Report of the Regional Co-ordination Meeting for the Long Distance Fisheries (RCM …LDF_2015.pdf · 2015-11-19 · The RCM DCF briefly discussed project proposal on “Strengthening

EU DATA COLLECTION FRAMEWORK (DCF), REG. 199/2008, 665/2008

and DECISION 2010/93/EU

Report of the

Regional Co-ordination Meeting

for the Long Distance Fisheries

(RCM LDF)

2015

Thünen Institute [TI]), Hamburg, Germany

21/04/2015 – 22/04/2015

Instituto Español de Oceanografía (IEO), Centro Oceanográfico de Cádiz Cádiz, Spain

9/06/2015 - 12/06/2015

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

2

Table of Contents

1. Executive summary.......................................................................... 3

2. Introduction .................................................................................... 5

2.1 General ................................................................................... 5 2.2 Background & legal requirements................................................ 5 2.3 Terms of Reference ................................................................... 5 2.4 Participants and Agendas ........................................................... 7 2.5 Structure of the report .............................................................. 7 2.6 Data call .................................................................................. 8

3. Review of EU Long Distance Fisheries activities ................................... 9

3.1 CECAF area .............................................................................. 9 3.2 SPRFMO area ......................................................................... 16

4. Review progress in regional co-ordination since the 2014 RCM ............. 17

4.1 Follow-up of the 11th Liaison Meeting ......................................... 17 4.2 Feedback from end users, including NC meeting ......................... 17 4.3 Sampling coordination in the area of competence of the RCM LDF . 17

5. Data Quality issues ......................................................................... 18

5.1 Progress on quality, control, validation etc. ................................ 18 5.2 Developing statistical sound harmonised sampling programmes ... 18

6. New CFP and development of of EU-MAP ........................................... 21

6.1 Impact of the landing obligation ............................................... 21 6.2 Ranking of métier to find out whether any of the NPs need to be

modified for 2015. .................................................................. 22

7. Surveys, studies and pilot projects .................................................... 23

8. Any other business ......................................................................... 25

8.1 Recommendations .................................................................. 25 8.2 Time and venue of the RCM LDF meeting in 2016 ....................... 25 8.3 Chairmanship ......................................................................... 25

9. Glossary ........................................................................................ 27

10. Annexes ........................................................................................ 28

10.1 Annex 1 – Agenda of the 1st meeting (April 2015; Hamburg,

Germany) .............................................................................. 28 10.2 Annex 2 – Agenda of the 2nd meeting (June 2015; Cadiz, Spain) . 29 10.3 Annex 3 - Minutes with the outcomes of the 1st RCM LDF meeting

(April 21-22, 2015, Hamburg, Germany) ................................... 31 10.4 Annex 4 – Amendments to the joint sampling program for small

pelagics fishery in the CECAF area ............................................ 35 10.5 Annex 5 – Multilateral Agreement on joint sampling programme

of the fishery activities in the SPRFMO ....................................... 37 Annex 2: “Observer Manual for biological data collection in SPRFMO

waters”. ................................................................................. 38 10.6 Annex 6 – Landings by species reported by MS ........................... 39 10.7 Annex 7 – Canary Islands- New métier sampled in the DCF:

MIS_DES_0_0_0 ..................................................................... 43 10.8 Annex 8 – The lists of species indicated by FAO/CECAF as

relevant for the assessments purposes ...................................... 46


3

1. Executive summary

Two RCM LDF meetings were held in 2015.

The first meeting, held in April at Thünen Institute (TI), Hamburg, Germany, was called on an

ad hoc basis to specifically address the urgent need of implementation of a sampling

programme for the fishery activities by EU vessels in the SPRFMO area. The meeting was

initiated during the EU National Correspondents meeting, organized by the European

Commission on March 25, 2015. As a result, a new multilateral agreement on joint sampling

programme of the fishing activities in the SPRFMO area was agreed and signed. The meeting

also provided the platform to discuss the already established multi-lateral agreement for the

CECAF region and resulted in signing an amendment to this agreement, extending the joint

sampling programme in CECAF area until end of 2016.

The second meeting took place at Instituto Español de Oceanografía (IEO), Centro

Oceanográfico de Cádiz, Spain, in June, with the aim to address the general Terms of Reference

set for the RCMs 2015 meetings and to provide a platform for an overview of the EU long

distance fisheries over the previous year in order to evaluate the scope of required regional

coordination in area of data collection.

The group reviewed the progress in regional coordination since 2014, the outcomes of the 11th

Liaison Meeting and feedback from the end-users.

The RCM LDF reviewed the Long Distance Fisheries activity by MS in CECAF and SPRMFO areas

with the use of updated 2014 data provided by MS. There were limited EU fishing activity in the

SPRMFO area in 2013 and 2014.

Based on the characteristics of fisheries in different regions within the CECAF area and following

the proposal made by STECF EWG 14-18, geographical fishing zones in the CECAF area were

revised. The RCM LDF proposes the inclusion of a new fishing ground (“Canary”). In this way,

EU and non EU waters are separated at RCM level without modification of the RCM coverage,

and without changes in sampling obligations or sampling patterns. Following this proposal, three

fishing grounds are considered for CECAF: “Madeira”, “Canary” (both being the EU waters) and

“From Morocco to Guinea Bissau” (as a non EU waters). General types of fisheries in the

relevant area are described in the report.

In Madeira and the Canaries, where only national vessels of one MS operate, coordination of

data collection at regional level is not required as fisheries in those fishing grounds are already

covered by the respective National Programmes.

The status quo on the FPAs with Morocco, Mauritania, Senegal, and Guinea-Bissau were

discussed.

In order to check whether there were any substantial changes in the fishing pattern in the

CECAF area in 2014 which would require amendments to the National Programmes in 2016, the

group updated last year’s ranking and compared the updated version to the 2014 version.

Based on that comparison, the RCM LDF is concluded that there is no need for amendments to

the NPs for 2016 in respect of the long distance fisheries in CECAF area. The only change to the

execution of NPs in current year and 2016 relates to the NPs budgets and the need to secure

funding necessary to implement the multilateral agreement on the joint sampling programme

for the fishery activities in the SPRFMO area (agreed and signed by the MS concerned in 2015).

In relation to the evaluation of the impact of the introduction of the landing obligation and/or

preparations for its implementation in the context of the Long Distance Fisheries, the RCM LDF

discussed the preliminary results of the project “For the provision of advice on the management

of discards in EU fisheries beyond EU waters” (conducted under the Framework Contract No.

MARE/2012/21), concerning CECAF and FPAs of Morocco and Mauritania. In general, the

introduction in EU legislation of the landing obligation has no impact on activity of the long

distance fishery.

The RCM DCF briefly discussed project proposal on “Strengthening regional cooperation in the

area of fisheries data collection” (MARE/2014/19) in relation to the combined North


4

Atlantic/North Sea region. The group concluded that the work done within this project is

beneficial for sampling procedures in place for the long distance fisheries. The outcomes of the

project and possible future implications will be reviewed in 2016.

In relation to call for proposals pre-announced by the Commission, regarding, i.a. inter-

sessional work between the annual Regional Coordination Meetings, develop and test an

operational framework for establishing and coordinating statistically-sound sampling

programmes at a regional or EU scale, the RCM LDF decided not to form a consortium to apply

for this grant, but rather participate on a national basis to other consortia that are likely to be

formed.

The RCM LDF 2015 made one recommendation in relation to future RCM LDF data calls – that

the National Correspondents of all non-landlocked EU MS shall be contacted in order to be sure

that all active fisheries in the areas in the competence of the RCM LDF are covered. It is

expected that all National Correspondents contacted respond to the data call either with

information on all fishing activity beyond the EU waters by the vessels under the flag of their MS

or with confirmation of none of such activities, along with information on MS’ participation in the

working groups of any RFMOs, concerning fishing activity in the waters outside the EU.

With the expiration of the term of current chair, the RCM LDF proposes Sieto Verver (NL) as the

new chair.

The next RCM LDF meeting is planned for June 2016, and Lithuania kindly offered to host this

meeting.


5

2. Introduction

2.1 General

Two RCM LDF meetings were held in 2015.

The first meeting, held on April 21-22 at Thünen Institute (TI), Hamburg, Germany, was

initiated during the EU National Correspondents meeting (organized by the European

Commission on March 25, 2015) in order to provide the follow-up of the outstanding RCM LDF

2013 recommendation to establish a sampling programme for the fishery in the SPRFMO area.

This meeting was called on an ad hoc basis to specifically address the urgent need of

implementation of a multilateral agreement on joint sampling of the fishery activities in the

SPRFMO area by the EU vessels already commenced late April 2015. The meeting also provided

the platform to discuss the extension of the already established multi-lateral agreement for the

CECAF region.

The second meeting took place at Instituto Español de Oceanografía (IEO), Centro

Oceanográfico de Cádiz, Spain, on 9–12 June, 2015, with the aim to address the general Terms

of Reference set for the RCMs 2015 meetings and to provide a platform for an overview of the

EU long distance fisheries over the previous year in order to evaluate the scope of required

regional coordination in area of data collection.

RCM LDF appreciated the excellent facilities offered by both Institutes to enable effective work

of the group. The availability of SharePoint offered by ICES proves to be very efficient in

organising the work before, during and after the meeting.

2.2 Background & legal requirements

The EU Data Collection Framework (DCF) establishes a framework for the collection of

economic, biological and transversal data by Member States (MS). It was intended that this

programme would provide the basic data needed to evaluate the state of fishery resources and

the fisheries sector.

The Regional Coordination Meeting for the Long Distance Fisheries (RCM LDF) proceeds from the

Data Collection Framework (EC Regulation no. 199/2008) establishing a community framework

for the collection, management and use of data in fisheries sector for scientific advice regarding

the CFP. According to this regulation and without prejudice to their current data collection

obligations under Community law, Member States (MS) shall collect primary biological,

technical, environmental and socio-economic data within the framework of a multi-annual

national programme drawn up in accordance with the Community programme.

According to EC Regulation 665/2008, laying down detailed rules for the application of Council

Regulation (EC) 199/2008, and its technical Decision 2010/93/EU specifying practical aspects

for data collection, actions planned by MS in their national programme shall be presented

according to the predefined regions.

The coordination of the data collection is recommended at regional level and specific meetings

are in charge of facilitating this and these meetings aim to identify areas for standardisation,

collaboration and task sharing between MS. RCMs are held annually with participants from each

MS involved in fishing activity in the respective region.

2.3 Terms of Reference

The following terms of reference were set for discussion by the RCM LDF 2015 – 1st meeting

(Hamburg, April 21-22, 2015):

1. Follow up of the RCM LDF 2013 recommendation to implement a multilateral agreement on the basis of joint sampling program of fisheries activity in SPRMFO area


6

o Protocol for the data collection – scope and format of data required by the SPRMFO standards (based on the SPRMFO Data Standards 2015)

o Choice of the coordination agency for data collection o Cost sharing key o Conclusion of the agreement

2. Discussion on the possibility to extent the Multilateral agreement for sampling in CECAF

3. Any other business

The following terms of reference were set for discussion by the RCM LDF 2015 – 2nd meeting

(Cádiz; June 9-12, 2015):

1. Review progress since 2014 following up the 11th Liaison Meeting report

2. Review feedback from end users, including NC meetings 3. Analyse data from 2015 RCM LDF data call 4. Regional data collection, analysis and storage and the evolution towards RCGs

Consider the progress of the “strengthening regional cooperation in data collection” MARE/2014/19, and possible implications

Review progress in data quality screening, harmonisation of national and regional data checking procedures.

Consider the data collection protocols for at-sea and on-shore sampling in the context of regional sampling designs and probability selection methods.

