Menu

Piattaforma LIFE

About LIFE Platform

Posts by LIFE Platform:

SF Winter seining 1

Finlandia: I pescatori di Puruvesi lanciano un appello urgente alla Commissione europea

,

La pesca invernale finlandese con la sciabica potrebbe presto scomparire a causa dei cambiamenti climatici

AGGIORNAMENTO DEL 22/01

Accedi qui alla risposta della DG Mare alla lettera inviata dai membri di LIFE

 

Bruxelles, 13 gennaio 2019

I membri di LIFE della Cooperativa Snowchange lanciano l'allarme: lo scioglimento dei ghiacci sta portando al dè la comparsa della stagione di pesca tradizionale con la sciabica. Negli anni '60 la raccolta poteva iniziare a novembre e terminare a maggio, ma cinquant'anni dopo la stagione potrebbe ridursi a solo poche settimane tra febbraio e marzo. Ciò sta avendo conseguenze drammatiche sui mezzi di sussistenza delle comunità locali.

Sull'orlo del collasso economico, i invitare il nuovo Commissario europeo per l'Ambiente, gli Oceani e la Pesca, Virginijus Sinkevičius di prendere provvedimenti urgenti e stabilire misure di sostegno specifiche.

Accedi alla lettera ufficiale al Commissario UE qui 

Santa1

Una riflessione LIFE sul LO

,

The Landings Obligation – No Simple Answers

11th of December 2019

Jeremy Percy

On Monday, 2 December 2019, the PECH (Fisheries) Committee of the European Parliament organized a public hearing on State of play of the Landing Obligation: challenges and best practices (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/cmsdata/189086/Final%20Programme%20PECH%20public%20hearing-Landing%20Obligation_2.12.2019.2_EN-original.pdf).

During the previous session of the Parliament, just over 18 months ago on May 14 2018, the PECH Committee organized a similar hearing entitled: “Landing Obligation and Choke Species in Multispecies and Mixed Fisheries”. In summing up, the then Chair of the PECH Committee, Mr Alain Cadec, commented: “…the diagnosis is very clear: uncertainty, difficulty, complexity…”.  Plus ça change… https://lifeplatform.eu/choking-landing-obligation/

A key element of the 2013 reform of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) of 2013 is the gradual elimination of the practice of discarding through the introduction an obligation to land all catches. The landing obligation (LO) is supposed to have been phased in since 2015 through to 2019 for all commercial fisheries (species under TACs, or under minimum sizes) in European waters and for European vessels fishing in the high seas.

However, a thread running through the presentations of all the speakers at this hearing was that, at Member State level, the LO is not being implemented effectively. Former fisherman Jerry Percy, LIFE’s Senior Advisor and Director of the NUTFA (New Under Ten Fishermen’s Association of the UK) was one of the speakers. His presentation is available here, and drawing on his experience in the UK, he has penned the piece below for LIFE.

The LO: designed for trawlers, not fit for purpose for small scale low impact fishing

It is abundantly clear that the Landings Obligation [LO] was written very much with larger scale mobile gears in mind. Just one illustration of this concentration of interest is underlined by the massive difference between discard related studies done with regard to larger and smaller scale sectors respectively, 3760 on large scale v 164 on small scale. This does make the requirements of the LO clearly inappropriate and therefore not fit for purpose with regard to the small scale fleet, especially as circa 80% of whom use passive rather than mobile gears.

The combination of a relatively low impact on stocks due to both vessel size and the resultant lack of fishing power, combined with their use of passive gears, many of which produce a live catch that can be returned unharmed to the water does provide a strong argument against tarring them with the same brush as the larger scale sector. Furthermore, the small scale sector should in fact be recognized and rewarded for this lower impact and lack of discards via the provision of additional fishing opportunities best delivered via Article 17 of the CFP. This states that “Within the fishing opportunities allocated to them, Member States shall endeavour to provide incentives to fishing vessels deploying selective fishing gear or using fishing techniques with reduced environmental impact, such as reduced energy consumption or habitat damage.”

The strategy to deter fishers from discarding, and the LO, need a rethink

Fishermen are fishermen and no fisherman gets out of bed and decides that he doesn’t want to catch much fish today. Our raison d’etre is to catch fish, lots of fish, and we have become very good at it and because we have become very good at it, we inevitably need systems in place to deter us from catching too much.

At the same time, there remains a commitment by member states to deal with the discard issue and it is still a live element with both eNGO’s and the public so as an industry we cannot simply ignore it, it’s not going to go away anytime soon.

The current failures of the LO are largely down to two major factors.

Firstly, that there has been precious little genuine monitoring or enforcement of the LO since its inception. This is exemplified by a recent comment from an official at the UK’s Marine Management organization (MMO) that 2018/19 was seen as an ‘education’ rather than an enforcement phase.  Furthermore, despite the LO being in place for the Baltic since 2015, it is common knowledge, including within the member states concerned that discards continue to run at over 50% for some species. On this basis and with very little real time monitoring or enforcement of discards it is hardly surprising that fishermen continue to dump fish.

