The text annexed hereto has been received by the General Secretariat of the Council in English only. 5583/03 fp 1 DG B III

Transcription

1 COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION Brussels, 22 January /3 PECHE 25 COVER NOTE 1 from : the Secretary-General of the European Commission signed by Mr Sylvain BISARRE, Director date of receipt : 21 January 23 to : Mr Javier SOLANA, Secretary-General/High Representative Subject : Commission Staff Working Paper "Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries - SubGroup on Balance between Resources and their Exploitation - Report : Investigating the Scientific basis for a follow up to the fourth generation of Multi-annual Guidance Programmes (MAGP IV) 3e meeting (Brussels, November 21)" Delegations will find attached Commission document SEC(23) 74. Encl.: SEC(23) 74 1 The text annexed hereto has been received by the General Secretariat of the Council in English only. 5583/3 fp 1 DG B III EN

2 COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES Brussels, SEC(23) 74 COMMISSION STAFF WORKING PAPER THE SCIENTIFIC, TECHNICAL AND ECONOMIC COMMITTEE FOR FISHERIES SUBGROUP ON BALANCE BETWEEN RESOURCES AND THEIR EXPLOITATION REPORT Investigating the Scientific basis for a follow up to the fourth generation of Multi-annual Guidance Programmes ( MAGP IV). 3 Meeting Brussels, November 21 1

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE Summary INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND TO THE MEETING TERMS OF REFERENCE PARTICIPANTS REVIEW OF THE REPORTS OF THE 1 ST AND 2 ND MEETINGS ON THE SCIENTIFIC BASIS FOR A FOLLOW UP TO MAGP IV THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CAPACITY AND DEPLOYED FISHING EFFORT THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN FISHING EFFORT AND FISHING MORTALITY TRENDS IN FISHING EFFICIENCY MODELS FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF FISHING CAPACITY FURTHER EVALUATIONS AND CASE STUDIES ON THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN CAPACITY, FISHING EFFORT AND FISHING MORTALITY CASE STUDY OF PALMA DE MALLORCA DEMERSAL TRAWL FLEET THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN FISHING CAPACITY, FISHING EFFORT AND FISHING MORTALITY IN THE ADRIATIC SEA Mid-water pair trawl fishery for small pelagic fish Rapido trawl fishery Small-scale fishery of common sole using gillnets CASE STUDY OF NORTHWESTERN MEDITERRANEAN TRAWL FISHERIES TARGETING HAKE INFLUENCE OF TRENDS IN FISHING POWER ON BIO-ECONOMICS IN THE NORTH SEA FLATFISH FISHERY REGULATED BY CATCHES- OR BY EFFORT QUOTAS SUMMARY OF CASE STUDIES ON THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN FISHING CAPACITY, FISHING EFFORT AND FISHING MORTALITY: THE NETHERLANDS, DENMARK, FRANCE AND THE UK Introduction Material and methods Results Conclusions DECOMMISSIONING AND EFFICIENCY Efficiency and decommissioning, UK English Channel fleet Efficiency and decommissioning, Dutch beam trawl fleet REVIEW OF ALTERNATIVE MANAGEMENT INSTRUMENTS AND THE MANAGEMENT OF CAPACITY INTRODUCTION CAPACITY MANAGEMENT INSTRUMENTS Input controls Output controls USER CHARGES ALLOCATION SYSTEMS COMPREHENSIVE REVIEWS OF ALTERNATIVE MANAGEMENT INSTRUMENTS AND THE MANAGEMENT OF CAPACITY EXPERIENCES IN THE EU Denmark Netherlands The UK capacity management system Mediterranean REVIEW OF BIO-ECONOMIC MODELS TO EVALUATE THE MANAGEMENT OF FISHING CAPACITY THE EIAA MODEL AND OVER-CAPACITY ESTIMATORS Introduction Available economic information

4 5.1.3 Estimates of economic sustainability and overcapacity Conclusion REVIEW AND EVALUATION OF EXISTING BIOECONOMIC MODELS FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF FISHING FLEETS Introduction Bioeconomic modelling of EU fisheries Applicability of current EU models Conclusions ANALYSIS OF TECHNICAL INTERACTIONS BETWEEN FISHING FLEETS IN THE ENGLISH CHANNEL MEFISTO, A BIO-ECONOMIC MODEL FOR THE MEDITERRANEAN FISHERIES GLOSSARY OF TERMS USED IN THIS REPORT REFERENCES ANNEX 1 CASE STUDIES ON THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN FISHING CAPACITY, FISHING EFFORT AND FISHING MORTALITY: ADRIATIC SEA ANNEX 2 RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN CAPACITY, EFFORT AND FISHING MORTALITY WITH REGARD TO COD, HAKE AND OTHERS ANNEX 3 APPROACHES TO EFFORT MANAGEMENT DISCUSSION PAPER ANNEX 4 MANAGEMENT MODELS WITH RESPECT TO FISHING CAPACITY. AA.VV. NOTE PREPARED FOR THE STECF PLENARY SESSION MEETING OF APRIL 2-6, ANNEX 5 MEFISTO, MEDITERRANEAN FISHERIES SIMULATION TOOL: A BIO- ECONOMIC MODEL FOR MEDITERRANEAN FISHERIES ANNEX 6 MEFISTO CASE STUDY 1: THE HAKE (MERLUCCIUS MERLUCCIUS) OF CATALONIA (GULF OF THE LION) ANNEX 7 MEFISTO CASE STUDY 2: THE SARDINE (SARDINA PILCHARDUS) AND THE ANCHOVY (ENGRAULIS ENCRASICHOLUS) OF TARRAGONA ANNEX 8 MEFISTO CASE STUDY 3: THE SARDINE (SARDINA PILCHARDUS) AND THE ANCHOVY (ENGRAULIS ENCRASICHOLUS) OF MÁLAGA ANNEX 9 PARTICIPANTS LIST WITH COMPLETE ADDDRESS