Identify any amendments to NP needed in 2016. Consider future funding mechanisms to continue strengthening regional cooperation

5. Landing Obligation Evaluate the impact of the introduction of the landing obligation, and/or preparations for its implementation, in the context of the Long Distance Fisheries

6. National Administrations

Address any issues relating specifically to national administrations and consider the role of NC within the RCM/RCG context.

Task sharing and task trading mechanisms that might operate within the context of a regional sampling designs.

7. AOB place and date of the next RCM/RCG LDF election of the new chair


7

2.4 Participants and Agendas

First name Email address Organisation 1st meeting

Hamburg

April 2015

2nd meeting

Cadiz

June 2015

Eva García Isarch [email protected]

Instituto Español de

Oceanografía (ES)

Centro Oceanográfico de

Cádiz

X

Zeneida Romero

Romero

[email protected]

Instituto Español de

Oceanografía (ES)

Centro Oceanográfico de

Cádiz

X

Ángeles Armesto [email protected] Instituto Español de

Oceanografía (ES)

Centro Oceanográfico de Vigo

X

Sieto Verver [email protected]

Institute for Marine Resources

and Ecosystem Studies

(IMARES, Wageningen UR),

IJmuiden(NL)

X

X

Maksims Kovsars [email protected] Fish Resources Research

Department in Riga (LV)

X

X

Irek Wojcik (Chair) [email protected] National Marine Fisheries

Research Institute in Gdynia

(PL)

X

X

Christoph Stransky [email protected] Thünen-Institut for

Seafisheries in Hamburg (DE)

X

Kay Panten [email protected] Thünen-Institut for

Seafisheries in Hamburg (DE)

X

X

Vilda Griuniene [email protected] Ministry of the Agriculture,

Fisheries Department (LT)

X

X

Romas Statkus [email protected] Fishery Service, Ministry of

Agriculture (LT)

X

Brigita Kukonenko [email protected] Fishery Service, Ministry of

Agriculture (LT)

X

The agendas of both meetings held in April 2015 in Hamburg and in June 2015 in Cadiz are

included in Annex 1 and Annex 2, respectively.

2.5 Structure of the report

Minutes with the outcomes of the 1st RCM LDF meeting (April 21-22, 2015, Hamburg, Germany)

– Annex 3.

Amendments to the multilateral agreement on joint sampling programme for the fishery

activities in the CECAF area, agreed in 2014 and 2015 – Annex 4.

mailto:[email protected]










8

Multilateral agreement on joint sampling programme for the fishery activities in the SPRFMO

area, agreed during the 1st RCM LDF meeting – Annex 5.

ToR addressed by the 2nd RCM LDF meeting (June 9-12, 2015, Cadiz, Spain) are referred to in

the following sections of the report.

ToR 1 - in section 4.1


ToR 3 - in section 2.6 and 3

ToR 4 - in section 5; 6.2 and 7



ToR 7 - in section 8

2.6 Data call

Prior to the 2nd RCM LDF 2015 meeting a data call was sent to National Correspondents of MS

concerned requesting a revised and updated data on fishing activities in CECAF and SPRMFO

areas. All MS participating in 2015 meeting responded to this data call and provided the data

requested. Data were also received from the UK, a MS involved in the fishing activity in the

CECAF area and not participating in 2015 meeting. Italy provided information that no activity

were carried out in CECAF area by Italian vessels in 2013 and only one vessel operated in that

area in 2014 (however, no effort and catch data were available at the meeting). No updated

data were received from PT.

For future data calls, RCM LDF recommends that the National Correspondents of all non-

landlocked EU MS shall be contacted in order to be sure that all active fisheries in the areas in

the competence of the RCM LDF are covered. It is expected that all National Correspondents

contacted respond to the data call either with information on all fishing activity beyond the EU

waters by the vessels under the flag of their MS or with confirmation of none of such activities.

The recommendation is specified in section 8.1


9

3. Review of EU Long Distance Fisheries activities

3.1 CECAF area

Considering the fact that the new CFP1 states a clear difference between EU waters (article 4)

and non EU waters, and following the proposal made in EWG 14-182 (see Table 6 of the EWG

report), geographical fishing zones in the CECAF area were revised to comply with the

separation between EU waters and non EU waters. Thus, after discussion, the RCM agreed on

the inclusion of a new fishing ground (“Canary”), as an addition to the already existing other EU

waters fishing ground - “Madeira”. In this way, EU and non EU waters are separated at RCM

level without modification of the RCM coverage, and without changes in sampling obligations or

sampling patterns. Following this proposal, three fishing grounds are considered for CECAF:

Fishing Ground “Madeira” EU waters

Fishing Ground “Canary”

Fishing Ground “From Morocco to Guinea Bissau” Non EU waters

In Madeira and the Canaries, only Portuguese and Spanish vessels, respectively, operate and

the fisheries/métiers are already included in respective National sampling programs and

therefore, coordination between MS is not needed.

Following this RCM decision, fishery data are presented separately for the three Fishing

grounds: “From Morocco to Guinea-Bissau”, “Madeira” and “Canary Islands”.

FISHING GROUND “FROM MOROCCO TO GUINEA-BISSAU”

The information below describes the general types of fisheries in the relevant West African

CECAF areas by MS (2014) as an overview of the CECAF Fisheries carried out by EU-fleets.

Some fisheries cover very large areas along the West African shelf. As non-EU countries also

conduct fisheries in this area, the catches taken by vessels of EU MS do only constitute a part of

the total catches.

As part of the EU fishing activity in West African waters, the Spanish fishery is mostly directed

to demersal stocks, but there is also a purse seine fishery targeting small pelagics in Morocco.

The other EU MS are operating in a pelagic fishery. An overview of species fished by EU MS in

the CECAF area in 2014 is presented in Annex 6. In most cases the EU fishery has been carried

out in this area under bilateral Fishing Partnership Agreements (FPAs) between the EU and the

Coastal States.

The responsibility for coordination of research activities in the area, stocks assessments and

providing scientific advice for the stocks management lies with the Fishery Committee for the

Eastern Central Atlantic (CECAF). In addition, the Joint Scientific Committees (JSCs) of the FPAs

between the EU and the partner countries (Morocco, Mauritania, Senegal and Guinea-Bissau)

play important role in setting an independent scientific cooperation framework between the EU

and these countries.

1 REGULATION (EU) No 1380/2013 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy, amending Council Regulations (EC) No 1954/2003 and (EC) No 1224/2009 and repealing Council Regulations (EC) No 2371/2002 and (EC) No 639/2004 and Council Decision 2004/585/EC. 2 Review of DCF National programme amendments for 2015 (and the 2013 Annual Report for Bulgaria) & development of the revised DCF Multiannual Programme (EWG-14-18). Brussels,

Belgium, 25-28 November 2014


10

The fisheries in the fishing ground “From Morocco to Guinea-Bissau” highly depend on the FPA

between the EU and the third countries. The situation, by country, is described in the following

sections:

Morocco

After a long period of negotiation, the new FPA with Morocco3 was finally ratified by the King of

Morocco in July 2014, involving the re-opening of some EU fisheries in this fishing ground,

starting September 2014. This FPA renewal involves new métiers operating in the zone that

have not been mentioned in previous RCMs. This is the case for an artisanal fleet of longliners

targeting Trichiuridae and Sparidae in the North (fishing Category Nº2 of the SFPA: “Small scale

fishing in the North”). This métier was called “LLS_DEF_6_0_0” (6 referring to the hook size

number), to differentiate it from “LLS_DEF_0_0_0”, which traditionally corresponded to

longliners targeting black hakes and/or other demersal fish in the CECAF area (in this case, in

the South zone of Morocco, under the fishing category Nº4: “Demersal fishing”) (see Tables 3.2

& 3.2).

The métier “MISC_DEF_0_0_0” corresponds to the artisanal fleet from the Canary Islands that

operates in South Morocco under the Fishing Category Nº3 of the FPA (“Small Scale Fishing in

the South”). These are artisanal vessels that use rods and lines targeting demersal fish. Traps,

which were also allowed in the last Protocol, are forbidden in the new one.

Mauritania

The Mauritanian FPA4 expired in July 2014, involving the closure of some EU fisheries. An

extension was permitted to two fishing categories (Nº3: “Crustaceans” and Nº7: “Pelagic

Fishing Trawlers”) until the end of 2014.

Senegal

The new SFPA with Senegal5, signed in October 2014 allows the métier OTB_DEF_>=70_0_0 to

operate in the Senegalese EEZ. These are vessels targeting black hakes. This fleet started its

activity in 2015 and no data were still available for this RCM.

Guinea-Bissau

A new FPA6 was signed with Guinea-Bissau in October 2014, which involved the reopening of

the shrimper and cephalopod-finfish fisheries at the beginning of 2015. The mixed fishery

3 COUNCIL DECISION of 16 December 2013 on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union, of the Protocol between the European Union and the Kingdom of Morocco setting out the fishing opportunities and financial contribution provided for in the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Union and

the Kingdom of Morocco (2013/785/EU). Official Journal of the European Union 21-12-2013. L 349/1-3 and PROTOCOL between the European Union and the Kingdom of Morocco setting out the fishing opportunities and financial contribution provided for in the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Kingdom of Morocco. Official Journal of the European Union 7-12-2013. L 328/2-39.

4 COUNCIL DECISION of 18 December 2012 on the signing, on behalf of the European Union, and on the provisional application of the Protocol setting out the fishing opportunities and financial contribution provided for in the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Islamic Republic of Mauritania for a period of two years (2012/827/EU) and PROTOCOL Setting out the fishing opportunities and financial contribution provided for in the fisheries partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Islamic Republic of Mauritania for a period of two years. Official Journal of the European Union. 31-12-2012. L361/43-84.

5 COUNCIL DECISION of 8 October 2014 on the signing, on behalf of the European Union, and provisional application of a Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Senegal and the Implementation Protocol thereto (2014/733/EU) and Agreement on a Sustainable Fisheries Partnership between the European Union and the Republic of Senegal. Official Journal of the European Union. 23-10-2014. L304/1-40.

6 COUNCIL DECISION of 16 October 2014 on the signing, on behalf of the European Union, and provisional

application of the Protocol setting out the fishing opportunities and financial contribution provided for in the


11

carried out by trawlers targeting finfish and cephalopods had traditionally been called

“OTB_CEP_>=70_0_0”. However, after discussion at the RCM, this métier was renamed as

“OTB_MCF_>=70_0_0”, considering that it targets both cephalopods and finfish. Since the

reopening of the fishery, the fleet deployed a new exploitation strategy during the first months

of activity in 2015. This strategy follows two different patterns: (i) either targeting cephalopods

and finfish, and/or (ii) targeting black hakes, in deeper waters, and with low or no cephalopods

bycatch. These two different patterns may follow the resources’ abundancies and are not

predictable in advance for sampling purposes. Thus, pending on the potential continuity of these

two different patterns followed by the same fleet under the same fishing category, maybe in the

future there will be a need of splitting the métier “OTB_MCF_=70_0_0” in two different ones

(“OTB_MCF_=70_0_0” and “OTB_DEF_=70_0_0”).

Table. 3.1. General types of fisheries in relevant CECAF areas by MS (2014)

FISHING

GROUNDS FISHERY AREA COUNTRIES

Fro

m M

oro

cco t

o

Guin

ea-B

issau

Small pelagic Morocco

Latvia, Poland, Lithuania, Germany, Spain

Demersal fish Spain

Crustaceans

Mauritania

Spain

Demersal fish Spain

Small pelagic Lithuania, Latvia, Poland, Netherlands, Germany

Small Pelagic

Guinea-Bissau No FPA in 2014 Crustaceans

Demersal fish & cephalopods

Madeir

a

Deep-water species

Madeira Portugal*1 Small pelagic

Demersal fish

Molluscs

Canary

Small pelagics

Canary Islands Spain

Demersal fish 1Based on data provided in 2014

The following tables, based on the data from 2010 to 2014 provided to the RCM LDF by MS,

show the main fishing activities in relation to fishing effort and total landings. UK provided data

but they were not included as they require further revision. No activity were carried out in

CECAF area by Italian vessels in 2013 and only one vessel operated in that area in 2014

(however, no effort and catch data were available at the meeting). Data from PT for 2014 were

not available during the meeting.

Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Guinea-Bissau (2014/782/EU) and PROTOCOL setting out the fishing opportunities and financial contribution provided for in the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Guinea-Bissau. Official Journal of the European Union. 13-11-2014. L328/1-32.


12

Table. 3.2. Effort (fishing days) by country and métiers from 2010 to 2014.

Métier (level 6) Country 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

LLS_DEF_0_0_0 ESP

na

Total

MISC_DEF_0_0_0 ESP 955 883 *1 *1 76

Total 955 883 *1 *1 76

OTB_CEP_>=70_0_0 OTB_MCF_>=70_0_0*5 ESP 6174 5573 4044 *2,3 *3,4

Total 6174 5573 4044 *2,3 *3,4

OTB_CRU_>=40_0_0 ESP 8125 7272 3311 581 3346

Total 8125 7272 3311 581 3346

OTB_DEF_>=70_0_0 ESP 1178 686 658 683 755

Total 1178 686 658 683 755

OTB_DES_>=40_0_0 ITA 834 874

Total 834 874

OTB_MCF_>=70_0_0 ESP 1020 448 193

Total 1020 448 193

OTM_SPF_>=40_0_0

GER 160 404 54 71

LIT 1400 950 437 724 661

LVA

NLD 696 621 393 125 467

POL 125 517 247 461 230

Total 2381 2492 1131 1310 1429

PS_SPF_0_0_0 ESP 495 463 *1 *1 4

Total 495 463 *1 *1 4

LLS_DEF_6_0_0 ESP 1286 na *1 *1 505

Total 1286 na *1 *1 505

Total métiers by years 21628 18361 9246 2588 6126

*1. No FPA with Morocco. *2. Fishing category not included in the last FPA with Mauritania. *3. No FPA with Guinea Bissau *4. No FPA with Mauritania *5. The métier OTB_CEP_>=70_0_0 fishing in Guinea Bissau should be renamed to OTB_MCF_>=70_0_0 na =not available.

Due to confidentiality issues, LVA could not provide effort data, because information about

“days-at-sea” is compiled for whole fleet segment of vessels with length more than 40 meters

(overall 5 vessels in the last two years), fishing in different fishing zones, including outside the

CECAF area.


13

Table. 3.3. Landings (tons) by country and métiers from 2010 to 2014 (Fishing ground: “From Morocco to Guinea-Bissau”).

MÉTIER 2010 ESP GER ITA LIT LVA NLD POL TOTAL

OTM_SPF_>=40_0_0 20650 116840 87237 87564 14605 326096

OTB_CRU_>=40_0_0 5331 5331

OTB_CEP_>=70_0_0 OTB_MCF_>=70_0_0* 6403 6403

OTB_DEF_>=70_0_0 5090 5090

OTB_DES_>=40_0_0 1751 1751

PS_SPF_0_0_0 1093 1093

LLS_DEF_6_0_0 669 669

MISC_DEF_0_0_0 444 444


OTM_SPF_>=40_0_0 37088 113700 89667 55044 60177 362976

OTB_CRU_>=40_0_0 5281 5281

OTB_MCF_>=70_0_0* 6967 6967

OTB_DEF_>=70_0_0 3603 3603

OTB_DES_>=40_0_0 2046 2046

LLS_DEF_6_0_0 789 789

MISC_DEF_0_0_0 469 469

PS_SPF_0_0_0 758

758


OTM_SPF_>=40_0_0 14582 48300 30207 34926 29178 138894

OTB_CRU_>=40_0_0 2806 2806

OTB_MCF_>=70_0_0* 6994 6994

OTB_DEF_>=70_0_0 3474 3474


OTM_SPF_>=40_0_0 62000 52820 11876 54137 174833

OTB_CRU_>=40_0_0 388 388


OTM_SPF_>=40_0_0 8282 103400 57561 64661 19934 235374

OTB_CRU_>=40_0_0 1076 1076

LLS_DEF_6_0_0 199 199

MISC_DEF_0_0_0 48 48

PS_SPF_0_0_0 4 4

* The métier OTB_CEP_>=70_0_0 fishing in Guinea Bissau was renamed to OTB_MCF_>=70_0_0 in 2015 (see section 3.1 paragraph Guinea-Bissau)

The summary of landing statistics for small pelagic trawl fishery in the West African waters of

the CECAF area, covering data from 2007 to 2014 is given in Table 3.4 below. The sharp decline


14

in landings occurred in 2012 due to the end of the FPA with Mauritania in July 2012. In 2013,

this fleet reentered this fishing ground, but landings are still low, due to the very restrictive

conditions of the new protocol of December 2012. At the time of the meeting, the group was not

aware of the reason for substantial increase of landings in 2014 as compared to previous year.

Table. 3.4. Landings (tons) of the EU trawl pelagic fleet from 2007 to 2014. Data provided by RCM participants.

Year Total EU landings (t)

2007 176 371

2008 314 332

2009 338 692

2010 326 896

2011 355 676

2012 157 194

2013 180 833

2014 253 838

Tables 3.5 - 3.6 below show the results of métier ranking for effort and landings criteria respectively for EU fishing activity in the CECAF area.

Table 3.5 Percentage of average effort (period 2012-2014) of different métiers operating in the CECAF area. Métiers are comparable to previous reports. Métiers included in the 90% threshold are marked in grey.

Métier % Effort

OTB_CRU_>=40_0_0 40.153

OTB_CEP_>=70_0_0

OTB_MCF_>=70_0_0

23.505

OTM_SPF_>=40_0_0 21.469

OTB_DEF_>=70_0_0 11.628

LLS_DEF_6_0_0 2.802

MISC_DEF_0_0_0 0.422

PS_SPF_0_0_0 0.022

Table 3.6 Percentage of average landings (period 2012-2014) of different métiers operating in the CECAF area. Métiers are comparable to previous reports. Métiers included in the 90% threshold are marked in grey.

Métier % Landings

OTM_SPF_>=40_0_0 96.114

OTB_DEF_>=70_0_0 2.016

OTB_CEP_>=70_0_0 (OTB_MCF_>=70_0_0)

1.020

OTB_CRU_>=40_0_0 0.693

OTB_MCF_>=70_0_0 0.116

LLS_DEF_6_0_0 0.032

MISC_DEF_0_0_0 0.008

PS_SPF_0_0_0 0.001


15

According to the métier ranking, no changes were observed for 2014 as compared to previous

years within the same métiers (Tab. 3.5 & 3.6). With regard to métier ranking for landings, the

single métier OTM_SPF_>=40_0_0, targeting small pelagics, constitutes more than 90%

threshold of métiers to be selected for sampling. In case of métier ranking for effort (Tab. 3.5),

four métiers were selected for sampling, including three demersal métiers targeting

crustaceans, cephalopods+finfish and demersal fish and one métier targeting small pelagics.

Other métiers targeting both small pelagics and demersal species were also included in previous

years due to their relevance in CECAF fisheries and their inclusion in respective FPAs fishing

opportunities. Therefore, no major changes occurred in the métiers sampled during the period

analyzed.

FISHING GROUND “CANARY”

A new métier was included in the Spanish National Programme in 2015. It is a mixed fishery

carried out by an artisanal fleet fishing demersal species in the Canary Islands, using different

types of fishing gears. The Annex 7 (“Canary Islands- New métier sampled in the DCF:

MIS_DES_0_0_0”) includes the description of this métier.

Effort and landings of the Canary Islands métiers are included in Tables 3.7 and 3.8,

respectively.

Table 3.7. Effort (fishing days) by métiers for the Canary Islands.2010-2014.

Country Métier (level 6) 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

ESP PS_SPF_10_0_0 2812 2714 2574 4010 2716

MIS_DES_0_0_0 na na na 28039 29206

Table 3.8. Landings (tons) by métiers for the Canary Islands. 2010 to 2014.

COUNTRY MÉTIER 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

ESP PS_SPF_10_0_0 1281 1431 1694 2353 1965

MIS_DES_0_0_0 na na na 1006 1079

FISHING GROUND “MADEIRA”

Table 3.9. Effort (fishing days) by métiers for Madeira. 2010-2013.

Country Métier (level 6) 2010 2011 2012 2013

PT LHM_FIF_0_0_0 36 92 333 318

LHP_LPF_0_0_0 1534 1488 1911 1139

LLD_DWF_0_0_0 3579 3760 2518 2465

LLS_FIF_0_0_0 1117 817 914 674

MISC_MOL_0_0_0 829 402 737 595

PS_SPF_16_0_0 740 540 743 571

Total métiers by years 7835 7098 7156 5762


16

Table 3.10.- Landings (tons) by métiers for Madeira. 2010-2013.

COUNTRY MÉTIER 2010 2011 2012 2013

PT PS_SPF_16_0_0 556 738 535 593

MISC_MOL_0_0_0 120 127 121 89

LLS_FIF_0_0_0 51 55 53 26

LLD_DWF_0_0_0 2079 2148 1887 1846

LHP_LPF_0_0_0 851 975 2266 1009

LHM_FIF_0_0_0 1 2 5 6

The most significant changes in the fishing activities of the EU fleets in CECAF waters during

2014 in relation to the previous years are due to the restarting of some fisheries in Morocco and

Guinea-Bissau, within the framework of the respective new protocols of July and October 2014.

New métiers were reported for Morocco in this RCM, due to the fishing opportunities in the new

FPA. The new SFPA with Senegal (October 2014) includes fishing opportunities for hake

trawlers, which started to be used in 2015. In addition, the expiration of the last FPA with

Mauritania, involving the cease of most EU fisheries at the end of 2014 should be noted.

3.2 SPRFMO area

Until 2011, the fishery in the SPRMFO area (South-East Pacific) was carried out by EU large

pelagic freezer trawlers and was directed to Chilean jack mackerel (Trachurus murphyi) mainly.

The fishery in this area is managed by the South Pacific Regional Fisheries Management

Organisation (SPRMFO). An overview of fishing activity and species fished by EU MS in the

SPRMFO area were presented in the RCM LDF 2012 Report.

No EU fleet activities in that area were reported over 2012. In 2013 only one vessel under the

Lithuanian flag was active with a negligible landings volume. Based on information available at

the SPRMFO webpage7 and the National report of the European Union to the 2014 SPRFMO

Science Committee, in 2014 only two EU vessels (one under DE and one under NL flags) were

fishing in the SPRMFO area from May to October with the total catch of 19565 tonnes of

Trachurus murphyi (representing 4.8% of the total catch of this species reported to SPRMFO).

7 COMM-03-INF-01; Data submitted to the SPRFMO Secretariat as at 15th January 2015 (https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/Meetings/Meetings-2013-plus/Commission-Meetings/3rd-Commission-Meeting-2015-Auckland-New-Zealand/COMM-03-INF-01-Data-Submitted-to-the-

Secretariat.pdf)


17

4. Review progress in regional co-ordination since the 2014 RCM

4.1 Follow-up of the 11th Liaison Meeting

The RCM reviewed the report from the 11th Liaison Meeting. There were no recommendations

endorsed by the 11th LM specifically addressed to the RCM LDF to be reviewed and/or discussed

by the group. The RCM LDF however, reflected on the recommendation endorsed by the LM

related to the newly introduced landing obligation in the context of its impact on the data

collection (See section 6.1).