Both carrots and sticks are required to encourage a change in culture

Secondly, it is equally clear that there has been much excellent work done to improve the selectivity of mobile gears in the last few years and discards in general have reduced significantly for many fisheries. The fact remains however that discarding is still extant within the mobile sector, there is a legal requirement in place that makes discarding illegal [whether we like it or not] and both carrots and sticks are necessary to encourage and support fishermen to change their culture as well as their fishing gears if discarding is to be reduced to the lowest possible level. Among the number of ‘elephants in the room’ referred to by various speakers at the recent hearing at the European Parliament on the subject, one that was not mentioned specifically was the fact that mobile gears are not inherently selective in the same way as passive gears, hence the seemingly insurmountable challenge of making them substantially selective.

It is also a fact that the leading gear technology expert certainly in the UK and probably the EU stated recently that his challenge was not only to develop more selective gears but it was an equal struggle to persuade fishermen to actually use them. Perhaps not surprisingly, some of the more selective gears inevitably lose some of the target species when trying to avoid other fish, hence the reluctance of some mobile gear operators to change their ways but change their ways they must to avoid breaking the law and also to avoid going bankrupt through being stopped from fishing in a choke species scenario [bearing in mind not only the zero catch quotas for 2019 for some species in some areas also but the parlous state of North Sea Cod that is shaping up to be a potentially major choke species for many vessels].

Some proposals

[1]: at the present time, cameras [REM] are the only reliable way of monitoring discards aboard fishing vessels. It is certain that technology will improve with time, but currently, cameras are the most cost effective and proven option.

[2]: All mobile gear vessels over a certain length [12 metres? / 15 metres?] as well as the larger passive netting vessels should be required to have cameras and perhaps other REM fitted, paid for via EMFF and its successors [as well as perhaps via any financial penalties incurred through overfishing].

[3]: As is currently the case, uplifts in quota should continue to be awarded to vessels to compensate to some extent for no longer being able to discard.

[4]: ALL fish caught must be landed

[5]: ALL fish suitable for human consumption should be sold for human consumption [only those species caught specifically for fishmeal are excluded – but still obviously count against quotas AND require cameras on the vessels concerned]

[6]: Fishermen are not penalized via their quota holdings for over quota landings [it is counter productive to reduce quota following a transgression that in turns means that the fisherman is further restricted on next trip and so on]. NB; the current inability of the under ten sector in the UK to be able to cross book [swap] quotas is a serious impediment to quota and catch flexibilities currently only available to the over ten PO sector [despite having an officially recognized Coastal PO for the under tens]. In the light of the LO, this is an absolutely vital component within this aspect of the initiative.

[7]: a sliding scale is introduced relating to the penalty for landing fish in excess of the vessel quota. Firstly, the value of the over quota landing is immediately subtracted from the overall landed value of the trip and secondly, a sliding scale of penalty directly related to the weight [or a percentage of the landing] is imposed. The initial suggestion is for the penalty to equal the value of the over quota element of the landing [ie, landing £1000 over quota results in £2000 overall penalty] but consideration should be given to a sliding scale, perhaps based on the premise that the more you land over quota, the higher the penalty, thus ensuring that a landing does continue to provide an income irrespective of size of vessel but is at the same time reduced and penalizes those who have a greater impact through catching fish in excess of their quota. The bigger the over quota landing, the bigger the penalty.

The basic premise being that the fisherman does not benefit financially from landing these fish and increasingly is penalized for doing so, especially if he repeats the overfishing whereby financial penalties should increase.

We recognize that not penalizing fishermen in quota terms for landing over quota fish goes against fisheries management logic but history suggests that this is in fact counter productive as the resultant reductions in access to quota generates a downward spiral as less quota equals more ‘discards’ and simply doesn’t work. The suggestion above recognizes that there will be an element of over quota landings initially but the penalties, especially if they are based on a progressive sliding scale, will provide more than enough encouragement for fishermen to avoid ‘discards’ very quickly. [at the same time, a backstop could be introduced based on a reduction in a vessel’s quota allocation to ensure no overall abuse of the system in the event of very significant or continuing over quota landings, perhaps aimed at the quota uplift element].

The approach outlined above also solves the problems highlighted by many commentators, namely that there will be no need to separate the catch on board, there will be no additional work required by the crew, no danger of cross contamination, no need to carry extra boxes and an overall improvement in safety over the present model. At the same time, there will no need for additional resources on land in terms of systems to deal with landings not destined for human consumption and no opportunities for illegal activities centred around the misuse of this element of landings.

In conclusion

No fishermen likes to consider, let alone promote a form of penalty for the process of fishing but our concern is that unless the industry comes up with some ideas then officialdom surely will. Although there will undoubtedly need to be alterations to the basic initiative set out here especially with regard to the percentage penalties, the potential sliding scales mentioned and a backstop, we consider that the basic premise is sound and that the current approach to the LO is simply unsustainable and we urgently need to find a practical alternative to avoid either bankrupting fishermen or forcing them into illegal activities.

