DG MARE Lot 2: Retrospective and prospective evaluation on the common fisheries policy, excluding its international dimension Ref.

Transcription

1 Ref. Ares(2014) /05/2014 DG MARE Lot 2: Retrospective and prospective evaluation on the common fisheries policy, excluding its international dimension Ref. No MARE/2011/01 Specific Contract No. 5: STUDY IN SUPPORT OF THE REVIEW OF THE EU REGIME ON THE SMALL-SCALE DRIFTNET FISHERIES Appendix 4.2: Denmark Case Study Report May 8 th, 2014

2

3 Project no: ZF1455_S06 Issue ref: FinalV002 Date of issue: 08/05/2014 Prepared by: MS Checked/Approved by: RM Evaluation of driftnet fisheries Danish Case study report Page i

4 Content 0 Introduction Case Study Consultations Previous driftnet fleets Fleet trends Fishery characteristics Social and economic characteristics Sustainability of fisheries Current driftnet fleets National Monitoring, Control and Surveillance of driftnet fleets...11 Literature cited...12 Annex 1 Stakeholders consulted...13 Evaluation of driftnet fisheries Danish Case study report Page ii

5 0 Introduction At the time of this study driftnet fisheries had not taken place in Denmark since 1 st January This case study regards the previous driftnet fishery for salmon (Salmo salar) and sea trout (Salmo trutta) in the Baltic Sea. The main information and data sources for driftnet fisheries in Denmark are fleet register data and landings data from the Danish AgriFish Agency and data gathered in various studies conducted by scientific bodies, especially ICES. Detailed and precise information on basic data was unavailable as the database does not distinguish between vessels fishing with driftnet and vessels fishing with other passive gear e.g. for cod. Precise data regarding the in-year distribution of vessel effort in driftnet fisheries compared to other fisheries were not available either. The Danish AgriFish Agency has the single national responsibility for management, statistics and control. DTU Aqua has the single responsibility for science and advice related to fisheries management in Denmark. Interviewed persons here could only provide sparse information in addition to the hard data gathered. The driftnet ban took effect in 2008 and since then no Danish vessels have fished with driftnet. On this background, the fisheries organisations and the fishermen provided limited information on the data regarding the fisheries and limited information on effects of the ban implemented more than 5 years ago. In the relevant period the Danish fisheries were influenced by substantial changes in management, including the introduction of TFC s and a ban on landing for salmon due to dioxin problems. It has not been possible to assess the individual effects of this. 0.1 Case Study Consultations Initial information on driftnet fisheries in Denmark was provided by The Danish AgriFish Agency revealing that driftnet fishing in Denmark was small scale although economically important for a couple of harbours on the island of Bornholm in the Baltic. Consultations were arranged with The Danish AgriFish Agency, DTU Aqua and the relevant fisheries organisations. This organisation furthermore provided contacts for relevant fishermen to be interviewed. Evaluation of driftnet fisheries Danish Case study report Page 3

6 Table 1: Breakdown of Stakeholder Consultations Denmark Case Study/Type of Organisation Research Control & Management Producer Organisation/ Fisher Association Fisher/Exfisher NGO/Other Total No of Organisations Consulted No. of Consultations with Individuals No. of Focus Group Consultations (Nos. involved in each) Note. Two of the persons representing organisations count as fishers too. Page 4 Evaluation of driftnet fisheries Danish Case study report

7 1 Previous driftnet fleets Danish fishermen have traditionally been fishing with driftnet for salmon (Salmo salar) and sea trout (Salmo trutta) only. The fishery has for the past 25 years been confined to the Baltic Sea. 1.1 Fleet trends The Danish fleet fishing from the island of Bornholm in the Baltic changed considerably in the period Changes were mainly caused by a new management system of transferable fishing concessions (TFC) in 2007, changes in stock abundance, the ban for drift net and the EU regulation on dioxin limits. The stakeholders consulted has not been able to give an account of the effect of the individual causes. The development in the fleet of vessels fishing for salmon can be seen in Table 2, 2 and 3 below. The Danish fleet register does not distinguish between various types of passive gear, thus the tables include vessels fishing for demersal species with fixed gill net. Table 2. Total number of vessels registered and fishing with static gear from Bornholm in the Baltic and number of crew Vessels Crew Vessels Crew Vessels Crew Vessels Crew Total Number of vessels Number of vessels fishing with static gear Number of vessels fishing with static gear only for salmon Not available Source: The Danish AgriFish Agency Table 3 and Table 4 shows the length and kw distribution of vessels fishing with static gear in the Baltic. Table 3. The fleet fishing from Bornholm with gill net, drift net and longline Length o.a Number of vessels Number of vessels Number of vessels meter meter meter meter Total Source: The Danish AgriFish Agency Table 4. The fleet fishing from Bornholm with gill net, drift net and longline Max. kilowatt Number of vessels Number of vessels Number of vessels kilowatt kilowatt kilowatt Over kilowatt Total Source: The Danish AgriFish Agency Evaluation of driftnet fisheries Danish Case study report Page 5