4.2 Feedback from end users, including NC meeting

Following the discussion held during the 2014 meeting, FAO/CECAF were contacted by RCM LDF

participants from Spain in order to consult their data requirements, including species, biological

variables and frequency of data to be collected in both short and long term perspective and the

draft list of species and biological variables to be potentially included in the EU MAP (provided

by the Commission in 2014) was sent for its revision. CECAF responded with the list of species

that are assessed in demersal and small pelagic Working Groups, noting that sharks and rays

included in the list are considered also of high relevance, although they are not assessed. The

lists of species indicated by FAO/CECAF as relevant for the assessments purposes are provided

in the Annex 8.

With regard to the SPRMFO, its website gives clear details on the data required and the format

for data submission. An overall comparison of observer data required by the SPRMFO with those

under the DCF was presented in the RCM LDF 2011 report.

The group reviewed the minutes and outcomes of the last NC meeting arranged by the

Commission on 25th March 2015. The main outcome of that meeting, in relation to the long

distance fisheries, was the decision to call an ad hoc RCM LDF meeting in April 2015 in order to

provide the follow-up of the outstanding RCM LDF 2013 recommendation to implement a

multilateral agreement on the basis of joint sampling of the fishery activities in the SPRFMO

area (Minutes of that meeting are presented in Annex 3).

4.3 Sampling coordination in the area of competence of the RCM LDF

In 2011, all MS involved in CECAF pelagic trawlers fisheries (Germany, Poland, the Netherlands,

Lithuania and Latvia) agreed to implement a common sampling programme in 2012 and 2013.

The multilateral agreement between these MS includes an allocation key for sharing the costs of

this programme. Sampling is based on an observer programme and is carried out by staff of

IMROP (the Mauritanian Oceanographic and Fishery Research Institute). The programme is

designed in accordance with current DCF requirements and is described in Annex 5 of the 2011

report of the RCM-LDF.

In 2013, all partners to the multilateral agreement signed an amendment to extent the joint

sampling program for small pelagics fishery in the CECAF area for another two years period,

until 31 December 2015. This agreement was amended mid-term to reflect the new financing

structure of the EMFF. In 2015, the agreement was again amended to extent the programme for

one year. The current end date is December 31, 2016 (Annex 4).

For the SPRFMO area, a new multi-lateral agreement was set in April 2015 (Annex 4). This

agreement builds upon the experience gained with the CECAF agreement. The sampling

programme is a continuation of sampling previously carried out under private arrangements

from the industry and the programme is in line with DCF and SPRFMO requirements. This

agreement will also end by December 31, 2016.

Given the end date of both agreements, the options for continuation of the programmes need to

be considered during the RCM LDF 2016 and if necessary, intersessionaly. Also, the

continuation, scope and design of the sampling programmes need to be reviewed in the light of

the new DCF as soon as the new DCF commences, including the redesigned sampling schemes.

currently being developed by various working groups and projects.


18

5. Data Quality issues

5.1 Progress on quality, control, validation etc.

RCM LDF discussed the planned work under the granted EU project on “Strengthening regional

cooperation in the area of fisheries data collection” (See section 7). The outcomes of this project

are of relevance to this group in terms of addressing the data quality issues as described in

earlier reports of this group (e.g. in 2012, 2014, indicating that data quality is poor or scarce for

e.g. the CECAF area).

Currently, no progress has been made in improving data quality by changing the sampling

design as the current situation of sampling the fisheries in CECAF and SPRMFO area is still

opportunistic, as is the fishery. This implies that it’s unlikely that a well established stratified

sampling will be successful. The group wishes to benefit from the work carried out in the EU

project and apply the methodology to sampling the LDF fishery where feasible.

No major shortfalls, other than already identified, in data quality are expected.

5.2 Developing statistical sound harmonised sampling programmes

Proposed DCMAP framework for regional sampling programmes

Given the current stand-still in the development of the new DCF, no progress has been made

towards the transformation of the RCM to RCGs. In general and as indicated during various

Expert Groups, the future RCGs should work more like year round process, rather than a one-off

meeting a year. The idea is to have a data compilation and analysis group, followed by

intersessional work preparing the grounds for agreements on tasks sharing and cooperation.

These agreements can then be concluded at a dedicated meeting where the NCs (or authorized

representatives) are present. This is the ideal situation, but in practice, national legal legislation

may prevent authorizing persons to sign on behalf of a MS. Where relevant, agreements need to

be prepared well in advance to be able to seek prior approval of the MS. RCM LDF is convinced

that given the current good cooperation in the region, a workable solution will be found.

Again, as this issue is addressed in the above mentioned EU proposal (MARE/2014/19), RCM

LDF will discuss the outcomes of this proposal regarding this transformation and act upon new

information. Given the well established cooperation between the MS present in the RCM LDF, no

concerns arise at this stage.

However, consultation of the main end-users is limited at this moment, a positive development

is the first response by CECAF to a request to list species CECAF requires data for. This

interaction is described in section 4.2 and in Annex 8. To ensure and improve adequate data

collection, this consultation needs to be improved as soon as possible. Having a clear view of

end-user needs, obligations and data requirements are crucial for a successful migration to a

RCG and to establish effective and useful sampling plans in the regions. This issue has been

addressed at various occasions, specifying that regional workplans should be developed in line

with end-user priorities while operating within the boundaries of the available budgets and

human resources.

Harmonizing national sampling programmes in CECAF and SPRMFO areas

The joint sampling programmes for pelagic fisheries are already established in CECAF and

SPRFMO areas can be seen as the ultimate harmonization of sampling programmes as only one

sampling protocol is executed. As detailed end user specifications lack at the moment, RCM LDF

does not foresee to amend the sampling protocols for 2015/2016, unless new DCF requirements

come into force during these years. Currently, the demersal fisheries in CECAF area are Spanish

and as such Spain covers the sampling of these fisheries nationally without having the need to

harmonize the sampling at regional level. The data is forwarded to CECAF working groups.


19

Statistical sound sampling in progress

As described in RCM LDF 2014 report, WKPICS2 provided a draft for “best practice” guidelines

with best practice for the new DCF (WKPICS, 2012). To make a start with the development of a

statistical sound sampling programme for long distance fisheries the RCM validated its sampling

design and implementation of sampling the fisheries in the CECAF area with these guidelines in

2013 already (RCM LDF Report 2013). At that time, one general concern and three key

inefficiencies in the sampling programmes were identified. The Liaison Meeting 2013 made two

recommendations regarding data quality issues and sampling design that needed to be

considered in the 2014 meeting. To ensure follow-up on these issues, the 2015 RCM revisited

these points and updated the responses to the current status.

Identified inefficiencies, LM recommendations, progress in resolving identified inefficiencies and

follow up on recommendations are reported in the table below:

Identified inefficiencies (WKPICS guide

lines)/ Liaison Meeting recommendations/

other issues

Progress/ response from RCM LDF

An important matter for long distance fisheries is

that they are active outside European

waters/regions. Information on fleets and vessel

activities of non-EU countries is not available for

the RCM (at least for the CECAF area), this

complicates the development of statistical sound

harmonised sampling programmes at a regional

level outside the EU.

To improve the communication with end-users

and subsequently collect information to use as a

basis for a regional sampling plan, RCM LDF

strives to contact relevant scientific groups in

CECAF and SPRFMO to request access to these

groups or at least establish a communication

channel to ensure optimal communication with

the end-users.

The chair of the RCM LDF will contact, in

cooperation with the EU representative

responsible for the area, FAO and request access

to the FAO Working Group on the Assessment of

Small Pelagic Fish off Northwest Africa as an

observer. Preferably, the first participation will

already take place in July 2015, when the next

WG is held in Casablanca.

For SPRFMO, the Dutch co-chair of the SPRFMO

scientific committee will be contacted to bring

him up to date on EU obligations, future

developments and to request feedback on the

data collection and requirements from SPRFMO

perspective.

The sample selection procedure. Samples, trips of

a particular vessel, are selected opportunistically,

based on the cooperation willingness of particular

vessels. In accordance with a statistically sound

sampling programme trips of vessels should be

selected randomly.

IMROP has been instructed to select vessels

randomly. However, as the number of available

vessels is (very) limited, the options for random

sampling are very scarce.

System to monitor performance of sampling

schemes - Quality Indicators. A system to

monitor refusal rates and non-response rates is

lacking for all monitored fisheries. Effective

sample size (or appropriate proxy such as

number of vessels or trips sampled) should be

calculated and recorded.

The external contractor provides information on

the sampling coverage for both areas upon

request.


20

Documentation of raising/weighting procedure for

national estimates. To date, estimates based on

samples of the long distance sampling

programmes have never been used in stock

assessments or management.

Not requested in current in DCF. Documentation

is available at IMROP (Mauritania) and IEO

(Spain). On the long term, activities to compare

and synchronize these protocols should be

investigated.

It is recommended that a ‘dry-run’ on the

progress form end-user participation to defining

data needs and designing a regional sampling

scheme is carried out during the roll-over years

2014-2016. The process itself, participating

meetings and end-user specification can be used

as specified by STECF EWG 13-02.

No current action, however, this issue should be

addressed as soon as new DCF requirements are

published.


21

6. New CFP and development of of EU-MAP

6.1 Impact of the landing obligation

In general, in the context of long distance fisheries, which operate under the governance of the

RFMO-managed international waters or waters of third countries with which the EU has a

Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreement (SFPA), the landing obligation or discard plans (if

and when in place) will depend on the specific management measures adopted by the relevant

RFMO or SFPA and will be fishing area-specific.

In relation to the evaluation of the impact of the introduction of the landing obligation and/or

preparations for its implementation in the context of the Long Distance Fisheries, one of the

Spanish participants presented the results concerning CECAF and SFPAs of Morocco and

Mauritania of the Specific Contract No. 3 “For the provision of advice on the management of

discards in EU fisheries beyond EU waters”.

This project was carried out under Framework Contract No. MARE/2012/21 “Scientific advice for

fisheries beyond EU Waters”. The Consortium members involved were MRAG (UK)

(Coordinator), IEO and AZTI (ES), IMARES (NL) and IPMA (PT). The purpose of this project was

to provide the Commission with an overview of the existing international obligations regarding

the management of discards within selected RFMOs and SFPAs beyond EU waters and to identify

to what extent such international obligations are aligned or inconsistent with the EU landing

obligation (Article 15 of the new Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) regulation, to be implemented

by 2019.

CECAF (as a RFO) and the SFPA with Morocco and Mauritania management measures were

considered for this study. The first task of the project was to provide an inventory of the EU's

international obligations concerning the management of discards and of all non-binding

international recommendations, resolutions or any kind of soft law measures concerning the

management of discards and identify which obligations are applicable to EU vessels by EU

legislation but not applicable to all fleets at international level; and second, which internationally

agreed measures that are binding in the Union and that are incompatible with the discard ban

provided by the new CFP Regulation.

Considering that CECAF acts exclusively as an advisory body, providing advice on fisheries

management issues to its members, no obligations related to the management of discards are

imposed by CECAF itself. In this context, it was also noted that the EU landing obligation is not

applicable in waters subject to a third country sovereignty or jurisdiction (Article 15d), as is the

case of Morocco, Mauritania and Guinea-Bissau.

Among the two West African SFPAs considered, only one measure under the current protocol of

the SFPA EU-Morocco applies both to a single species with an EU-specific TAC, as well as to a

fleet in which an EU métier is active. It is the case of the 0% bycatch limitation of swordfish

(Xiphias gladius), established for the métier of artisanal longliners targeting Trichiuridae in the

North (Fishing category No. 2 of the FPA: “Small scale fishing in the North”). Swordfish is a

species subject to an ICCAT TAC in North Atlantic waters and is also listed within Council

Regulation (EC) 104/2015. Therefore the EU landing obligation applies based on Article 15(1).

However, the bycatch limitation under the EU-Morocco FPA does not stipulate how bycatch

exceeding 0% limit must be managed and therefore there is no specific obligation to discard

catches of swordfish. Thus, the conclusion was that no EU métiers are considered to be affected

by a potential inconsistency between the EU landing obligation and the terms of the Morocco or

Mauritania SFPA protocols.


