Supplementary Memorandum by the Joint
Nature Conservation Committee
INTRODUCTION
At the evidence session of the Sub-Committee
on 2 April, we were invited to answer a question detailing our
experience of "emergency" measures under the Common
Fisheries Policy. Mark Tasker responded to this question and offered
to provide detail on dates etc in writing subsequently. This note
provides that detail.
JNCC has had twice experienced the use of these
measures, on both occasions in our role as governmental advisors
on UK nature conservation.
The first such experience relates to the Darwin
Mounds.
— The Darwin Mounds were discovered
150 km off NW Scotland in May 1998 in water 1000m deep. They consist
of sandy mounds with cold-water coral growing on top, therefore
peculiarly vulnerable to permanent damage from fishing gears (particularly
trawls) that touch the seabed.
— Further surveys in 1999 and
2000 showed increasing damage from trawling, believed to be mostly
French in origin.
— European Commission asked the
International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) for
"urgent advice" in July 2000. This was requested to
help fulfil the Commission's mandate to protect sensitive marine
habitats.
— ICES answered this request in
spring 2002 (the delay was caused by the letter from the Commission
becoming accidentally lost in ICES).
— More detailed advice was requested
of ICES and supplied in spring 2003; all supported the scientific
case for closure.
— UK applied for an emergency
closure in August 2003, indicating that it would put the site
forward as a Special Area of Conservation under the Habitats Directive
as soon as it had the powers to do so. A 3-month emergency closure
was granted and later extended to six months.
— European Commission put forward
proposals and Council agreed to a permanent closure in April 2004.
— The UK has treated the site
as if it was an SAC from this point, and has not licensed any
non-fishery activities in the area.
There was some initial resentment from industry
(particularly in France) and from some regulators, but there is
now reasonable acceptance of the closure (as indicated by the
lack of adverse comment on the sites proposed designation in recent
consultations by JNCC on the SAC proposal for the site. Evidence
from VMS indicates occasional minor transgressions of the site
closure. There has been no independent science survey of the site
since 2000.
The second attempted use of emergency measures
relates to the bycatch of common dolphins off south-west England.
— Understandable concern at rising
numbers of common dolphins washing up dead on beaches in south
west England in late winter started in late 1990s. There is evidence
that these strandings had been occurring, albeit to a lesser extent,
since at least the mid 1980s. At the same time, some pelagic pair-trawl
operators asked for help in solving a bycatch of common dolphins
in their fishery.
— Following an NGO campaign, UK
government to apply for an emergency closure of pair trawl fishery
on grounds of excessive catch of common dolphins in July 2004.
— Following non-agreement to this
closure by other nations fishing in the area, the European Commission
asked ICES for advice in early 2005 on status of common dolphin
population (size etc), bycatch and any mitigation measures that
might be suitable.
— ICES advised the Commission
in May 2005 that there were in the order of 500,000 dolphins in
one genetic population, with unknown bycatch, but unlikely to
exceed unsustainable levels.
— Based on this ICES advice, Commission
chose not grant emergency closure.
— Bycatch has continued, but increasing
evidence that substantial proportion of the bycatch is not caused
by pair-trawls.
April 2008
|