5 Executive Summary This is the last in a series of three meeting reports of the STECF-SGBRE Expert Working Group convened to advise the Commission on the Scientific basis for a follow-up to MAGP IV. The series of meetings were set up to attempt to provide answers to the following questions, which also served as Terms of Reference: 1. Has there been a direct clear link between fishing capacity (however it is measured) and deployed fishing effort (however it is measured) in the past? 2. Are there clear examples where various levels of deployed fishing effort can be related to observed exploitation rates? 3. To what extent have other factors (technological improvements, environmental changes biological interactions or economic factors) affected such relationships. 4. How does fleet capacity grow and decrease? What are the main factors that explain fleet dynamics? 5. Which managerial models can be used to administer fishing capacity in an efficient way? The first of the series of meetings was held in Brussels from October 2. The report of that meeting was reviewed by STECF at its November 2 plenary meeting SEC(21)177. The second meeting of the Sub-group took place from January 21 and the Report SEC(21) 1194 was reviewed by STECF during its April 21 Plenary meeting SEC(21)1581. The third meeting scheduled for February 21, was postponed to November 21. At its first two meetings, the Expert Group reviewed existing literature and case studies on the relationships between fleet capacity, deployed fishing effort and observed exploitation rates and in addition, carried out original investigations, using data for specific fishing fleets in the north-east Atlantic and Mediterranean. Taking into account the findings in the first two meeting reports, the terms of reference for the third meeting were modified in an attempt to focus the Group s attention on specific issues. The Terms of Reference for the third meeting were as follows: 1. Review the reports of the first two meetings and summarise the findings on the relationship between capacity, fishing effort and fishing mortality. 2. Wherever possible, provide further examples of the above relationships with regard to fisheries and areas not yet addressed by the group. 3. Describe the relationships above in relation to hake and cod stocks in the northeast Atlantic. 4. Describe in more detail the pros and cons of the various alternative management models (sensu instruments) using both observations and theory. 5. Review existing different bio-economic models, discuss and identify which are most suitable and applicable for evaluating the management of fleet capacity. 3

6 6. Consider the options to evaluating the effectiveness of different capacity management instruments or combinations using one or more of the existing bioeconomic models. The Expert group reviewed the reports of the first two meetings. The report of the first meeting SEC (21) 177 concluded that the relationship between capacity, effort and observed exploitation rates are complex and depend on a large variety of factors. The Group also concluded that if such relationships can be demonstrated, they are likely to be highly fleet-specific, and suggested that an appropriate fleet segmentation is a fundamental requirement to establishing the relationships. The report further concluded that there is a lack of case studies for major fleets that are currently subject to MAGPs and that future efforts should be focussed on fleets or fleet segments that are deemed to be important for MAGPs. At its second meeting (SEC(21) 1194), the expert group continued to examine case studies and undertake evaluations addressing the relationships between fishing capacity, fishing effort and exploitation rates and also began to address which managerial models can be used to administer fishing capacity in an efficient manner. Data and case studies were evaluated for the following fleets: The Palma, Majorca trawl fleet in the Mediterranean Italian trawl fleets in the Ligurian and North Tyrrhenian Seas The French purse seine fishery for bluefin tuna in the Mediterranean The Dutch beam trawl fleet in the North Sea The Danish Demersal fleets in the North Sea The Third meeting addressed additional case studies on the relationship between capacity, effort and fishing mortality for the following fleets. i. The Demersal trawl fleet of Palma de Mallorca ii. Three fleets operating in the Adriatic sea viz: iii. The Western Mediterranean fleets targeting hake iv. Trends in fishing power on bio-economics in the North Sea flatfish fishery regulated by catches- or by effort quotas v. The relationships between fishing capacity, fishing effort and fishing mortality for fleets from The Netherlands, Denmark, France and the UK. Main Findings The Demersal trawl fleet of Palma de Mallorca For the Palma de Mallorca trawl fleet a strong direct relationships between effort expressed as days fishing and capacity expressed as landed weight (an output measure) was demonstrated. Fleets in the Adriatic Three fleets in the central and northern Adriatic Sea were examined. The mid-water pair trawl fleet for small pelagic fishes (sardines and anchovies), 4