22

6.2 Ranking of métier to find out whether any of the NPs need to be modified for 2015.

In order to check if the fisheries in 2014 had similar pattern as in previous years or whether

there were significant changes to that pattern and to evaluate whether or not there is a need for

amendments of NP for 2016 in relation to the long distance fishing activity, the group performed

the ranking of métiers using effort (days at sea) and landings data for 2012-2014 for the CECAF

area (see section 3.1 – “CECAF area” for details).

Based on the above analysis of the most actual métier ranking at the regional level compared

with the métiers selected for sampling in the NPs 2014-2016 in respect of the fishing activity in

the CECAF area, the RCM LDF is concluded that there is no need for changes or amendments to

the NPs for 2016 in respect of the long distance fisheries in CECAF area.

The only change to the execution of NPs in current year and 2016 relates to the NPs budgets

and the need to secure funding necessary to implement the multilateral agreement on the joint

sampling programme for the fishery activities in the SPRFMO area (agreed and signed by the

MS concerned in 2015).


23

7. Surveys, studies and pilot projects

Early 2015, 2 project proposals were granted in response to the EU call for proposals on

“Strengthening regional cooperation in the area of fisheries data collection” (MARE/2014/19).

The 2 projects cover the Mediterranean region and the combined North Atlantic/North Sea

region. The latter project was presented and briefly discussed at the RCM.

The project (also known as the fishPi project) revolves around the following strategic aims:

• To propose Regional Sampling Designs

• To develop and implement the use of probability based selection methods

• To propose mechanisms for international working (e.g. conversion of RCMs to

RCGs)

• To develop cooperation within and between regions

The ultimate added value is created by producing better estimates based on statistically credible

methods, while these are based on efficient and cost effecting working procedures.

From an organisational point of view, the project leadership is in the hands of the Scottish

University of St Andrews. The consortium consists of 14 institutions (40 individuals) completed

with 2 external statistical experts. The total budget is approximately 400k€. The duration of the

project is 12 months, ending April 2016.

The actual work is distributed over 4 work packages:

1.Regional cooperation (including reviewing existing coordinating activities, proposals for

regional work programmes and regional/national consultations on the implementation of the

case studies, stemming from Work Package 2)

2. Regional Sampling designs for commercial fisheries based on case studies:

a) Small pelagics

b) North Sea mixed demersal fisheries

c) North Sea flatfish

d) Northern & Southern Hake

These studies include regional sampling designs, estimation methods and protocols, data

exchange formats and code lists and provision of standardized R-scripts.

3.Regional sampling programmes for fisheries and ecosystem impact data not currently

collected (including by-catch currently undersampled within the DCF like PETS, analyse different

observation methods, stomach analysis and sampling procedures, sampling of small scale

fisheries and recreational fisheries).

4. Data quality at a national and regional level and output products (including development of

detailed guidelines for application of quality indicators at national and regional datasets,

standardized R-scripts, develop working procedures for quality control through e.g. regional

databases)

The group felt that the work done within this project is beneficial for sampling procedures in

place for the long distance fisheries. The outcomes of the project and possible future

implications will be reviewed in 2016.

The Commission pre-announced a call for proposals by mid-2015 to continue the work of the

2014 call. A 1.8m€ proposal will be launched to:

a) Conduct inter-sessional work between the annual Regional Coordination Meetings or

meetings of the Planning Group of Economists;

b) further develop regional and EU-wide databases and transmission process for DCF data;


24

c) develop and test an operational framework for establishing and coordinating

statistically-sound sampling programmes at a regional or EU scale;

d) trial the collection of new variables that may be required under reformed CFP.

(http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/maritimeaffairs_fisheries/contracts_and_funding/annual_work_programme/2015/c_2014_9794_en.pdf, page 14).

Based on this scope, RCM LDF decided not to form a consortium to apply for this grant, but

rather participate on a national basis to other consortia that are likely to be formed, building

upon the experience gained in the 2014 call.

The Framework Contract No. MARE/2012/21 “Scientific advice for fisheries beyond EU Waters”

has been performed during 2014 and continued in 2015 through the development of a number

of specific contracts. The aim of this framework contract is to constitute a provision of scientific

advice and other services for the implementation of the CFP beyond EU waters. The contract has

been conceived to provide the European Commission with a flexible tool to give specific and

timely scientific responses through advice and/or other specific preliminary services needed for

the provision of the advice, which is necessary for the day-to-day policy and management of

fisheries managed under RFMOs and SFAs, in the context of the external dimension of the

Common Fisheries. More detailed description of that project was provided in the RCM LDF 2014

report.

http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/maritimeaffairs_fisheries/contracts_and_funding/annual_work_programme/2015/c_2014_9794_en.pdf

http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/maritimeaffairs_fisheries/contracts_and_funding/annual_work_programme/2015/c_2014_9794_en.pdf


25


8.1 Recommendations

In order to ensure that all active fisheries in the areas in the competence of the RCM LDF are

covered and that updated information on the MS’ involvement in working groups of any RFMOs

related to fishing activity in the waters outside the EU is available, the RCM LDF made the

following recommendation:

Recommendation 2015-1 : RCM LDF Data calls

RCMLDF 2015

Recommendation

RCM LDF recommends that from 2016 onwards, data calls related

to long distance fisheries are addressed to all non-landlocked EU MS in order to:

ensure that all active fisheries in the areas in the competence of the RCM LDF are covered;

obtain information on MS’ participation in the working groups of any RFMOs related to fishing activity in the waters outside the EU

It is expected that all National Correspondents contacted respond to the data call either with information on all fishing activity beyond the EU waters by the vessels under the flag of their MS or with confirmation of none of such activities.

Follow-up actions needed

RCM LDF Chair to launch data call

All non land-locked Members States to respond

Responsible persons for follow-up actions

Chair of the RCM LDF and non land-locked Members States

Time frame (Deadline) RCM LDF Data Calls from 2016 onwards

8.2 Time and venue of the RCM LDF meeting in 2016

In order to ease the coordination workload for experts attending more than one RCM and

following the expected work schedule for 2016, the next RCM LDF will be held in June 2016,

unless urgent issues call for an earlier meeting.

Regarding the venue of the next RCM LDF meeting, the Lithuania invites the group to come to

Klaipeda or Vilnius for its next meeting. The RCM appreciated the invitation by Lithuania to hold

the meeting.

8.3 Chairmanship

While taking into account EU Regulation 665/2008 Article 4.2, RCM LDF proposes Sieto Verver

(NL) as the new chair. The group thanked Irek for chairing and guiding the group for 4

consecutive years.


26

In order to facilitate the common memory of the group, the following table provides an

overview of the venues and chairmanship of this RCM.

Year Venue Chair

2015 Hamburg, Germany

Cádiz, Spain Irek Wojcik (Poland)

2014 IJmuiden, The Netherlands Irek Wojcik (Poland)

2013 Constanza, Romania Irek Wojcik (Poland)

2012 Madrid, Spain Irek Wojcik (Poland)

2011 Ljubljana, Slovenia Maria Teresa Garcia (Spain) and Dirk-Jan van der Stelt

(The Netherlands)

2010 Madrid, Spain Maria Teresa Garcia (Spain) and Jaime Mejuto (Spain)


27

9. Glossary

AR Annual Report (of activities carried out by MS under the DCF)

AWP Annual Workplan

CECAF Fishery Committee for the Eastern Central Atlantic

CFP Common Fishery Policy (EU)

CR Control Regulations (EU)

DCF Data Collection Framework (follow up of DCR)

DC-MAP Multi Annual Programme for Data Collection (follow up of DCF)

EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone

EFMM European Fisheries and Maritime Fund

EWG STECF Expert Working Group

FPA Fishing Partnership Agreement

GFCM General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (FAO)

IATTC Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission

ICCAT International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas

ICES International Council for the Exploration of the Sea

IOTC Indian Ocean Tuna Commission

JSC Joint Scientific Committees (of the FPA)

LDF Long Distance Fishery

LM Liaison Meeting

LP Large Pelagic species

MRR Master Reference Register

MS Member State(s) (of the EU)

NA North Atlantic

NP National Programme (of activities carried out by MS under the DCF)

NS&EA North Sea and Eastern Arctic

OP Operational Programme

PGCCDBS Planning Group on Commercial Catches, Discards and Biological Sampling

PGECON Planning Group on Economic Issues

PGMed Mediterranean Planning Group for Methodological Development

RCG Regional Coordination Group

RCM Regional Coordination Meeting

RDB Regional Data Base (of the RCM)

RDB S.C. Regional Data Base Steering Committee (of the RCM)

RFMO Regional Fisheries Management Organization

SPRMFO South Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Organization

STECF Scientific, Technical and EconomicCommittee for Fisheries

WCPFC Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission

WGRFS ICES Working Group on Recreational Fisheries Surveys

WKPICS ICES Workshop on the Practical Implementation of Statistical Sound Catch

Sampling Programmes


28

10. Annexes

10.1 Annex 1 – Agenda of the 1st meeting (April 2015; Hamburg, Germany)

EU DATA COLLECTION FRAMEWORK (DCF)

REG. 199/2008

Regional Co-ordination Meeting for the Long Distance Fisheries

(RCM LDF 2015 – 1)

Hamburg, 21 – 22 April, 2015

Thünen Institute [TI]), Hamburg, Germany

Agenda (draft)

General time schedule:

Tuesday Wednesday

11:00 - 18:00 - meeting time 09:00 – 16:00 - meeting time

13:00 – 14:30 - Lunch 10:45 – 11:15 - Coffee break

16.00 - 16.30: Coffee break 13:00 - 14:30 - Lunch

Work Plan

Tuesday, 21st April 2015

11.00 - 16.00 : Plenary session:

4. Welcome, organization & house rules, adoption of the agenda, appointment of rapporteurs

5. Folow up of the RCM LDF 2013 recommendation to implement a multilateral

agreement on the basis of joint sampling program of fisheries activity in SPRMFO area o Protocol for the data collection – scope and format of data required by the

SPRMFO standards (based on the SPRMFO Data Standards 2015)

o Choice of the coordination agency for data collection

o Cost sharing key

o Conclusion of the agreement

16.30 – 18.00 : Plenary session: Point 2 continued

Wednesday, 22nd

April 2015

9.00 - 10.45 : Plenary session

6. Discussion on the possibility to extent the Multilateral agreement for sampling in

CECAF

11.15 – 13.00 : Plenary session Point 3 continued

14.30 – 16.00 : Plenary session:


8. Adoption of the draft report

Closure of the meeting


29

10.2 Annex 2 – Agenda of the 2nd meeting (June 2015; Cadiz, Spain)

EU DATA COLLECTION FRAMEWORK (DCF)

REG. 199/2008

Regional Co-ordination Meeting for the Long Distance Fisheries

(RCM LDF 2015 – 2)

Cádiz, 9–12 June, 2015

Instituto Español de Oceanografía (IEO), Centro Oceanográfico de Cádiz

Puerto Pesquero. Muelle de Levante, Cádiz, Spain

Agenda

General time schedule:

Tuesday – Thursday Friday

9:00 - 18:00 - meeting time 09:00 – 14:00 - meeting time

11:00 – 11:30 - Coffee break 11:00 – 11:30 - Coffee break

13:00 - 14:30 - Lunch

16:00 – 16:30 - Coffee break

Work Plan

Tuesday, 9th

June 2015


9. Welcome, introduction of the participants, organization & house rules

10. Discussion on the proposed ToRs, adoption of the agenda and appointment of

rapporteurs

ToR 1 Review progress since 2014 following up the 11th

LiaisonMeeting report

o Follow-up of recommendations

o Review of the outputs of RCM 2014

o Review of the outputs of the 11th Liaison Meeting

ToR 2 Review feedback and recommendations from data end users

11.15 – 13.00 : Plenary session

ToR 2 continued

ToR 3 Analyse data from 2015 RCM LDF data call

o Update the catch statistics (based on data tables provided by MS)