8 Table 5 shows the number of salmon fishing vessels fishing from Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Latvia from according to the report from Finnish Game and Fisheries Research Institute Data analysis to support the development of a Baltic sea salmon action plan (SI , FISH/2007/03)2009). The fishery was conducted with drift nets as well as hook and long line. Table 5. Number of vessels in Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Latvia according to activity (SI , FISH/2007/03) Danish fishing for salmon and sea trout in the Baltic peaked with 30 vessels in 2003 and declined to a low 7 vessels in 2006 increasing to 12 in the year preceding the ban. Only a smaller share of these were active vessels with more than 60 fishing days per year. Vessel lengths were typically 5-15 meters according to the stakeholders consulted. The driftnet fleet ceased to exist from 2008, some vessels were scrapped, some vessels changed to fishing salmon by long line and some vessels changed to cod and plaice fishing with trawl or gillnet. There is no account of the specific changes in the vessels activities, and the information is based on stakeholder s assessment of the development. The salmon fleet were halved in the period following the COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 684/2004 of 13 April 2004 forbidding salmon with high dioxin content to be sold for human consumption. The dioxin limits resulted in salmon above 4.4 kilos or 72 cm, being categorised as unfit for human consumption. Denmark introduced transferable fishing concessions (TFC) 1st January Vessels affected by the dioxin regulation were offered quotas for cod as a compensation for lost revenue. In context of the TFC introduction a general scrapping scheme was offered to fishermen, including vessels fishing for salmon. There is no account of the number of driftnet vessels that made use of these two schemes. Page 6 Evaluation of driftnet fisheries Danish Case study report

9 In ICES : WGBAST REPORT 2012, the general conclusion of the effects of the drift net ban was the following: The disappearance of the driftnet fishery in 2008 initially had a considerable effect on the fishery. Driftnet fishery was conducted by vessels having specialized in using driftnets in the autumn and spring and some of them fished with longlines in the winter months Fishery characteristics The main target species in the Baltic are cod, herring, sprat and salmon (Salmo salar) or sea trout (Salmo trutta). Species are managed by TAC s in tonnes for the first three and in pieces for salmon/sea trout, and TAC s are allocated to Member States according to relative stability. Prior to the accession of Baltic States to EU, the TAC/quotas were agreed in the Baltic Sea Fisheries Commission and subsequently allocated in EU by EU council decision. The setting of TAC s and technical measures were based on scientific advice provided by ICES. From the Danish side DTU Aqua were and is, responsible for the Danish science input. Danish fishermen targeted salmon/ sea trout mainly in the Eastern Baltic sub area The fishery was managed and controlled by the Danish authorities in accordance with EU guidelines. Quotas were not exceeded by Danish fishermen. The catches of the most important species can be seen from Table 6 below Table 6. Danish landings of Bornholm vessels landed in Bornholm harbours Species Live weight Value Live weight Value Live weight Value (kg) (1.000 DKK) (kg) (1.000 DKK) (kg) (1.000 DKK) Sea Trout 4, Salmon 333,749 4,137 20, ,051 3,466 Cod 7,125,980 62,992 5,832,342 67,613 6,370,146 45,943 Source: The Danish AgriFish Agency The fishery was conducted from September to December mainly with driftnet of a length of typically from 10 kilometres to 20 kilometres and a depth around 5 meters according to stakeholders consulted. Longlining was also common. There is no official account of the frequency of use of driftnet respectively longlining or of gear configuration. The fish was landed in a number of ports, mainly on Bornholm but also in other Baltic harbours, as can be seen for Table 7 below. Table 7. Landing ports with landed salmon/sea trout of more than 2,000 kilos in 2007 and 2012 Landing port 2007 Live weight (kg) 2012 Live weight (kg) Årsdale, Bornholm 11,603 29,476 Nexø, Bornholm 9,570 18,644 Rønne Bornholm 4,655 7,426 Stubbekøbing, Falster 3,805. Køge, Zealand 3,342 2,775 Christiansø, Bornholm 2,877 12,052 Kalundborg, Zealand 2, Reersø Zealand 2, Hasle, Bornholm ,734 Tejn, Bornholm 193 6,120 Evaluation of driftnet fisheries Danish Case study report Page 7