♦ ♦ ♦

IMG_3056

LIFE chiede al Comitato PECH di porre rimedio a torti storici

, , ,

La PCP ha creato un mare distorto

Bruxelles, 28 novembre 2019

Brian O'Riordan

Per più di trent'anni le successive politiche comuni della pesca hanno discriminato ed emarginato i pescatori su piccola scala a basso impatto e le loro comunità, favorendo la pesca eccessiva industrializzata.

In una lettera indirizzata al presidente della Commissione Pesca (Pech) del Parlamento europeo, LIFE ha chiesto di porre rimedio a questi torti storici, e che il Comitato Pech fornisca la leadership necessaria per affrontare le evidenti carenze politiche.

A cinque anni dall'adozione della riforma della Politica Comune della Pesca (PCP) e dalla sua attuazione, il previsto miglioramento della sostenibilità i risultati per le flotte di piccole dimensioni a basso impatto in tutta l'UE non sono stati raggiunti, e si sta sprecando l'opportunità di sfruttare il loro potenziale per raggiungere obiettivi più ampi di sostenibilità sociale, ambientale ed economica.

I pescatori costieri su piccola scala tendono a pescare nei modi meno dannosi per l'ambiente per fornire i maggiori benefici alla società.

La riforma della PCP viene attuata in modo inadeguato dagli Stati membri, causando una distorsione dei mari. Di conseguenza, i piccoli pescatori sono privati delle quote e devono fare affidamento su specie non soggette a quote. Inoltre, vengono efficacemente esclusi dai benefici dell'accesso al modello di Organizzazione di Produttori (OP). Ciò significa che le zone di pesca costiera sono soggette a operazioni di pesca intensiva su larga scala, potenzialmente più distruttive, che utilizzano reti a strascico, draghe e altri attrezzi trainati, e che la maggior parte dei sussidi alla pesca sostiene le operazioni di pesca su larga scala.

I piccoli produttori ittici dovrebbero essere messi in grado di formare le proprie Organizzazioni di Produttori - descritte come "la chiave per raggiungere gli obiettivi della PCP" - per facilitare il loro accesso alle risorse, ai mercati e ai processi decisionali. La realtà, tuttavia, è che le OP riconosciute dagli Stati Membri hanno quasi esclusivamente monopolizzata dalla pesca su larga scala interessi che erigono barriere all'ingresso nei mercati delle opportunità di pesca, creano ostacoli allo sviluppo dei membri delle flotte di pesca su piccola scala e limitano il flusso dei benefici del modello OP.

Il nuovo EMFAF (2021-2027), se opportunamente indirizzato, potrebbe contribuire a ribaltare la situazione. In particolare, come proposto dal Parlamento europeo, il finanziamento dei piani nazionali degli Stati membri dovrebbe essere subordinato alla preparazione di un piano d'azione per lo sviluppo di una pesca su piccola scala sostenibile e redditizia.

LIFE è convinta che se ai pescatori su piccola scala venisse fornito il contesto politico favorevole previsto dalla PCP e la volontà politica di promuoverlo, la pesca su piccola scala a basso impatto potrebbe fare la differenza tra il successo e il fallimento nell'attuazione della PCP 2014 e nel raggiungimento degli obiettivi fissati dalla Direttiva quadro sulla strategia marina per un buono stato ambientale entro il 2020.

Il prossimo martedì 3 dicembre la Commissione Pech discuterà di "un accordo equo per i pescatori su piccola scala, artigianali e costieri nell'assegnazione delle possibilità di pesca". https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/PECH-OJ-2019-12-02-1_EN.html. Questo rappresenta un'opportunità ideale per portare la pesca su piccola scala dalla periferia al centro della politica europea della pesca.

Accedi alla lettera in inglese qui

Accedi alla lettera in francese qui

Accedi alla lettera in spagnolo qui

Accedi alla lettera in italiano qui

Accedi alla lettera in tedesco qui

Appello alla CE per una strategia oceanica inclusiva

, , ,

Small scale fisheries organisations and NGOs  join forces for an inclusive Oceans Strategy that takes into account the rights of fishing communities

Brussels, 21st of november 2019

On World Fisheries Day, LIFE and an international network of organizations call to the European Commissioner-designate for Environment and Oceans, Mr. Virginijus Sinkevičius, for an inclusive oceans strategy that recognises the central role of fisheries, with a balanced approach to securing social, economic and environmental sustainability.

Access full information on the website of the Coalition for Fair Fisheries Arrangements by clicking here

subsidies

Stop ai sussidi dannosi

, ,

Sovvenzioni alla pesca:  fondi pubblici per il bene pubblico, non per il guadagno individuale.

Non per aiutarci a pescare di più, ma per aiutarci a pescare meglio.