7 The rapido trawl fleet for common sole (Solea vulgaris) The small-scale fishery for common sole using gillnets. For the mid-water pair trawl fleet exploiting sardine and anchovy, there is a weak relationship between fishing effort and fishing mortality for both species. For the rapido trawl fleet, a highly significant correlation was found between fishing capacity (kw, GRT and number of vessels) and fishing activity expressed as total fishing days at sea. In addition, the relationship between fishing capacity in terms of overall kw and GRT and the effective fishing effort standardised as days at sea x kw or GRT also was highly significant. For the small scale gillnet fishery for common sole, the relationship between fishing capacity expressed as overall length of gillnet deployed at sea and nominal fishing effort (fishing activity) expressed as days at sea x number of vessels was highly significant, indicating that on average each vessel deploys the same amount of net per day. In addition, the relationship between output capacity expressed as catch and effort expressed either as days at sea x number of vessels or km of net deployed was highly significant. The western Mediterranean trawl fleets Results of modelling the north-western Mediterranean trawl fisheries for hake showed that vessel identity was the main factor affecting hake catch rates. Among the vessel characteristics, size was the best descriptor of fishing power in the selected trawl fleets. Trends in fishing power on bio-economics in the North Sea flatfish fishery. An evaluation of the trends in fishing power on bio-economics in the North Sea flatfish fishery regulated by catch or effort quotas, indicated that the harvest control rule proposed under the Precautionary Approach appears to be very restrictive with the current stock situation. Furthermore, the results indicate that if this approach been strictly applied during the 199s either through effort (TAE) or catch (TAC) controls, it would have induced enhanced biological status of the stocks but have resulted in major economic losses in the short term. Overall results from this study suggested that, in a multi-species multi-fleet fishery, there are wide biological and economic differences expected when implementing the same management rules with different management tools. TACs and TAEs have different benefits and drawbacks. In particular, regarding catchability, TAEs are more sensitive to a bias induced by mis-specifying the relationship between effort and mortality. Furthermore, not accounting for trends in fishing power due to technological developments, increases the risk of underestimating F and overestimating SSB. The relationships between fishing capacity, fishing effort and fishing mortality for fleets from The Netherlands, Denmark, France and the UK 5

8 The group carried out further investigations on the relationship between fishing capacity, fishing effort and fishing mortality using up-dated information for selected Dutch and Danish fleets. In addition, data on UK and French fleets were also evaluated. The overall conclusions are that with respect to target species the fishing efficiency of some of the fleets under examination appears to have increased over the period of investigation. However, in some cases decreasing trends have been observed. Fishing efficiency of most fleets under investigation has decreased between 1999 and 2. The efficiency of the English fleets harvesting hake appears to have decreased over the whole period of investigation. The reason for these observed trends are still unclear. Decreasing trends in fishing efficiency may be related to TACs being more restrictive or species being less available. On the other hand, increases in efficiency may be due to either changes in the technical characteristics and/or ability of the crew, but may also be influenced by the allocation of ITQs among vessels (e.g. Dutch beam trawlers). The measure of engine power (HP, kw) to standardise fishing effort appears only useful for fisheries that are energy-intensive, e.g. those requiring engine power for pulling the gear over the bottom. In such cases (e.g. beam and otter trawling) a positive relationship exists between engine power and the proxy for fishing capacity. Gross tonnage (GRT) does not appear to be a relevant measure of fishing capacity for fleets using towed gears but it does seem to be a better proxy for gill-netters, possibly because larger boats can carry more nets. Using alternative measures of fishing effort for the English fleets did not significantly alter the results, except for gill-netters, where using net size as a measure of fishing effort modified the perception of fishing power. However, the fit between partial F and effort was never substantially improved. Improvements of the fit between partial F and effort were brought about by standardising fishing effort by horsepower for trawlers, and by gross tonnage for gillnetters. Standardising fishing effort by efficiency trends only enhanced the fit in one case: the Danish gill-netters harvesting plaice. The results indicate that in most of the case studies, the relationship between fishing effort and fishing mortality is more dependent on which capacity measure is used than on whether efficiency trends are accounted for. Decommissioning and efficiency An evaluation of the effects of decommissioning on efficiency highlights the inappropriateness of using physical capacity units for both the measurement of fishing capacity and the basis of capacity reduction programmes. While the latter is to some extent essential from a pragmatic management perspective, managers need to take into account differences in efficiency of the boats when implementing decommissioning programmes. That is, it needs to be recognised removing x% of the fleet will not equate to a x% reduction in output. 6

9 A key result of the study relates not to the effects of management per se, but to the effects of boat replacement on the harvesting capability of the fleet. Introducing newer, larger vessels increases the harvesting potential of the fleet. The importance of vintage to the level of technical efficiency has a substantial implication for the management of EU fisheries, and the North Sea fisheries in particular. New vessels are able to incorporate new design technologies that improve their performance. Under the MAGPs, countries that achieve their capacity reductions can assist in the modernisation of their fleet. As noted above, replacing older vessels with new vessels will increase the level of technical efficiency in the fleet, and again distort the balance between catching capacity and catch. Moreover, as larger boats were found to be more efficient than smaller boats, replacing even two old smaller boats with one new larger boat with the same overall physical capacity may result in a substantial efficiency increase. When assistance is provided to replace ageing fleets, the resultant increase in efficiency may more than offset any reduction in capacity and nominal effort arising from the MAGP. A further implication of the results is that decreasing fleet size through policies such as the MAGP to bring it back into balance with the stocks may result in increased harvesting efficiency through decreased crowding. While economic benefits are likely to derive from such a policy as a result of the reduction in overall resource used in fishing, the conservation benefits may be less than anticipated. Review of different instruments to manage capacity The Expert group reviewed several different management instruments and provides a commentary on each in turn. The review categorises the different instruments according to whether they are input or output measures The different instruments evaluated are as follows: Input controls: Licence limitations (limited entry management) Unitisation schemes Decommissioning and buyback schemes Limitations on activity Technical controls on vessels Output controls Total allowable catches (TACs) Individual quotas In addition the Report discusses the merits of user charges as an alternative approach to input or output controls i.e. to change the costs or benefits of fishing through imposing a charge for use to the resource, either on inputs or outputs. The report also discusses different allocation systems on the management of capacity and summarises a variety of comprehensive reviews on alternative management instruments that complement the above discussion. 7