10 Source: The Danish AgriFish Agency The drift nets used were normally of the monofilament type with a mesh size of 80 mm, a length of 20 meters and a depth of 5 meters. The nets were set in rows of typically 100 nets per row and a total number of nets of equal to kilometres. A detailed analysis of the fishery was made for 2001 by DTU Aqua (Danmarks Fiskeriundersøgelser, ISBN: DFU-rapport ). It showed an autumn catch ration of 26 salmon per 100 net and 66 salmon per hooks. The average amount of nets used for one set was 529, and the average amount of hooks for one set In 2001 there were made 290 sets of drift nets and 553 sets of hooks. There is no account of the reasons for the hook fishery, but as it is easier to change the fishing depths of hooks, these may be used more efficiently in periods or areas where the salmon swim deeper than 5 meters. 22 Danish vessels participated in the Baltic salmon fishery in 2001 according to the report. The effort was as follows: 9 vessels fished 1-9 days, 2 vessels fished days, 2 vessels fished days, 4 vessels fished days, 2 vessels fished days, 3 vessels fished more than 80 days. The highest number of days was 138. All in all the 22 vessels had 843 fishing days in The fishery was a clean fishery with no by catches. By catches of harbour porpoise were not registered and not encountered according to interviews conducted with fishermen and the fisheries organisation. The development of the entire Baltic driftnet and hook fishery in the period can be seen from Figure 1 below Figure 1. Development in driftnet and hook fishery. Fishing effort calculated as gear days (ICES WGBAST Report 2008) The development in Baltic catches of salmon can be seen in Figure 2 below. Page 8 Evaluation of driftnet fisheries Danish Case study report

11 Figure 2. Development in tonnes of salmon caught for Baltic States (SI , FISH/2007/03) Social and economic characteristics According to the fishermen s organisation (Bornholms og Christiansøs Fiskeriforening) Fishermen suffered an economic loss due to the ban and need to leave the fishery or invest in new gear. The interviewed fisherman stated he would resume driftnet for salmon if the ban was lifted. There is no public account of the economic and social consequences of the ban Sustainability of fisheries The Agreement on the Conservation of Small Cetaceans of the Baltic and North Seas (ASCOBANS) was concluded in 1991 under the auspices of the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (UNEP/CMS or Bonn Convention) and entered into force in The aim of the Agreement is to promote close cooperation amongst parties with a view to achieving and maintaining a favourable conservation status for small cetaceans in the entire Agreement area. In 2002 ASCOBANS declared the third Sunday in May of each year as the International Day of the Baltic Harbour Porpoise in order to raise awareness of the critical situation of the populations of harbour porpoises native to the Baltic Sea. Following the discussions regarding the status and need for protection of the harbour porpoise, EU adopted COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 2187/2005 which prohibited the use of driftnet in the Baltic from 1 January In the discussions on the basis for the ban Commissioner Joe Borg 22 nd February answered the European Parliament: In the past, Harbour porpoises used to occur in the Baltic Sea but the population has been declining significantly over recent decades and is today considered endangered. Harbour porpoises are now rare in the Baltic Sea. The incidental entanglement of harbour porpoise in fishing gear, particularly driftnets, has been identified as the main threat to the population in the Baltic Sea, inhibiting any possible recovery of this population. Significant bycatches of harbour porpoises in the salmonid drift net fishery along the Polish Coast were reported until the late 1990(1). The Subgroup on Fishery and Environment (SGFEN) of the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF) recommended a prohibition of drift nets in their report in 2002(2). Data for recent years indeed show that there have not been any cetacean by-catches reported in the years 2005 or later. This Evaluation of driftnet fisheries Danish Case study report Page 9