Bruxelles, 4 ottobre 2019

Brian O'Riordan

L'associazione Low Impact Fishers of Europe (LIFE) sostiene che i fondi pubblici dovrebbero essere utilizzati per il bene pubblico, non per il guadagno individuale. La pesca e l'ambiente marino sono una risorsa pubblica. che devono essere conservati entro limiti sostenibili se si vuole che la pesca abbia un futuro. A tal fine è necessario prestare attenzione ai tre pilastri della sostenibilità: la dimensione ambientale, quella sociale e quella economica. LIFE chiede quindi che, nell'ambito del nuovo schema di finanziamento europeo per il settore marittimo, venga data priorità a alla tutela dell'ambiente e alla conservazione degli stock ittici, e al sostegno di progetti collettivi che contribuiscono alla sostenibilità sociale ed economica delle comunità di pescatori.

In quest'ottica, LIFE ha accettato di essere cofirmataria di una lettera redatta insieme alle ONG ambientaliste (disponibile qui) sui sussidi alla pesca e indirizzata ai membri del Parlamento europeo. Il Parlamento europeo svolgerà un ruolo determinante come codecisore nel prossimo processo di "trilogo" per l'adozione di un nuovo regolamento per un Fondo europeo per gli affari marittimi, la pesca e l'acquacoltura (FEAMP) per il periodo 2021-2027.

In occasione dell'ultima riunione della Commissione Pesca (Pech) del Parlamento europeo, il 2 ottobre scorso, i deputati hanno esaminato le sovvenzioni erogate al settore della pesca europeo attraverso il Fondo europeo per gli affari marittimi e la pesca (FEAMP)Hanno inoltre discusso le questioni derivanti dalla proposta approvata dall'ultimo Parlamento per sovvenzionare i settori marittimo, della pesca e dell'acquacoltura in Europa nel prossimo periodo, dal 2021 al 2027, nell'ambito di quello che sarà chiamato "Fondo europeo per gli affari marittimi, la pesca e l'acquacoltura" (EMFA). Il dibattito precede il prossimo ciclo di negoziati a tre, attraverso i quali il Parlamento europeo e il Consiglio dei ministri dovranno giungere a una "codecisione" concordata sulla nuova legislazione, con la facilitazione della Commissione europea.

Una questione controversa nel dibattito è l'erogazione di sussidi per azioni che contribuiscono alla sovraccapacità, pesca eccessiva o pesca illegale, non dichiarata e non regolamentata (INN). Dal 2005 l'Organizzazione mondiale del commercio (OMC) ha ricevuto il mandato di negoziare la fine di alcune forme di sussidi alla pesca che contribuiscono alla sovraccapacità e alla pesca eccessiva. In seguito alla Conferenza delle Nazioni Unite sullo Sviluppo Sostenibile Rio + 20 del 2012 e alla conseguente definizione degli Obiettivi di Sviluppo Sostenibile (SDGs), l'OMC si sta ora concentrando sulla realizzazione dell'SDG 14.6. Questo impegna gli Stati a: "entro il 2020, vietare alcune forme di sussidi alla pesca che contribuiscono alla sovraccapacità e al sovrasfruttamento, eliminare i sussidi che contribuiscono alla pesca INN e astenersi dall'introdurre nuovi sussidi di questo tipo".

Per questo motivo, nella sua proposta del 2018 sul FEAMP (ora FEAMP) dopo il 2020, la Commissione europea ha elencato come non ammissibili, le sovvenzioni per "operazioni che aumentano la capacità di pesca di un peschereccio o che sostengono l'acquisto di attrezzature che aumentano la capacità di un peschereccio di trovare pesce" e per "la costruzione e l'acquisto di pescherecci o l'importazione di pescherecci, a meno che il presente regolamento non preveda altrimenti".

Nella proposta del Parlamento europeo, Le sovvenzioni possono essere utilizzate per "lo scopo di migliorare la sicurezza o le condizioni di lavoro o di vita dell'equipaggio, comprese le correzioni alla stabilità della nave, o la qualità del prodotto, a condizione che qualsiasi aumento di capacità "sia entro il limite assegnato allo Stato membro interessato, senza compromettere l'equilibrio tra la capacità di pesca e le possibilità di pesca disponibili e senza aumentare la capacità di cattura del peschereccio interessato."

Tale proposta è molto in linea con la Convenzione sul lavoro nella pesca dell'OIL, C.188, e come tale è sostenuta sia dagli armatori che dai sindacati. Grazie ai loro sforzi, le disposizioni chiave della C.188 dell'OIL sono diventate legge dell'UE nel dicembre 2016 attraverso la Direttiva del Consiglio 2017/159. Gli Stati membri devono conformarsi entro il 15 novembre 2019. Sovvenzionare la sicurezza e condizioni dignitose è anche in linea con gli sforzi per rendere il settore della pesca più attraente per le giovani generazioni. Ma esiste una linea sottile tra l'aumento della capacità di pesca, da un lato, e il miglioramento della sicurezza e delle condizioni di lavoro e di vita a bordo, dall'altro. Il denaro pubblico dovrebbe essere utilizzato per migliorare la sicurezza e le condizioni di lavoro se questo aumenta anche la capacità di pesca? Una disposizione del genere minerebbe la credibilità dell'UE nei negoziati dell'OMC per vietare i sussidi dannosi che contribuiscono alla sovraccapacità, alla pesca eccessiva e alla pesca illegale entro il 2020, in linea con l'Obiettivo di Sviluppo Sostenibile 14.6?