10 Finally the Report documents the different systems in operation in Denmark, the Netherlands, the UK and the Mediterranean Region. 8

11 Review of bio-economic models for the management of fishing capacity. The Expert group has reviewed existing bio-economic models and their applicability for the management of capacity and lists all known models, many of which were funded by the EU. The Group concludes that a logistical difficulty with the use of bioeconomic models for assessing capacity management is that most models are not updated. Because funding for modelling activity is not ongoing, but is largely project specific, researchers are unable to keep the models up to date after the end of the project in which they were developed. Further, as most models have been developed for particular purposes (e.g. to evaluate a particular problem), they are not able to address all potential management options. Even models that have been developed as generic modelling tools, such as the MEFISTO model for the Mediterranean, are limited in their scope to the fisheries and issues that they were designed to address. In most cases, these models need to be further developed, and all models need to be maintained on an ongoing basis. The Group also proposes a method to assess economic sustainability and overcapacity using economic data prepared under the concerted action FAIR CT , the Economic Interpretation of ACFM Advice (EIAA) and the Annual Economic Report of selected European Fishing Fleets (AER). This is referred to as the Break-Even method. The method is described in detail and its utility is illustrated using a specific example. The group concludes that the Break-Even method is considered operational on a wider EU-level and sufficiently robust, although not necessarily theoretically optimal. Further the method is supported by its transparency, and acceptability in the industry due to the use of well-known business-economics principles. The method can handle many species subject to different yield curves by weighting them together using prices. The method takes into account a number of the economic elements the fisherman would face and include in his decision about whether to leave the industry or remain. Furthermore, because the method is based on remuneration of production factors, be it only vessel capital or both vessel capital and fish stocks, the method could be used independently of TAC and quota settings. Finally, the calculation is based on well-justified costs and earnings statistics produced in the industry. It is possible to apply the method to all the fleet segments that are included in the AER. At present about 5 segments are included, but in the EU supported concerted action commencing in 22 the number will be increased. Although the method is based on output it could be applied on the input side as well; in the most simple form, by changing the fishing capacity in terms of potential number of fishing days (number of vessels times vessel fishing days) proportionally with the required change in output. By using models that take into account explicitly a number of capacity and effort variables e.g. in particular the number of vessels and fishing days categorised in homogenised fleet segments, an estimate of overcapacity could be obtained. Using an optimisation procedure where profit is maximised either on a fleet segment level or the fishery as a whole, will indicate the optimum fleet composition and number of fishing days required to catch a given TAC. 9

12 The Group provides a review of an analysis of technical interactions between fishing fleets in the English Channel. The results show that decreasing the fishing effort of fleets differentially affects the catching capacity of other fleets, depending of their level of competition for the resource. Although the results should essentially be used on a qualitative manner; they provide relevant information on both the direction and the magnitude of the competition interactions in such a polyvalent fishery. Finally, the Group provides an overview of MEFISTO, a bio-economic model for the Mediterranean fisheries. 1

13 1 Introduction 1.1 BACKGROUND TO THE MEETING In April 1999, STECF was asked to address the scientific background for a follow up to MAGP IV and in its 8 th report 2, proposed a number of areas that require investigation in order to appropriately advise the Commission. At its 9 th meeting in November , STECF was asked to organise and develop terms of reference for a meeting on the scientific basis for a follow up to MAGP IV. As an initial step, the Committee discussed the organisation of a one-year working schedule for an STECF Sub-group to examine the relationship linking fleet capacity with exploitation rates of fish stocks, taking into account biological, technical and economic considerations wherever possible. A first meeting of the STECF Sub-group on Balance between Resources and their exploitation (SGBRE), chaired by Mr Gaetano Messina, was convened in February 2. The report of that meeting 4 provided an overall review of the parameters suitable to measure fishing effort. At its meeting in April 2 5, STECF noted that several fundamental questions still needed to be addressed for an examination of the past performance of MAGPs and to assist the Commission in proposing a successor to MAGP IV. STECF therefore in its 1 th report STECF proposed to convene a series of three meetings under the Chairmanship of Dr J Casey, to address the following questions: 6. Has there been a direct clear link between fishing capacity (however it is measured) and deployed fishing effort (however it is measured) in the past? 7. Are there clear examples where various levels of deployed fishing effort can be related to observed exploitation rates? 8. To what extent have other factors (technological improvements, environmental changes biological interactions or economic factors) affected such relationships. 9. How does fleet capacity grow and decrease? What are the main factors that explain fleet dynamics? 1. Which managerial models can be used to administer fishing capacity in an efficient way? STECF also pointed out that the meetings should focus on examples from specific fisheries and resources and proposed that appropriate examples should be drawn from the following broad categories of fishery. Demersal Otter trawl fisheries Inshore (small-scale) pelagic fisheries Offshore (large-scale) pelagic fisheries Artisanal (small-scale) fisheries Offshore static gear fisheries 2 8 th Report of STECF. SEC (1999) th Report of STECF. SEC (2) th Report of STECF. (2) 113: Chapter 8 and Annex th Report of STECF. (2) 113: Chapter 6 11