12 corresponds, however, to the low status of the population and the resulting limitation of its distribution to the Western Baltic. Harbour porpoises have full protection status under Community legislation and the drift net ban is considered an essential measure to allow for the recovery of the harbour porpoise population in the Baltic Sea. While a full drift net ban has been implemented in other European waters already since 2002, a gradual approach was accepted by the Commission for the Baltic Sea, Experts now estimate that the number of harbour porpoise in Baltic Sea amounts to just 100 individuals. They consider the conservation prospects very bad according to the workshop on The Harbour Porpoise of the Baltic Sea (Warzaw, October 2012). The workshop identified the main threats to the harbour porpoise as follows: by-catch, chemical pollution, noise, disturbances, collisions, climate changes and fluctuations impacting the environment, changes in the food source. An account of the sustainability effect of the drift net ban on harbour porpoise was not made. Sustainability in relation to salmon was somewhat reduced following the ban due to increased catches of undersized salmon (ICES) Due to the driftnet ban in 2008 the harvest rate of feeding salmon decreased to about one third. Since then the longline fishing has increased. The share of discarded minimum size salmon is most likely to be larger in the present offshore longline fishery than in the past driftnet fishery. In the Danish offshore fishing in undersized salmon in longline catches varied between 1.7% and 20.3% (mean 11.5%), whereas in the driftnet catch the mean percentage of salmon smaller than 60 cm was 3% (ICES WGBAST REPORT 2012) Page 10 Evaluation of driftnet fisheries Danish Case study report

13 2 Current driftnet fleets No driftnet fleets exist in Denmark, according to the Danish AgriFish Agency, and Bornholms og Christiansøs Fiskeriforening National Monitoring, Control and Surveillance of driftnet fleets According to the Danish AgriFish Agency the driftnet ban in the Baltic Sea is an absolute ban. It is easy to monitor and control. Control takes place in context of other control duties, and the cost and number of controls is not accounted for. No infringements have been encountered. Evaluation of driftnet fisheries Danish Case study report Page 11

14 Literature cited COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 684/2004 of 13 April 2004 Danmarks Fiskeriundersøgelser, Afd. for Ferskvandsfiskeri, 8600 Silkeborg Dansk laksefiskeri i Østersøen 2001, Status for forsøg med forsinket udsatte laks ved Bornholm og Møn Af Frank Ivan Hansen og Stig Pedersen ISBN: DFU-rapport Finnish Game and Fisheries Research Institute DATA ANALYSIS TO SUPPORT THE DEVELOPMENT OF A BALTIC SEA SALMON ACTION PLAN (2009) SI , FISH/2007/03 Lot 6 ICES WGBAST REPORT 2008 ICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE ICES CM 2008/ACOM:05 Report of the Baltic Salmon and Trout Assessment Working Group (WGBAST) ICES WGBAST REPORT 2012, ICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE, ICES CM 2012/ACOM:08, REF. ACOM, PGCCDBS Summary report, WWF Workshop and Conference The Harbour Porpoise of the Baltic Sea. Warsaw, October 2012 The Danish AgriFish Agency Dynamic statistical tables. Page 12 Evaluation of driftnet fisheries Danish Case study report

15 Annex 1 Stakeholders consulted Organisation/name DTU Aqua, Jørgen Dalskov, Senior advisor Organisation Type &/or Role in Organisation research Type of consultation and assistance provided Questionaire and telephone consultation; Salmon and Sea trout fisheries Date of Consultation July/August 2013 Danish AgriFish Agency Mik Jensen, inspector,, responsible for in government management and control Questionaire and telephone consultation; Salmon and Sea trout fisheries July/August 2013 Danish AgriFish Agency Troels Pade, Statistician Skagen Fiskeriforening Carl Jesper Hermansen, Chairman, former fisherman and now chairman of the fisheries organization in Skagen. Statictics Fisheries organisation Mail and telephone consultation; Salmon and Sea trout fisheries telephone consultation; Mackerel, salmon and Sea trout fisheries July/August 2013 July/August 2013 Bornholms og Christiansøs Fiskeriforening Hans Madsen, Advisor Bornholms og Christiansøs Fiskeriforening Thomas Thomsen, Fisher and chairman Vessel Tina R 48, Henning Finne, Fisheries organisation Fisheries organisation typical salmon fisher telephone consultation; salmon and Sea trout fisheries telephone consultation; salmon and Sea trout fisheries telephone consultation; salmon and Sea trout fisheries July/August 2013 July/August 2013 July/August 2013 Evaluation of driftnet fisheries Danish Case study report Page 13