In discussione c'è anche se i pescatori debbano o meno essere indennizzati per la chiusura temporanea delle attività di pesca che li costringono a bloccare le loro imbarcazioni. Queste chiusure forzate comportano una riduzione dei loro mezzi di sostentamento e, se le chiusure si protraggono nel tempo, possono significare la scomparsa e la morte delle loro attività. Una volta che queste piccole imprese falliscono, non c'è modo di farle tornare indietro.

Tuttavia, i pescatori artigianali, in quanto imprenditori autonomi, non hanno diritto all'indennità di disoccupazione durante tali chiusure. Non hanno diritto né hanno chiesto sussidi per compensare la perdita di guadagno durante le chiusure. Preferiscono di gran lunga lavorare in mare che essere disoccupati a terra.. Concordano quindi con le ONG sul fatto che la perdita di guadagno non dovrebbe essere compensata dai sussidi europei. Sono aperti a suggerimenti e assistenza per consentire loro di perseguire alternative valide e di diversificare. LIFE è favorevole a tali chiusure e a qualsiasi alternativa a breve termine alla pesca, devono essere parte integrante dei piani d'azione a livello nazionale per la pesca costiera su piccola scala a basso impatto.g, delineato nella proposta della Commissione.

Tali piani d'azione fornirebbero la base per investire nella sostenibilità del settore e per migliorarne la redditività. Nel 2017 le flotte artigianali di cinque Stati membri hanno subito perdite lorde e in nove Stati membri perdite nette, come riferito dal Comitato scientifico, tecnico ed economico (relazione STECF 2019 AER). Questo dato si confronta con 3 e 5 rispettivamente per le attività di pesca su scala maggiore. Lo CSTEP osserva inoltre che la redditività delle imprese di pesca su piccola scala dipende molto di più dall'aggiunta di valore, rendendo l'accesso al mercato un fattore chiave per la redditività. I pescatori su piccola scala devono vendere il loro pesce sugli stessi mercati utilizzati per le attività di pesca su larga scala, dove la qualità, soprattutto la freschezza, può essere molto diversa. Troppo spesso, gli sbarchi in massa del settore su larga scala trascinano i prezzi sul mercato, rendendo difficile il sostentamento delle piccole imprese.

LIFE chiede quindi che venga fornito un sostegno ai pescatori su piccola scala. di organizzarsi e di creare organizzazioni di produttori (OP). Tali OP si assicurerebbero l'accesso alle risorse attraverso i programmi di riassegnazione delle quote sostenuti dal FEAMP e ai mercati. I piccoli pescatori vedono Non ha senso investire in nuove navi o migliorare le proprie imbarcazioni se non si ha accesso alle risorse. e dei mercati compromette la redditività delle loro imprese. Vorrebbero piuttosto che si investisse in azioni che garantiscano il loro futuro; azioni che assicurino un accesso sostenibile alle risorse e ai mercati. I pescatori artigianali non vogliono pescare di più, ma pescare meglio, privilegiando la qualità rispetto alla quantità.

Riferendo sull'attuale attuazione del FEAMP, la Commissione europea ha osservato che nel complesso il segmento delle flotte di grandi dimensioni ha ricevuto circa 70% di sovvenzioni, mentre 18% sono state destinate al settore delle flotte più piccole (sotto i 12 metri con attrezzi non trainati). Ciò ha creato una distorsione nei mari che deve essere corretta. Il rappresentante della Commissione ha anche osservato che non è giustificato dal punto di vista economico investire fondi pubblici in navi e motori, visti gli ottimi risultati economici della flotta su larga scala. Tali investimenti dovrebbero piuttosto provenire dal settore privato.

Riassumendo, il presidente della Commissione Pesca, Chris Davies, ha osservato che nessun parlamentare è a favore di sussidi dannosi. Secondo il criterio dell'SDG 14.6 dell'OMC, migliorare la sicurezza delle imbarcazioni per garantire la sicurezza dei pescatori non potrebbe essere un male. Tuttavia, non possiamo essere sicuri, ha detto, che le nostre azioni non portino a conseguenze indesiderate.

♦ ♦ ♦

Brian_Commissioner

LIFE incontra il nuovo Commissario

, ,

 

LIFE Meets with Commissioner-designate for the Environment and Oceans, Virginijus Sinkevičius

Fisheries are, and will continue to be, an integral part of the EU’s blue economy – with an essential role to play in decarbonizing the food sector and in food security, LIFE was informed. Small-scale low impact fisheries could play an important role in this regard, and fishers are ready to play their part, LIFE informed the Commissioner-designate.

Brussels, 2nd of October 2019

Low Impact Fishers of Europe (LIFE) were very happy to kick off the month of October with a meeting with the Commissioner-designate for the Environment and Oceans, Virginijus Sinkevičius.