14 The first of the series of three meetings was held in Brussels from October 2. The report of that meeting was reviewed by STECF at its November 2 plenary meeting. The second meeting of the Sub-group took place from January 21 and was reviewed by STECF during its April 21 Plenary meeting. The third meeting scheduled for February 21, was postponed to November TERMS OF REFERENCE 7. Review the reports of the first two meetings and summarise the findings on the relationship between capacity, fishing effort and fishing mortality. 8. Wherever possible, provide further examples of the above relationships with regard to fisheries and areas not yet addressed by the group. 9. Describe the relationships above in relation to hake and cod stocks in the northeast Atlantic. 1. Describe in more detail the pros and cons of the various alternative management models (sensu instruments) using both observations and theory. 11. Review existing different bio-economic models, discuss and identify which are most suitable and applicable for evaluating the management of fleet capacity. 12. Consider the options to evaluating the effectiveness of different capacity management instruments or combinations using one or more of the existing bioeconomic models. 1.3 PARTICIPANTS STECF Members J Casey (Chairman) G Messina J Smit Invited experts F Alemany G Fabi H Frost T Hutton P Marchal S Pascoe M Pastoors J Sacchi C Ulrich STECF Secretariat F Biagi (European Commission) 12

15 2 Review of the reports of the 1 st and 2 nd Meetings on the Scientific Basis for a Follow up to MAGP IV The reports of the first two meetings are given in Commission Publications SEC(21)177 and SEC(21) At it s first meeting (SEC(21)177), the expert group reviewed available existing literature and case studies that have attempted to establish the relationships between fleet capacity, deployed fishing effort and observed exploitation rates and concluded that such are complex and depend on a large variety of factors. The report also concluded that if such relationships can be demonstrated, they are likely to be highly fleet-specific, and suggested that an appropriate fleet segmentation is a fundamental requirement to establishing the relationships. The report further concluded that there is a lack of case studies for major fleets that are currently subject to MAGPs and that future efforts should be focussed on fleets or fleet segments that are deemed to be important for MAGPs. At its second meeting (SEC(21) 1194), the expert group continued to examine case studies and undertake evaluations addressing the relationships between fishing capacity, fishing effort and exploitation rates and also began to address which managerial models can be used to administer fishing capacity in an efficient manner. Data and case studies were evaluated for the following fleets: The Palma, Majorca trawl fleet in the Mediterranean Italian trawl fleets in the Ligurian and North Tyrrhenian Seas The French purse seine fishery for bluefin tuna in the Mediterranean The Dutch beam trawl fleet in the North Sea The Danish Demersal fleets in the North Sea 2.1 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CAPACITY AND DEPLOYED FISHING EFFORT For the Dutch beam trawl fishery in the North Sea, no direct relationship between capacity (measured in total HP of the fleet) and nominal effort (measured as total days at sea) at the overall fleet level could be detected, but this was probably due to the aggregation of data at the fleet level. When the relationships were drawn for different fleet-segments, there often appeared to be linear relationships between capacity and effort, but only during periods of increasing or decreasing fleet size. In other situations no correlations were found. The Danish fleets showed a clearer trend between capacity and effort, notably after the introduction of the fleet reduction programs (MAGP). Direct relationships between capacity (defined as number of vessels) and indicated fishing effort, were found for the Palma de Mallorca trawl fleet. It must be taken into account that in this fishery the effort is not regulated by output controls, such as TAC s, but by means of inputs limitations, such as the maximum number of fishing days and a limit on the total HP and GRT of the fleet. Within this framework, the fishermen tend to exert the maximum fishing effort by trying to work all permitted days. The salary system, which is directly proportional to the catches, also leads to this situation. Thus, one may expect to find a positive relationship between fleet capacity and deployed effort, as effectively occurred. Furthermore due to these 13