14.30 – 18.00 : Plenary sessions:

ToR 3 continued

Wednesday, 10th

June 2015

9.00 – 18.00 : Plenary session (the whole day)

ToR 4 Regional data collection, analysis and storage and the evolution towards RCGs


30

o Consider the progress of the “strengthening regional cooperation in data

collection” mare/2014/19, and possible implications;

o Review progress in data quality screening, harmonisation of national and regional

data checking procedures.

o Consider the data collection protocols for at-sea and on-shore sampling in the

context of regional sampling designs and probability selection methods.

o Identify any amendments to NP needed in 2016. Consider future funding

mechanisms to continue strengthening regional cooperation

Thursday, 11th

June 2015


ToR 5 Landing Obligation o Evaluate the impact of the introduction of the landing obligation, and/or

preparations for its implementation, in the context of the Long Distance Fisheries

11.15 – 13.00 : Plenary session

ToR 6 National Administrations o Address any issues relating specifically to national administrations and consider

the role of NC within the RCM/RCG context.

o Task sharing and task trading mechanisms that might operate within the context of

a regional sampling designs


ToR 6 continued


Draft recommendations – discussion

Adoption of the recommendations

Report assemblage and reading

Friday, 12th

June 2015


Report assemblage and reading – continued

ToR 8 Any other business o place and date of the next RCM/RCG LDF

o election of the new chair

Adoption of the draft report

Closure of the meeting


31

10.3 Annex 3 - Minutes with the outcomes of the 1st RCM LDF meeting (April 21-22, 2015, Hamburg, Germany)

Minutes of the Ad hoc Regional Coordination Meeting for the Long Distance Fisheries (RCM

LDF 2015-1)

Hamburg, 21-22 April 2015

1 Introduction

The meeting of RCM LDF 2015-1 was initiated during the EU National Correspondents meeting of

March 25, 2015 in order to provide the follow-up of the outstanding RCM LDF 2013 recommendation

to implement a multilateral agreement on the basis of joint sampling of the fishery activities in the

SPRFMO area. As the main RCM LDF meeting is due in June, while the fisheries in the SPRMFO area

by the EU vessels already commences late April, the main meeting will not meet in time to ensure

coordination of adequate biological sampling during the 2015 fishing season. The Member States

involved thus agreed to meet on an ad hoc basis to address the recommendation in question. While

addressing the SPRFMO recommendation, the meeting also provides the platform to discuss the

extension of the already established multi-lateral agreement for the CECAF region as this agreement

is due to terminate by the end of 2015.

The following participants attended the meeting:

Christoph Stransky (Germany) Ireneusz Wójcik (Poland, chair) Kay Panten (Germany) Maksims Kovsars (Latvia, part-time) Sieto Verver (The Netherlands) Vilda Griunienė (Lithuania)

The participants appreciated the offer by Germany to host the meeting.

2 Agreements for the SPRFMO region

Rationale

Based on the current DCF regulation, all MS fishing in the SPRFMO area for Chilean Jack Mackerel

hold the obligation to sample at least 10% of the fishing activities in the area8. The fisheries

conducted by Germany, Lithuania, The Netherlands and Poland in SPRMFO area are all similar,

involving pelagic vessels targeting jack mackerel. Given the experiences with the successful

implementation of a multi-lateral agreement in the CECAF area, the MS involved expressed their wish

to set up a similar multi-lateral agreement for the SPRFMO area to ensure labour and cost-efficient

sampling in the region.

The following paragraphs present the main outcomes of the discussions at the meeting and the

subsequent conclusions. The outcomes of the discussions during the meeting are reflected in the

actual multi-lateral agreement.

Choice of the coordination agency for data collection

The Netherlands offered to coordinate the biological data collection in SPRFMO area through a multi-

lateral agreement for all MS involved for the years 2015 & 2016. The actual work will be done by a

subcontractor (Corten Marine Research, CMR), hired by The Netherlands.

Conclusion: Germany, Lithuania, The Netherlands and Poland agreed that The Netherlands will act

as the coordinating agency for the multi-lateral agreement. The Netherlands will organize the

sampling on behalf of its partners as described in the multi-lateral agreement between Germany,

Lithuania, The Netherlands and Poland.

8 CMM 3.01; Conservation and Management Measure for Trachurus murphyi (SPRFMO-COMM-03 (2015) ANNEX H)


32

Cost sharing key

The group discussed various options for a cost sharing key. The two most obvious cost sharing keys

relate to either the TAC share for each MS or the average landings over a certain period of time. The

latter construction was not considered appropriate for this region as the fishery has an opportunistic

character and the united fleet owners distribute the quota and effort over the vessels (and flag

states) available for the fisheries. Hence, landings are not a “true” MS figure, but based more on

opportunistic behaviour of the industry.

In order to achieve maximum stability for cost sharing, the group agreed to follow the relative TAC

distribution as determined by the EU Regulation on Fishing Opportunities 2015 (regulation

2015/523)9.

Conclusion: Following the relative TAC shares as described in the EU Regulation on Fishing

Opportunities 2015 (regulation 2015/523), Germany, Lithuania, The Netherlands and Poland agree on

the following cost sharing key for the subcontracting costs of the biological sampling in the SPRMFO

area. This key applies to 2015 and 2016.

Member State Share in costs (%)

Germany 25.15

Lithuania 17.50

The Netherlands 27.26

Poland 30.09

Sampling coverage and costs

The group discussed the sampling coverage of the fisheries in terms of appropriate and sufficient

coverage of the fishing season. Two options were discussed: adhere to the minimum of 10%

coverage of the fishing effort in the region (SPRFMO requirements) or strive to cover the entire

fishing season thus ensuring both sufficient coverage as well as addressing the recommendation by

the autumn 2014 meeting of the SPRFMO Scientific Committee to ensure adequate coverage

throughout a fishing season. The latter option also addresses the intention of the European

Commission to adhere to end-user recommendations.

For both options, either 10% coverage or “full” coverage, CMR provided the group with budget

forecasts. The first option would costs € 59.845,= (ex VAT), the second option € 81.705,= (ex VAT).

Should the fishery increase during 2015 or 2016 and the chosen option proves to be insufficient, an

ad hoc solution to expand the sampling coverage will be sought between the partners.

Conclusion: Following the intentions of the European Commission to adhere to end-user

requirements and recommendations, Germany, Lithuania, The Netherlands and Poland agree to

ensure full coverage of the fishing season. This implies a maximum 5 trips of 6 weeks during the

entire season.

Tendering

The group discussed the need for tendering procedures. Given the current, already well established

framework for data collection in the region by CMR as well as proven reliability, accuracy and

9 Council Regulation (EU) 2015/523 of 25 March 2015 amending Regulations (EU) No 43/2014

and (EU) 2015/104 as regards certain fishing opportunities


33

scientific achievements, CMR currently is the obvious candidate for this assignment. Hence, the group

considered tendering for this assignment is not appropriate.

Protocol for the data collection in SPRFMO area

The group discussed the manual for data collection in SPRFMO area as provided to the group by

CMR10. Comparisons were made between the SPRFMO Data Standards11 and the manual. The

following observations were made:

The CMR observer manual provides for collection of all information required by SPRFMO, except the

following:

There are no forms found in the observer manual collecting information required in the SPRFMO Data

Standards, Annex 7 Part B Paragraph q “Record any bycatch mitigation measures employed”.

Record any bycatch mitigation measures employed:

Were bird scaring (tori) lines in use? (nil/equipment code - as described in Section L)

Were bird bafflers in use? (nil/equipment code - as described in Section N)

Describe the offal/discard discharge management in place (select all that apply: no discharge

during shooting and hauling/ only liquid discharge/waste batching ≥ 2 hours/other/none).

Were any other measures used to reduce the bycatch of marine mammals, seabirds, septiles

or species of concern? (Yes/No)

The observer manual also does not include forms for Annex 7 Part G Paragraph 2 and 3 of the

SPRFMO Data Standards:

Record sex of each individual for taxa where this is feasible from external observation, e.g.

pinnipeds, small cetaceans or Elasmobranchii species of concern.

Were there any circumstances or actions that may have contributed to the bycatch event?

(e.g. tori line tangle, high levels of bait loss)

Conclusion: The Netherlands will notify CMR and will request to collect the required data and include

the required forms in the manual if appropriate. Should the additions be considered not relevant to

these fisheries, partners might agree to accept the exception to collect the data. In addition, CMR will

be asked to specify in the manual that the data collection protocol is based on SPRMFO requirements,

including reference to the relevant SPRFMO document (CMM 3.02)

Multi-lateral agreement

Following the conclusions as described above, Germany, Lithuania, The Netherlands and Poland

settled a multi-lateral agreement for biological sampling in the SPRFMO area. The agreement was

signed by Germany, The Netherlands and Poland at the meeting. Lithuania will sign the agreement

later, due to national legal arrangements, and will distribute the signed agreements to the Partners.

Based on this agreement The Netherlands will subcontract CMR.

10 Observer manual for PFA vessels in the Pacific, version 5 11 CMM 3.02, Conservation and Management Measure on Standards for the Collection,

Reporting, Verification and Exchange of Data (SPRFMO-COMM-03 (2015) ANNEX K)


34

3 Agreement for the CECAF region

Amendment to the agreement

The current multi-lateral agreement (signed in 2011) for biological sampling in the CECAF region

terminates on December 31, 2015. The original agreement has been amended a few times to reflect

changes in the financing structure and to extent the end-date. The last amendment dates from

December 2014 determining the end-date of the agreement on December 31, 2015. In December

2014, the subcontractor involved, CMR, indicated that they would not be able to extent the services

into 2016. This statement was withdrawn in April 2015, thus allowing to extent the agreement for

2016.

Given the experiences with the successful implementation of a multi-lateral agreement in the CECAF

area over the last years, the MS involved expressed their wish to amend the current agreement again

to allow for the extension.

Conclusion: The current agreement for biological sampling in the CECAF area will be extended to

December 31, 2016.

Costs and cost sharing key

CMR provided the group with a budget forecast for 2016, resulting in a slight increase (Appx

3000Euro) of the maximum total costs as compared to currently agreed budget. Having reviewed the

budget forecast, the group agrees with the amended budget.

Currently, the total costs are shared over the partners following the average distribution of the

landings over the reference period 2008-2012. The group explored the impact of shifting the

reference period to 2010-2014 as well as using the entire period of 2008-2014 as a reference period.

Both options didn’t result in any significant shift in the relative contribution of the partners, hence the

already established cost sharing key was considered to be appropriate and could be continued.

Conclusion: The total maximum costs for biological sampling in the CECAF area for 2016 amounts to

€67.700. The cost sharing key will not be modified for 2016.

Final conclusion

Following the conclusions described above, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, The Netherlands and Poland

settled the amendment to the multi-lateral agreement for biological sampling in the CECAF area. The

amendment was signed at the meeting by Germany, The Netherlands and Poland. Due to national

legal arrangements, Lithuania and Latvia will sign the amendment later and will distribute the signed

agreements to the Partners.

Based on this conclusion The Netherlands will amend the subcontract with CMR.

4 Any other business

Considerations for future sampling

Through the current setup of multi-lateral agreements, biological sampling in both CECAF and

SPRFMO area is secured for 2015 and 2016. The group briefly addressed the follow-up of this work

after 2016. The current setup through an expert sub-contractor, focussing on these two areas alone,

proves to be very efficient. CMR however stressed that 2016 will be the last year of service as the

owner will retire by 2017. Various options to follow-up are possible, ranging from new subcontractors

(if any at all) to individual MS actions to cater for national obligations. Given the current experiences

with the multi-lateral agreement, the group felt that continuation of this setup in some form would be

preferred.