Our wide-ranging discussion covered several issues of concern to the small scale sector, including quota redistribution, the landing obligation, marine spatial planning and inshore fisheries, access to markets, Producer Organisations for small-scale fish producers, fisheries subsidies, the integration of fisheries into the wider blue economy, and last but not least the key role of women all along the value chain.

LIFE emphasised that successive Common Fisheries Policies had failed to grasp the importance of small-scale low impact fisheries and to capitalise on their potential to contribute to sustaining food supplies, livelihoods and the cultural heritage of coastal communities. If treated fairly and supported by effective policies, the latent potential of small-scale low impact fisheries could be mobilized to provide solutions to the problems besetting European fisheries.

The widening focus of the Directorate dealing with Maritime Affairs and Fisheries to Oceans governance and the blue economy potentially has huge implications for fisheries. Not the least of which is rise of aquaculture as the future source of food from the sea.

LIFE and its members are at the disposal of the new European administration to support the three pillars of sustainability – the social, economic and environmental dimensions.

Ulteriori informazioni:

Mission letter of the European Commission: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/mission-letter-virginijus-sinkevicius_en.pdf

Answers to the European Parliament: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/resources/library/media/20190927RES62446/20190927RES62446.pdf

Proposed priorities for the EC Directorates (For DG Mare see page 114 – A Blue Economy Initiative to Combat Climate Change): https://www.politico.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/clean_definite2.pdf

 

♦ ♦ ♦

westmed

Regional Plan of Action for SSFs

,

 

Mediterranean fisheries

RPOA-SSF monitoring framework and priority actions

 

Download it here

 

This document provides a common framework to guide the implementation of the Regional plan of action for small-scale fisheries in the Mediterranean and the Black Sea (RPOA-SSF). For each main section within the RPOA-SSF the document identifies:

–          General indicators to measure progress in implementing the RPOA-SSF over the course of its duration (2018-2028).

–          Topics which are short-termpriorities (2019-2021) for RPOA-SSF implementation. For identified priority topics, a short-term objective has been proposed, as well as specific actions to be undertaken through GFCM bodies (i.e. work plan).

Relevant work that is being/will be carried out by partner organizations (particularly in the context of the Friends of SSF platform, which includes LIFE’s work) has been noted.

This document will be finally approved (with potential slightly modifications from the CPCs) within the framework of the next GFCM Commission to be held in Athens from 4-8th November 2019.

Foto3

Cetaceans-Fisheries Interactions in the Med

, ,

 

LIFE Launches Initiative to Study Cetaceans- Fisheries Interactions

The initiative involves the close collaboration between scientists and fishers,

combining fishers local and experiential knowledge with scientific information in the quest for solutions.

 

Brussels, 9th of September 2019

The month of August saw LIFE and its partners launching an initiative in 3 areas of the Western Mediterranean to document the interaction between small-scale fisheries and cetaceans – in Andalusia, Spain; Sicily, Italy; and in Malta. The project aims to tap into the rich local and experiential knowledge of the fishers to document the extent and severity of interactions with cetaceans, to understand the intensity of the problem, and to propose solutions.

The project is supported by the MAVA Foundation. MAVA has a keen interest in protecting threatened, endangered and sensitive species (TES) and is seeking solutions through engaging with small-scale fishers and promoting exchanges on best practice between them.

The initiative builds on existing collaboration between fishers and scientists in the region, and a successful outcome depends on close cooperation between them. In Sicily, fishing operations will become “floating laboratories” where the interactions will be observed, documented, and analysed by scientists. The initiative also seeks to combine the local and experiential knowledge and data generated by the fishers with the data gathered by the scientists to provide joint solutions reached both parties. This is in line with one of LIFE’s core objectives, which is to document the Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) of small-scale fishers, and to promote its use by scientists and fishery managers in decision taking processes.

A prosperous livelihood from fishing requires safe and secure access to productive fishing grounds and to resources. Meeting these requirements is proving ever more difficult for small-scale fishers, and nowhere more so than in the Mediterranean. Increasingly small-scale fishers must contend with such problems as overfishing, climate change, pollution and invasion of exotic species. They must also compete with predatory marine mammals and birds, which may often be threatened, endangered and sensitive species (TES).

Interactions between birds, mammals and fishers may be as old as fishing itself. However, today such interactions are the cause of critical economic losses to the fishers. These losses include damage caused to their nets, damage caused to their catch, and a potential danger to life and limb.

The study will record incidences of entanglement of cetaceans as by-catch in fishing gears as this may be life threatening, and cause suffering. The results of the study should provide insights into how these and other harmful impacts can be reduced.

The study will produce a better understanding of the problem, and aims to provide information on possible mitigation measures to be used, hopefully moving beyond the use of “pingers”, and to raise awareness among the administrations and decision-makers on the issue and to favour common practical solutions to common problems.

LIFE is also developing a voluntary on-line questionnaire for fishers to complete, to provide details of interactions with cetaceans and of any damage caused, to be posted soon.