16 regulatory measures, the range of variation of both parameters was low over the period analysed. However, it was observed that the substitution of old vessels by new vessels, resulted in a slight increase of the total number of fishing days by year and boat (around 5%). This is attributable to the fact that new vessels lost a fewer permitted working days because of bad weather conditions or mechanical problems. On the other hand, technological improvements associated with fleet modernisation resulted in changes in the spatial allocation of fishing effort, as well as fishing efficiency, increasing the effective effort on some target species. The relationship between fishing capacity of the seven main trawl Ligurian fleets, expressed as overall GRT and HP and fishing effort, standardised in terms of GRT days or HP days were seen to be highly correlated. For French tuna seiners a fairly good relationship between fishing capacity (kw or GRT) and effort (fishing days) was identified for the period up to After 1995, the relationship broke down when the number of fishing days became anomaly low, principally because of complete information on the activity of several vessels and of a change in fishing strategy (Figures and 3.3.5). 2.2 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN FISHING EFFORT AND FISHING MORTALITY In the western Mediterranean trawl fisheries the relationships between fishing effort and fishing mortality are most clear when the fleet is split into homogeneous subfleets and effort is expressed as species-specific effort. The relationship between fishing intensity expressed as days at sea per km 2 and observed fishing mortality rates for hake in the Tyrrhenian and Ligurian Seas shows a weak but significant linear relationship. It was not been impossible to demonstrate a direct relationship between fishing effort and fishing mortality for French bluefin tuna purse seiners. 2.3 TRENDS IN FISHING EFFICIENCY The findings of the EU funded project 98/27, On the applicability of biological and economic indicators to evaluate the fishing efficiency dynamics of some demersal fisheries of the North Sea were reviewed by the expert group. The main findings were as follows: Fishing efficiency of the Dutch and Danish fleets are subject to trends and stepwise changes over time and the relationship between fishing mortality and fishing activity can be enhanced by standardising the number of days fishing by horsepower (for fleets using towed gears) and by the time dynamics in fishing efficiency. The trends in fishing efficiency were different depending on the species under consideration. Such contrasting dynamics might reveal shifts in fishing strategies, which could result from one of the harvested stocks being depleted (Danish trawlers fishing for cod and plaice), TAC restrictions and/or unrestrictive individual quotas (Dutch beam-trawlers harvesting sole and plaice). The mixed-species aspect of the fisheries is hence obscuring the nature of the relationship between fishing mortality and fishing activity. Despite species-dependent effects, an overall increase in efficiency for Dutch beamtrawlers over was detected. The group concluded that this increase might be related to the management measures in force over that period, including TACs, ITQs and the implementation of the plaice box. The latter might have resulted in a reduction of the competition for fishing grounds, which could have benefited the 14

17 smaller trawlers fishing in the restricted area, while the larger trawlers might have taken advantage of the exploration of new fishing grounds outside the Plaice Box. The overall conclusion of the group on trends in technical efficiency was that improving the understanding of management measures on fishing efficiency would lead a better understanding of some of the dynamics of fishing mortality. 2.4 MODELS FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF FISHING CAPACITY The expert group commenced examining various models for the management of fishing capacity, and provided a short discussion on the classification of the following models. Restricted licensing Individual transferable quotas Management of capacity through subsidies The discussions were not exhaustive and this item is addressed more fully in the present report (see section 4). 3 Further evaluations and case studies on the relationships between capacity, fishing effort and fishing mortality. 3.1 CASE STUDY OF PALMA DE MALLORCA DEMERSAL TRAWL FLEET In addition to the analysis of the relationships between capacity presented in the second report of this group, which considered capacity as an input measure, this relationship has been also explored assuming capacity as an output measure (i.e. landed catch). The results, plotted below, show strong direct relationships between effort expressed as days fishing and capacity expressed as landed weight for all fleets examined viz: Fleet 1: the shelf fleet targeting mainly red mullet, picarels and octopuses; Fleet 2: the shelf/slope fleet targeting alternatively bony fishes such as hake on the shelf and upper slope and crustaceans including Norway lobster or red shrimp on the slope: Fleet 3: the slope fleet operating exclusively on the slope targeting deep shrimps. fleet 1 Capacity (landings in Kg) y = 139,7x R 2 =, effort (fishing days) 15

18 fleet 2 Capacity (landings in Kg) y = 463.7x R 2 = effort (fishing days) fleet 3 Capacity (landings in Kg) y = 65.69x R 2 = effort (fishing days) 3.2 THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN FISHING CAPACITY, FISHING EFFORT AND FISHING MORTALITY IN THE ADRIATIC SEA Data for the following fisheries operating in the central and northern Adriatic sea have been examined to determine the relationship between capacity, effort and fishing mortality. mid-water pair trawling for small pelagic fishes (sardines and anchovies), rapido trawling for common sole (Solea vulgaris) small-scale fishery of common sole with gillnets. The data were collected during investigations carried out by the Institute of Researche on Marine Fisheries (IRPEM-CNR) of Ancona, within research projects funded either by the EC or the Italian Government. A full description of the data and analyses are given in Annex I Mid-water pair trawl fishery for small pelagic fish The relationship between fishing mortality on sardine and anchovy and standardised effort for Porto Garibaldi mid-water pair trawl fleet are shown in Figures and

