9081/03; see HC 63-xxv (2002-03), paragraph 1 (18 June
2003). Back
3
(24074) 15255/02; see HC 63-xxx (2002-03), paragraph 12 (16 July
2003). Back
|