The initiative is being   implemented in partnership with the following organizations in the different subareas: Asociación Herpetológica Española (AHE,  https://herpiberica2018.usal.es/sponsor/ahe/) in Spain, the MareCamp Association in Italy ( https://www.marecamp.com/it/) and the Malta College of Arts, Science and Technology (MCAST) in Malta (https://www.mcast.edu.mt/about-mcast/ )

Per maggiori informazioni: download the Concept note of the Interaction between cetaceans and small-scale fishers in the Mediterranean (in English, Spanish, Italian and Maltese).

Concept note in English

Concept note in Spanish

Concept note in Italian

Concept note in Maltese

Looking for cod in the Baltic

, ,

Whither Cod: where have all the codfish gone?

 

Brussels, 28 September 2019

Brian O'Riordan

 

What are the future prospects for fisheries in the Baltic Sea following the collapse of this keystone stock?

 

The time to act is past. LIFE said this in March. We say it again.

We now live effectively in a post-cod era as far as the Eastern Baltic cod stock is concerned. The very survival of cod in the Baltic, the cornerstone for the livelihoods of thousands of fishers for centuries, is under threat.

In October last year LIFE spelled out the essential elements of an Action Plan which went unheeded (https://lifeplatform.eu/action-plan-for-eastern-baltic-cod/). In March this year LIFE called for establishing a biological rest period for the cod pre-spawning and peak spawning time, with a complete closure for all the fisheries targeting cod and pelagic species, the main food for cod, as well as all other fisheries known for significant cod by-catch risk, in subdivisions 25 and 26, between 1 May and 30 September (https://lifeplatform.eu/final-call-for-eastern-baltic-cod/). This also went unheeded.

The stark advice from ICES in May 2019 that there should be zero catch in 2020 of the Eastern Baltic cod stock was quickly followed by the imposition of emergency measures from the European Commission. These measures prohibit European fishing vessels “to fish for cod in ICES subdivisions 24, 25 and 26, and to retain on board, transfer, tranship, process on board or land cod and fisheries products from cod caught in that area” up to December 31 2019. LIFE fully supports these emergency measures.

The preamble to the emergency measures justifies them in grim fashion: “the biomass of eastern Baltic cod is at such a dangerously low level that the stock is no longer able to replenish itself and is hence threatened with collapse, secondly, any continued fishing on that stock increases the risk of its collapse, and, thirdly, the peak spawning season is ongoing."

Meanwhile, for the Western Baltic cod stock, ICES recommended commercial catches in the range of 3 to 5 tonnes for 2020. With the exception of 2017, recruitment has been low since 1999, with 2018 and 2019 the lowest in the time series. The entire fishery depends on a single year class – 2016 – the estimated abundance of which ICES has significantly revised downwards – by 54%. This year class is the most important year class contributing to the catch and the revised estimate is largely responsible “for the 52% decrease in the 2020 catch”, says ICES.

So, what happened to all the cod that ICES reckoned were there last year, when they did their survey?

Wherever they went to, the future prospects for fisheries are not good, given that, according to ICES, the low growth, poor condition, and high natural mortality of cod are related to changes in the ecosystem. These include

  • Poor oxygen conditions that can affect cod directly by altering metabolism and indirectly from a shortage of benthic prey, while also affecting the survival of offspring;
  • Low availability of fish prey in the main distribution area of cod; and
  • High levels of parasite infestations; this is related to an increased abundance of grey seals.

In short, nothing short of an effective ecosystems approach, a fundamental pillar of the CFP, will help the cod. Closing the fishery is a drop in the ocean. In any case, the fish simply aren’t out there for anyone to catch in economic quantities or quality.

In light of this critical situation, Wolfgang Albrecht, a small scale fisherman who is also a founding Director of LIFE, Member of the BSAC /EXCOM , First Chairman Fischereischutzverband Schleswig-Holstein, provided this response on the reform of the CFP. This is one of the inputs informing a theme discussion on the future of the CFP at the ExCom of the Baltic Sea Advisory Council next Tuesday 3 September in Helsinki, at the HELCOM headquarters.

Albrecht calls for significant fleet reductions to be made, for fishing intensity to be reduced, and for the use of non-selective gears like trawling to be substantially reduced. In framing fisheries for the future a new regional policy for the Baltic based on inshore fisheries should be developed, with resource allocation prioritised for those operations that comply with criteria of an environmental, social and economic nature, that go beyond catch history.

Public money for public good, not individual gain!

He calls for a halt to any new finance for new builds from public sources, and a cessation of ongoing subsidies for three consecutive years.