19 F CNR-IRPEM ANCONA, ITALY S t a n d a r d i s e d f i s h i n g d a y s Figure Relationship between mean fishing mortality rate of anchovy (F) and standardised fishing effort ( ) F CNR-IRPEM ANCONA, ITALY S t a n d a r d i s e d fi s h i n g d a y s Figure Relationship between mean fishing mortality rate of sardine (F) and fishing effort ( ). The results indicate that there is a weak relationship between fishing effort and fishing mortality for both species. However, the regression coefficients were highly significant (P<.1), but the dispersion of data points around the regression line was high in both cases resulting in low values of R square (anchovy =.35, sardine =. 31). This may be due to the fact that the biomass of these species varies over time independent of the fishery Rapido trawl fishery Fishing capacity and fishing effort of the Ancona rapido trawl fleet have been considered for the period 1984 to 21. Data come from a census conducted at the local trawler fishermen s association and at the landing sites. The census formed part of a research project funded by the EC (Study project 99/51). Up to 199, fishing with the rapido trawl was mainly undertaken at night, alternating with bottom otter trawl during the day. Since 1991 the rapido trawl gear has been used round the clock and for the whole year. 17

20 Evolution of fishing capacity and fishing activity Temporal trends of fishing capacity expressed as engine power (kw), tonnage (GRT) and number of vessels, showed an increase in fleet nominal capacity over the years (Figure 3.2.3). The weakest correlation over time was obtained for engine power, probably because several fishing vessels are equipped with de-rated engines to comply with their licence restrictions. Fishing activity, in terms of total number of fishing days at sea together with number of vessels (Figure 3.2.3), has increased linearly over time, not only as a result of an increase in the number of vessels and fishing time, but also because of the change in fishing strategy kw 3 N. VE SS EL S 2 1 y = x R² =.665 CNR IRPEM ANCONA, ITALY y =.413x R² =.726 YEARS CNR IRPEM ANCONA, ITALY YEARS GR T FIS 14 HI 12 NG 1 DA YS 8 6 y = x R² =.69 5 CNR IRPEM ANCONA, ITALY y = x 1636 R² =.91 YEARS 2 CNR IRPEM ANCONA, ITALY YEARS Figure Annual trends of fleet capacity (kw, GRT and number of vessels) and fishing activity (total days at sea) of the Ancona rapido trawl fleet in the period Relationship between fishing capacity and fishing activity A highly significant correlation was found between fishing capacity (kw, GRT and number of vessels) and fishing activity expressed as total fishing days at sea (Figure 3.2.4). Furthermore, two pools of values could be distinguished: one associated with the period and a second for the period During the latter period, fishing activity increased by a factor of 2-4. In addition to the increase in number of vessels and nominal fleet capacity, these results are also affected by the different fishing strategy adopted since

21 6 5 4 y = 2.636x R² = y =.515x R² = kw GRT CNR IRPEM ANCONA, ITALY FISHING DAYS CNR IRPEM ANCONA, ITALY FISHING DAYS N. VESSELS y =.5x R² = CNR IRPEM ANCONA, ITALY FISHING DAYS Figure Relationship between fleet capacity (kw, GRT and number of vessels) and fishing activity for the Ancona rapido trawl fleet in the period Relationship between nominal fishing capacity and fishing effort The correlation between the fishing capacity in terms of overall kw and GRT and the effective fishing effort standardised as days at sea x kw or GRT respectively, was highly significant (Figure 3.2.5) and also highlighted the grouping of data points into periods and FISHING CAPACITY (kw ) 7 y =.5x R² = CNR IRPEM ANCONA, ITALY FISHING EFFORT (DAYS AT SEA x kw) FISHING CAPACITY (GRT) 14 y =.5x R² = CNR IRPEM ANCONA, ITALY FISHING EFFORT (DAYS AT SEA x GRT) Figure Relationship between fishing capacity (overall kw and overall GRT) and standardised fishing effort for the Ancona rapido trawl fleet in the period Small-scale fishery of common sole using gillnets Data are derived from an investigation on fleet, gears and landings at the main landing sites of a coastal area (about 3 km) of the central-northern Adriatic sea, which started 19

22 in 1999 and is still in progress. Due to the short period of data collection ( ) and the seasonal pattern of this fishing activity, analyses have been conducted using seasonal data Relationship between fishing capacity and fishing effort The relationship between fishing capacity in terms of overall length of gillnet deployed at sea and nominal fishing effort (fishing activity) expressed as days at sea x number of vessels was highly significant (Figure 7) showing that these parameters were highly correlated indicating that each vessel on average deploys the same amount of net per day. KM OF GILLNET 8 y = 2.571x R² = FISHING EFFORT (DAYS AT SEA X N. VESSELS) Figure Relationship between fishing capacity (km of gillnet at sea) and standardised nominal fishing effort (days at sea x number of vessels) Relationship between fishing capacity and fishing effort A high correlation was observed between output capacity expressed as catch overall and effort expressed both as boat days and or km of net deployed (Figure 3.2.7). However, the effort expressed as km of net deployed gave a slightly better fit. TONS OF SOLEA VULGARIS 3 y =.4x R² = TONS OF SOLEA VULGARIS 3 y =.1x R² = KM OF GILLNET FISHING EFFORT (DAYS AT SEA X N. VESSELS) Figure Relationship between overall catch of sole and fishing capacity (km of gillnet at sea) and between overall catch of sole and fishing effort (days at sea number of vessels). 2