One option that could be explored would be that one MS acts as coordinating body, while having an

overview of experienced and available observers across the partners.

This issue needs further exploration at the upcoming RCM LDF.


35

10.4 Annex 4 – Amendments to the joint sampling program for small pelagics fishery in the CECAF area

The following two amendments to the agreement extending the joint sampling program for small pelagics fishery in the CECAF was signed by all MS involved in 2014 and 2015.

AMENDMENT TO:

Multi-lateral agreement between Germany, Latvia, Lithuania,

The Netherlands and Poland for biological data collection of

pelagic fisheries in CECAF waters

This Amendment replaces the initial amendment dated December 2013, to reflect the impact of the

introduction of the EMFF in the co-financing options. The amendment is retrospectively accepted as

per 1st January 2014.

The Multi-lateral agreement between Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, The Netherlands and Poland for

biological data collection of pelagic fisheries in CECAF waters, as signed by all countries named in

June 2011 (See annex) is amended as follows from 1st January 2014 onwards:

Term:

The multi-lateral agreement is extended beyond its initial end date of 31 December 2013. The new

end date is 31 December 2015.

Costs:

The cost share for each country of the total costs follows a key based on the share in average

landings in 2008-2012. Due to the move from direct to in-direct co-funding through national EMFF

budgets, co-funding of the National expenses shall be covered through the National EMFF budget of

each respective member. As of 2014, co-funding is no longer executed through the Dutch National

Budget as it was in previous years.

Cost shares are maximum amounts, in case of lower costs, deductions might apply in line with the

relative shares.

Total Landings 2008-2012 (RCM LDF Data) and cost shares by partners

Partner 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 average 2008-2012

Landings share

Cost share per year

Netherlands 83,630 68,019 92,980 55,044 34,926 66,920 22.95% € 14,864

Germany 0 0 20,650 37,088 14,582 14,464 4.96% € 3,212

Poland 17,709 46,287 14,605 60,177 29,178 33,591 11.52% € 7,462

Lithuania 120,100 124,480 116,040 121,000 44,133 105,151 36.06% € 23,356

Latvia 68,410 81,283 87,237 89,667 30,723 71,464 24.51% € 15,874

TOTAL 289,849 320,069 331,512 362,976 153,542 291,590 100.00% € 64,768


36

AMENDMENT TO:

Multi-lateral agreement between Germany, Latvia, Lithuania,

The Netherlands and Poland for biological data collection of

pelagic fisheries in CECAF waters

April 2015

This Amendment adapts the Amendment dated December 2014 to extend the effective time-frame for

this multi-lateral agreement and to reflect budget modifications for 2016. This amendment

commences 1st of January 2016.

The Multi-lateral agreement between Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, The Netherlands and Poland for

biological data collection of pelagic fisheries in CECAF waters, as signed by all Member States

concerned in June 2011, and amended in December 2014, is amended as follows from 1st January

2016 onwards:

Term:

The multi-lateral agreement is extended until 31 December 2016.

Costs:

The cost share of the total costs for 2016 for each Member State follows a key based on the share in

average landings in 2008-2012, as previously agreed. Following EMFF co-funding rules, co-funding of

the national expenses shall be covered through the National EMFF budget of each respective Member

State.

Cost shares are maximum amounts, in case of lower costs, deductions might apply in line with the

relative shares.

Total Landings 2008-2012 (RCM LDF Data) and cost shares by partners

Partner 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 average 2008-2012

Landings share

Cost share per year

Germany 0 0 20,650 37,088 14,582 14,464 4.96% € 3,358

Latvia 68,410 81,283 87,237 89,667 30,723 71,464 24.51% € 16,593

Lithuania 120,100 124,480 116,040 121,000 44,133 105,151 36.06% € 24,413

Netherlands 83,630 68,019 92,980 55,044 34,926 66,920 22.95% € 15,537

Poland 17,709 46,287 14,605 60,177 29,178 33,591 11.52% € 7,799

TOTAL 289,849 320,069 331,512 362,976 153,542 291,590 100.00% € 67,700


37

10.5 Annex 5 – Multilateral Agreement on joint sampling programme of the

fishery activities in the SPRFMO

Multi-lateral agreement between the responsible institutions of Germany, Lithuania,

The Netherlands and Poland for biological data collection of pelagic fisheries in SPRFMO waters

Germany, Lithuania, The Netherlands and Poland agree to co-operate in the biological data collection of pelagic fisheries in SPRMFO waters in 2015 and 2016. This agreement is in accordance with EC Regulation 665/2008, laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation 199/2008. Having regard the above mentioned Regulation, the project proposal including budget forecast

“Biological Data Collection of pelagic fisheries in SPRFMO waters in compliance with the DCF” (Annex 1) as well as the “Observer Manual for biological data collection in SPRFMO waters”

(Annex 2), discussed at the Ad Hoc Regional Coordination Meeting for Long Distance Fisheries in Hamburg, April 21st , 2015, the following details apply to this agreement: Partners The following Member States are considered as partner within this agreement:

Member State Institute Contact person

Germany Thünen Institute (TI) Christoph Stransky (National Correspondent)

Lithuania Fisheries Service under the Ministry of Agriculture of the Republic of Lithuania

Indre Sidlauskiene (Director)

The Netherlands Centre for Fisheries Research (CVO) Sieto Verver (Head CVO)

Poland National Marine Fisheries Research Institute

(NMFRI)

Ireneusz Wójcik

(Head of Department, DCF Coordinator)

Coordination The Netherlands coordinates the execution of this multi-lateral agreement. The Netherlands will contract independent contractor ‘Corten Marine Research’ (CMR) to carry out the actual work.

Sampling protocol Biological sampling is carried out on board EU fishing vessels in SPRFMO area by CMR observers. These observers are instructed by CMR and follow the sampling protocol as described in “Observer Manual for biological data collection in SPRFMO waters”, based on data collection

requirements set out in “CMM 3.02, Conservation and Management Measure on Standards for

the Collection, Reporting, Verification and Exchange of Data (SPRFMO-COMM-03 (2015) ANNEX K)”. Data responsibility CMR is responsible for data collection, quality control and delivery to the SPRFMO scientific working group of all data collected under this agreement. CMR also reports all data to CVO and CVO will distribute the data to Partners upon request.

Costs The total costs for the sampling programme is estimated at the amount of € 81,705,= ex VAT per year. This sampling programme is eligible for co-funding under the national EMFF budget of the respective partners. The total costs are shared by the partners following the relative shares in fishing opportunities

in the SPRMFO area as set in the Council Regulation (EU) 2015/523 of 25 March 2015 amending

Regulations (EU) No 43/2014 and (EU) 2015/104 as regards certain fishing opportunities. Cost shares are maximum amounts, in case of lower costs, deductions might apply in line with the relative shares. The yearly costs by partner are shown in the following table:


38

Partner Share (%) Contribution

Germany 25.15 € 20.548

Lithuania 17.50 € 14.300

The Netherlands 27.26 € 22.273

Poland 30.09 € 24.584

Total contribution € 81.705

The Netherlands sends each Partner an invoice per year, to which standard financial conditions apply.

Access to vessels

On top of Council Regulation 199/2008 (Section 2, Article 11), each Partner ensures access to its fleet for the observers under this agreement. Denied access to vessels does not exempt a Partner from legal or financial obligations. Term This agreement commences retrospectively on January 1, 2015. With exception of financial

obligations, this agreement ends on December 31, 2016. This agreement, with exception of financial obligations, is subject to dissolve prior to this date in case the pelagic fishery in the SPRMFO area by EU vessels closes. Signatures

Member State Name Function Signature

Thünen Institute (TI)

Germany

Christoph Stransky National Correspondent

Date: 21 April 2015

Fisheries Service under the Ministry of

Agriculture of the Republic of

Lithuania (FS)

Lithuania

Indre Sidlauskiene Director

Date: ____________

Centre for Fisheries Research

The Netherlands

Sieto Verver Head Centre for Fisheries Research

Date: 21 April 2015

National Marine

Fisheries Research

Institute (NMFRI) Poland

Ireneusz Wójcik Head of Department

(NMFRI), DCF Coordinator

Date: 21 April 2015

Annex 1: “Biological Data Collection of pelagic fisheries in SPRFMO waters in compliance with the DCF”.

Annex 2: “Observer Manual for biological data collection in SPRFMO waters”.


39

10.6 Annex 6 – Landings by species reported by MS

Landings by species (tons) in area “From Morocco to Guinea Bissau”. Data from 2014(*)

Species DE ES LT LV NL PL

Alectis alexandrinus (ALA)

Alfonsinos nei (ALF) 8

Aphanopus carbo (BSF)

Aristeus varidens (ARV)

Arius heudelotii (SMC)

Boops boops (BOG)

Brachydeuterus auritus (GRB)

Brama australis (BRU) 55

Brama brama (POA) 4 1 9 4

Campogramma glaycos (VAD) 11

Caranx rhonchus (HMY)

Caranx spp. (TRE)

Centrolophidae (CEN)

Centrophorus squamosus (GUQ)

Chaceon maritae (CGE)

Chloroscombrus chrysurus (BUA)

Dentex dentex (DEX) 12 1 39

Diplodus spp. (SRG) 7

Emmelichthyidae (EMT)

Engraulis encrasicolus (ANE)

Epigonus telescopu (EPI)

Euthynnus alletteratus (LTA) 13

Farfantepenaeus notialis (SOP) 226

Galeichthys feliceps (GAT)

Haemulidae (Pomadasyidae) (GRX)

Hemicaranx bicolor (HXB)

Katsuwonus pelamis (SKJ) 1

Lichia amia (LEE) 1 5

Loligo vulgaris (SQR)

Mene maculata (MOO)

Merluccius merluccius (HKE) 1 76 258

Merluccius spp (HKX) 4219

Mugil cephalus (MUF) 1

Mugilidae (MUL) 1

Muraena helena (MMH)

Osteichthyes (MZZ) 2557 7

Pagellus spp. (PAX) 10

Pagrus pagrus (RPG)

Parapeneus longirostris (DPS) 813

Parapristipoma octolineatum

(GRA)


40

Patella spp. (LPZ)

Phycis phycis (FOR)

Plectorhinchus mediterraneus (GBR) 15

Pomadasys incisus (BGR)

Pomatomus saltatrix (BLU)

Pontinus kuhlii (POI)

Ruvettus pretiosus (OIL)

Sarda sarda (BON) 6 1 30 48

Sardina pilchardus (PIL) 3993 4 12 985 43800 332

Sardinella aurita (SAA) 886 23 17627 2663

Sardinella maderensis (SAE) 56 9127 1163

Sardinella spp. (SIX) 2

Scomber japonicus colias (MAS) 2645 19 15050 1104

Scomber scombrus (MAC) 1825

Scomberomorus cavalla (KGM)

Scomberomorus tritor (MAW)

Scombroidei (TUX) 4

Selene dorsalis (LUK)

Sparidae (SBX) 1 1

Sphyraena spp (BAR)

Spondylosoma cantharus (BRB) 8

Thunnus alalunga (ALB)

Thunnus albacares (YFT)

Thunnus obesus (BET)

Trachinotus ovatus (POP) 1

Trachurus picturatus (JAA)

Trachurus spp (JAX) 681 29728 485

Trachurus trachurus (HOM) 1 270 14325

Trachurus trecae (HMZ) 45

Trichiuridae (CUT) 177 1 119

Trichiurus lepturus (LHT) 25 400

Unknown 9 1012

Xiphias gladius (SWO)

Zeidae (ZEX)

(*) – UK data for 2014 have been delivered but not listed because some errors still need to be adjusted by the Member State. PT and IT data for 2014 not available at the time of the meeting


41

Landings by species (tons) in Canary. Data from 2014

Species CANARY (ES)