He advocates the following measures:

  1. Restriction of industrial scale fishing of sand eel and sprat.
  2. Displacement of these fishing activities to fishing areas which lie further North.
  3. Reintroduction of seasonal and area-specific Spawning Time Closure (STC) for trawlers
  4. Exception from the STC for small scale fishing activities with vessels up to 12m in length, which deploy only passive gears in water depths of up to 20m.
  5. 50% reduction in the length of nets (passive gear) permitted during the STC to contribute to stock protection.
  6. Scientific involvement and evaluation of these measures.
  7. Abolition of rock hopper fishing to protect rocky grounds and reefs.
  8. Limitation of engine power in trawler fishing to 221KW in the exclusive economic zones of the member states (minimum 12 nautical miles from the coastline).
  9. Same data recording standards for all member states.
  10. Halt all fishing methods which produce more than 2% by-catch.
  11. Replacement / access for bottom-set net fisheries only after tasking existing operations with passive catch equipment 1:1.
  12. Hardship compensation by means of temporary financial support of affected vessels by means of he EMFF.
  13. Research into the damaging effects of trawl fishing during the cod’s spawning season on reproduction levels including the results of studies which are already available.
  14. When imposing any restrictions “the polluter pays principle” should be the guiding principle applied.

MORE INFORMATION:

Proposal for a reform of the CFP by Wolfgang Albrecht (German)

Proposal for a reform of the CFP by Wolfgang Albrecht (English)

♦ ♦ ♦

Expulsion of Beam Trawlers from the Skagerrak (DK).

, ,

 

Danish Low Impact Small-scale Fishers

Call for the Expulsion of Destructive Beam Trawlers from the Skagerrak.

 

 Protestors occupy Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Copenhagen over the invasion of the destructive Dutch beam trawl fleet. 

 

Copenhagen, August 28, 2019: This morning a group of small-scale coastal fishermen from Hanstholm, Thorupstrand, Løkken, Hirtshals and Skagen in northern Jutland occupied the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Copenhagen, the national authority responsible for fisheries. Their goal is to draw attention to an environmental disaster taking place in the Skagerrak, and to demand the expulsion of the destructive Dutch beam trawl fleet that is causing it.

Normally the Dutch beam trawl fleet fishes in the Southern North Sea, but they started to invade the 3 years ago. This year their numbers have been increasing due to poor catches of sole further South along with the banning of electric pulse fishing.  Some pulse vessel owners decided convert to twin rig beam trawling and relocate to the Skaggerak in search of better fishing. The status of plaice and sole stocks in the southern North Sea is a cause for concern, with Dutch pulse vessels and beam trawlers only able to catch between 60% and 70% of their quotas.

The Danish fishermen are calling for an immediate halt to the destruction of the marine environment and their fishing grounds; they demand that the Skagerrak is closed to beam trawling.

Having depleted resources in the Southern North Sea, Dutch beam trawlers have now shifted their attention to the Skagerrak. The twin rigged trawls may measure up to 12 metres wide and weigh up to 9 tonnes. These trawlers are systematically ravaging the seabed in the Skagerrak, making it impossible for local small scale fishermen to fish and transforming the fishing grounds into a desert.

"We simply can’t make a living any more. The seabed is being destroyed and the fish are gone. Now the responsible authorities must act, “ says Jesper Olsen, fisherman from Thorupstrand and spokesperson for the fishermen.

“Beam trawlers must leave Skagerrak for good. Neither the fish and the marine environment nor the small scale fishermen will survive if they stays”, says Henry Fjord, fisherman from Hanstholm. CONTACT:

Jesper Olsen, 0045 3092 3656

Thomas Højrup, chairman of the Co-operative Thorupstrand Costal Fishing Guild: 0045 5129 9049

Notes:

Beam trawling is one of the least selective and most destructive fishing methods. Using heavy chains to dig through the seafloor to force the fish into the net. After prolonged dragging only starfish and small dabs are left alive, leaving the fishing grounds covered with wounded and dead fish, and causing a major loss of biodiversity. The Dutch government, backed by EU subsidies, encouraged the beam trawl fleet to convert to electric pulse fishing without any prior impact assessment. In January 2018, the European Parliament voted to ban pulse fishing, and this should have been phased out.

A ban on the use of electric pulse gear and overfishing on plaice and sole in the southern North Sea has prompted these vessels to convert to twin rig beam trawling and relocate to Skagerrak.

The fishermen also suspect the beam trawlers of fishing above their quota. Therefore, they demand that a checkpoint is set up in Hanstholm so that authorities can check whether the trawlers’ catches are within the allowable quotas. Danish small-scale fishermen also believe that the quota for plaice in Skagerrak should be reduced.

The coastal fishermen plan to remain in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs until they have been promised that a checkpoint will be set up in Hanstholm. They have a meeting with the Minister of Food, Fisheries and Gender Equality Mogens Jensen (S) at. 15.00 today, and have also invited the Minister of the Environment Lea Wermelin (S), other members of parliament, the press and NGOs to visit the delegation of fishermen.

Caricare di più

ISCRIVITI ALLA NOSTRA NEWSLETTER

* indica i requisiti necessari
it_ITItalian
en_GBEnglish hrCroatian nl_NLDutch fr_FRFrench de_DEGerman elGreek pl_PLPolish ro_RORomanian es_ESSpanish maMaltese it_ITItalian