23 3.3 CASE STUDY OF NORTHWESTERN MEDITERRANEAN TRAWL FISHERIES TARGETING HAKE. Within the framework of the EU project 98/53 Factors affecting catch rates of NW Mediterranean trawl fleets and derivation of standardised abundance index the influence of several elements of fleet capacity (as length of the vessel, GRT, HP and GT) on fishing power of trawlers when targeting hake was explored trough generalised linear and additive models applying routines contained in the S-Plus programming environment. Other considered factors were time (month and year), closures and geographic area. Multivariate analyses (Principal Components, Cluster, and Multiple Correspondence) were used to identify métiers/fishing tactics. The data (complete data sets of monthly effort and landings by vessel, species and port) come from three groundfish fisheries along the Spanish Mediterranean coast (harbours of Santa Pola, Castellón and Barcelona), one from south-eastern France (harbour of Sète) and one from northwest Italy (harbour of Santo Stefano). Data from the following periods were used: Santa Pola , Castellón , Barcelona , Sète and Santo Stefano Results of modelling showed that vessel identity was the main factor affecting hake catch rates. Among the vessel characteristics, size was the best descriptor of fishing power in the selected trawl fleets. Abundance indices exhibited significant interannual and seasonal variations and significant but smaller geographic differences (Goñi et al, 1999). 3.4 INFLUENCE OF TRENDS IN FISHING POWER ON BIO-ECONOMICS IN THE NORTH SEA FLATFISH FISHERY REGULATED BY CATCHES- OR BY EFFORT QUOTAS This analysis has been conducted during the project dealing with the applicability of biological and economic indicators to improve the understanding of the relationship between fishing effort and fishing mortality in the North Sea (EU study 98/27). It aims to mix the separate biological and economic approaches developed during the project, within a dynamic bio-economic model estimating the influence of trends in fishing power on the status of the fishery under different management regimes. The case study is the Dutch beam trawl fishery in the North Sea. Stochastic simulations are conducted in order to investigate whether misspecifying this relationship between fishing effort and fishing mortality (by underestimating the trends in catchability due to fishing power creeping) might induce large bias and risks in the assessment and management models used by ICES (VPA and Precautionary Approach). Management measures implemented are input control (effort quotas, TAE) and output control (catch quotas, TAC). The methodological framework of this multi-species and multi-fleet study is made up of various stochastic modules describing the following: biological dynamics the harvesting process catchability dynamics economic analysis, 21

24 the assessment procedure the fisheries management the implementation of the management tools and the fishing strategies. The biological and harvest models are both length- and age-based. The catchability is prone to both stochastic and deterministic variations. Its deterministic variations are caused by trends in fishing power, which are related to stable economic parameters (increase in capital invested and mean age and technology of the boat). However, only the catchability for sole is affected by such trends, since previous biological studies, have shown that the catchability for plaice has remained constant over the last decade. The assessment procedure is used to simulate stock assessments and estimate fishing mortality. The fisheries management model is based on outcomes of the stock assessment. The short-term target fishing mortalities are set following the Harvest Control Rules (HCR) of the Precautionary Approach (e.g. no catches allowed if SSB is below Blim), and are assumed to be strictly applied by managers and respected by producers. These target mortalities are spread among fleets depending on their relative fishing mortality rate, considered constant across fleets in the simulations. Finally, the fishing strategy is made simple. When TAEs are implemented, fishermen are assumed to set their effort at the most conservative level, i.e. in order not to fish over the minimum authorised fishing mortality across stocks. Conversely, when TACs are implemented, fishermen are assumed to set their effort in order to reach the maximal TAC across stocks, with any over-shoot of the TAC for other stocks assumed to be discarded. The model is parameterised and validated over the period , and stochastic simulations of various scenarios are conducted over the period Scenarios investigate various hypotheses of management choices and future trends in fishing power. Some major outcomes of this study are that the HCR proposed under the Precautionary Approach appears to be very restrictive in the current stock situation. Had this approach been strictly applied during the 199s (either through TAE or TAC), the results indicate that it would have induced enhanced biological status of the stocks on the one hand (Figure 3.4.1), but have resulted in major economic losses in the short term on the other hand (Figure 3.4.2). 22

25 3 sole 3 plaice ICES Real_TA C SSB / Bpa HCR_TA C HCR_TA E Blim/Bpa Figure ICES assessment and biological results of the model for the sole and plaice stocks between 1991 and 1999, for three different management options: Real observed TAC, TAC set following the Precautionary Approach HCR, TAE set following the Precautionary Approach HCR. 25 fishing effort 2 cum ulated discounted profit days profit (1 NGL) Real_TA C HCR_TA C HCR_TA E Figure Simulated annual effort per boat (left) and individual cumulated discounted profit (right) between 1991 and 1999, for the medium Dutch beam trawlers (3-2 HP) and three different management options: Real observed TAC, TAC set following the Precautionary Approach HCR, TAE set following the Precautionary Approach HCR. Overall results from this study suggested that, in a multi-species multi-fleet fishery, there are wide biological and economic differences expected when implementing the same management rules with different management tools. TACs and TAEs have different benefits and drawbacks. In particular, regarding the catchability, TAEs are more sensitive to a bias induced by mis-specifying the relationship between effort and mortality. Not accounting for trends in fishing power due to technological development increases the risks of underestimating F and overestimating SSB. As with any other complex bio-economic models, this model is based on a number of assumptions that limit its direct use for management purposes. In particular, the use of 23