Alectis alexandrines (ALA)

Aphanopus carbo (BSF)

Aristeus varidens (ARV)

Arius heudelotii (SMC)

Auxis thazard, A. rochei (FRZ) 8

Auxis thazard (FRZ)

Balistidae (TRI) 24

Beryx spp (ALF) 47

Bodianus scrofa (IVD) 6

Boops boops (BOG) 28

Brachydeuterus auritus (GRB)

Brama australis (BRU)

Brama brama (POA)

Campogramma glaycos (VAD)

Caranx ronchus (HMY)

Caranx spp. (TRE)

Centrolophidae (CEN)

Centrophorus squamosus (GUQ)

Chaceon maritae (CGE)

Chelon labrosus (MLR) 2

Chloroscombrus chrysurus (BUA)

Chromis limbata (HZL) 2

Conger conger (COE) 20

Dentex dentex (DEX)

Dentex spp (DEX) 100

Dicentrarchus labrax (BSS) 2

Diplodus spp (SRG) 40

Emmelichthyidae (EMT)

Engraulis encrasicolus (ANE) 34

Epigonus telescopes (EPI)

Epinephelus marginatus 28

Euthynnus alletteratus (LTA)

Farfantepenaeus notialis (SOP)

Galeichthys feliceps (GAT)

Haemulidae (Pomadasyidae) (GRX)

Helicolenus dactylopterus (BRF) 3

Hemicaranx bicolour (HXB)

Katsuwonus pelamis (SKJ) 2

Lepidopus caudatus (SFS)

Lichia amia (LEE)

Lithognathus mormyrus (SSB)

Loligo vulgaris (SQR) 4

Mene maculata (MOO)

Merluccius merluccius (HKE) 12

Merluccius spp (HKX)

Mora moro (RIB)

Mugil cephalus (MUF) 4

Mugilidae (MUL)

Mullus surmuletus (MUR) 20

Muraenae helena (MMH)

Muraenidae (MUI) 71

Mycteroperca fusca (MKF) 12


42

Oblada melanura (SBS) 4

Octopus vulgaris (OCC) 23

Osteichthyes (MZZ)

Others 6

Pagellus spp (PAX) 44

Pagrus pagrus (RPG)

Pagrus spp (SBP) 82

Pandalidae (PDZ)

Parapeneus longirostris (DPS)

Parapristipoma octolineatum (GRA) 9

Patella spp. (LPZ)

Percoidei

Phycis phycis (FOR) 13

Plectorhinchus macrolepis (GBL)

Plectorhinchus mediterraneus (GBR)

Plesionika edwarsii (LKW) 8

Plesionika narval (PVJ) 49

Polymixia nobilis (PXV)

Polyprion americanus (WRF) 5

Pomadasys incisus (BGR) 2

Pomadasys perotaei (PKE)

Pomatomus saltatrix (BLU) 5

Promethichthys prometheus (PRP) 5

Pseudocaranx dentex (TRZ) 39

Ruvettus pretiosus (OIL) 4

Sarda sarda (BON) 6

Sardina pilchardus (PIL) 258

Sardinella aurita (SAA) 381

Sardinela maderensis (SAE) 100

Sardinella spp. (SIX)

Sarpa salpa (SLM) 55

Scomber colias (MAS) 696

Scomber scombrus (MAC)

Scorpaena scrofa (RSE) 6

Sepia officinialis

Sepia spp. (IAX)

Seriola spp. (AMX) 52

Serranus spp 40

Sparisoma cretense (PRR) 179

Sphyraena spp (BAR) 6

Spondyliosoma cantharus (BRB) 24

Stephanolepis hispidus (FIK) 17

Sthenoteuthis pteropus (OFE) 2

Thunnini (TUN)

Trachinotus ovatus (POP) 3

Trachurus picturatus (JAA)

Trachurus spp (JAX) 431

Trachurus trachurus (HOM)

Trichiuridae (CUT)

Trichiurus lepturus (LHT)

Umbrina canariensis (UCA) 2


43

10.7 Annex 7 – Canary Islands- New métier sampled in the DCF: MIS_DES_0_0_0

Canary Islands- New métier sampled in the DCF: MIS_DES_0_0_0

In 2014 a new métier, named MIS_DES_0_0_0, for the artisanal fleet fishing demersal species

in the Canary Islands (FAO Division 34.1.2) was approved by the Commission to be included in

the Spanish National Programme (from 2015 onwards). The main reasons for the inclusion of

this métier were (i) the increasing interest in the knowledge of artisanal fisheries for monitoring

and possible application of management measures, and (ii) the contribution to the Marine

Strategy Framework in the Canary Archipelago. A description template of this métier is included

in below.

For the period 2011 to 2013 the estimated economic value for demersal fish and crustaceans

in Canaries assumes an average annual value of 4.8 million Euros, of which 26.4% corresponds

to Tenerife Island (source: Government of the Canary Islands).

This artisanal activity is carried out by a polyvalent and multi-species fleet using traps (fish

and shrimp pound nets; moray pots), hooks (hand lines and demersal longlines), and nets (lift

and trammel nets). The fleet performs diurnal fishing trips of less than one day, and uses

several fishing gears to capture demersal species, some of them caught with different gears

during the same fishing trip. The current regulation of this activity establishes a specific fishing

license named “artes menores” (small gears) for this fishery, and management measures such

as marine protected areas, selectivity devices, spatiotemporal closures for the use of specific

trammel nets, maximum number of traps per boat, minimum depth of traps, etc.

In the period 2011-2013, landings occurred in 29 fishing ports, being Tenerife the island with

the largest number of boats (30%) and higher effort (27%) of the fishery in the Canary Islands.

For this period, a total of 558 artisanal vessels landed demersal species in the Canary Islands.

Ship length is highly variable although most of them are less than 10m length. In order to select

more accurately the demersal artisanal métier, absolute and proportional values in landings and

fishing trips were obtained in relation to the general activity of this polyvalent artisanal fleet

(often fishing pelagic resources at the same trip or seasonally). Thereby, the mean values

obtained for this métier (period 2013-2014) of landings, trips and number of boats were 1.043

tons, 28.623 fishing days and 343 boats, respectively.

There is a high number of target species, but the most important (in landings or for socio-

economical reasons) are parrotfishes (Sparisoma cretense), seabreams (Pagrus spp and Dentex

spp), morays (Muraenidae), amberjacks (Seriola spp), alfonsinos (Beryx spp) and shrimps

(Plesionika narval). There are also other species that should not be considered as by-catch due

to their relevance in the fishery, i.e. other seabreams (Sparidae), groupers (Serranidae),

triggerfish (Balistidae) and octopuses (period 2013-2014).

The strategy for concurrent sampling will be scheme 1 (comprehensive sampling of all

species), and the planned sampling intensity is 1 fishing trip per month at sea, on board of

selected boats. In 2015, concurrent samplings will be carried out off Tenerife Island by IEO staff

in the Oceanographic Center of Canaries. It has been designed the strategy of ship selection

and we visited all the fishermen’s associations in Tenerife (a total of 10), in order to meet and

inform them about the planned sampling. We considered that these meetings are essential to

get the support and collaboration of artisanal fishermen before starting the sampling at sea.

Owners of more than 40 selected boats have shown interest and readiness to host our scientific

observers. Once the authorities (Harbour Master’s Office - Ministry of Public Works) provide us

the permission to board on these vessels, it is expected to begin the concurrent sampling at sea

by mid-2015. No data are available about discards, but it is a multi-specific fishery where most

of the species are commercialized and therefore discards are not considered significant.


44

Description template for the métier MIS_DES_0_0_0

CANARIAN DEMERSAL FISHERY

RCM RCM LDF (Long Distance Fisheries)

Name of métier: MIS_DES_0_0_0

Flag countries: ESP

Date of update: 13-10-2014

Description of the métier

Spatial distribution of the fishing activity of the métier

Territorial waters of the Canary Islands

Seasonal pattern of the fishing activity of the métier

The fleet is operative all the year

Number of vessels involved in métier by LOA group (Appendix III EC949/2008):

There are 558 vessels with different length: 0-<10 m: 451 10-<12 m: 50 12-<25 m: 57

Detailed gear types and selectivity devices used in métier

Fish pound nets: minimum mesh opening 50.8mm. Maximum dimensions 3m x 1m. Shrimp pound nets: minimum mesh opening >12mm Moray pots: Minimum diameter 60cm, Minimum length 100cm Demersal Longlines: Maximum number of hooks 500. Maximum length of mother line 2000m Hand lines: allowed Trammel nets: minimum mesh opening of 400mm (external panel) and 82mm (internal panel). Maximum height of the net 2m. Maximum length of each internal panel 50m and maximum length of the net 350m Lift nets: minimum mesh opening 12mm and maximum size of the net (diameter) 3.3m

Management measures Spain: Closed area: The 3 Marine Protected Areas in El Hierro, La Palma and La Graciosa Authorised gear traps, demersal longlines, hand lines, trammel nets, lift nets. See gear details above Minimum authorised mesh size: see gear details above By-catches: no data available Minimum sizes: Sparisoma cretense: 20 cm Pagrus pagrus: 33 cm Dentex gibbosus: 35 cm Muraena augusti: not established (adviced 56 cm) Seriola spp: not established Beryx splendens: not established (adviced 37 cm) Plesionika narval: not established (adviced 1,6 cm)

Main target and by-catch species for the métier

Target species: Parrot fish (Sparisoma cretense), seabreams (Pagrus spp, Dentex spp), morays (Muraenidae), amberjacks (Seriola spp), alfonsinos (Beryx spp), narval shrimp (Plesionika narval) By-catch species: no data available

Indicate level of discard of major species (mostly subset of G1 or G2 species)

Species Level of discarding

DISCARD DATA NOT AVAILABLE

Is significant part of the catches landed in foreign countries?

Landing country Sampling agreement (y/n)


45

No No

Sampling of the métier

Indicate if this Métier is merged with other métiers for sampling

No

Justification for merging:

Sampling scheme Type of sampling The sampling scheme will be at sea (scheme 1)

Sampling frame and primary sampling unit for data collection One trip per month (minimum) will be sampled, as the fishing trips are of less than 1 day

Data collected Retained catch. Concurrent at sea

Observers at sea Yes

Self sampling Yes

Sampling landings on shore

Indicate if the Métier is associated with particular sampling problems:

This métier is polyvalent and includes several fishing gears (traps, gillnets, hooks, liftnets)

Additional remarks (historical and others):


46

10.8 Annex 8 – The lists of species indicated by FAO/CECAF as relevant for the assessments purposes

Table A.8.1 - Species indicated by CECAF to be included in the EU MAP. FAO division 34.1.1.

Species (Engl.) Species (Latin) Classification Habitat Priority

Dem

ersa

l sp

ecie

s

Southern pink shrimp Farfantepenaeus notialis Crustacean demersal high

Deepwater rose shrimp Parapenaeus longirostris Crustacean demersal high

Common squid Loligo vulgaris Mollusc demersal high

Common octopus Octopus vulgaris Mollusc demersal high

Cuttlefish Sepia hierredda Mollusc demersal high

Common cuttlefish Sepia officinalis Mollusc demersal high

Cuttlefish Sepia spp. Mollusc demersal high

Other hake Merluccius spp. Teleost demersal medium

Tongue sole Cynoglossus spp. Teleost demersal high

Canary dentex Dentex canariensis Teleost demersal medium

Congo dentex Dentex congoensis Teleost demersal medium

Large-eye dentex Dentex macrophthalmus Teleost demersal high

Morocco dentex Dentex maroccanus Teleost demersal medium

Dentex Dentex spp. Teleost demersal high

Black hake Merluccius polli Teleost demersal high

Black hake Merluccius senegalensis Teleost demersal high

Red pandora Pagellus acarne Teleost demersal high

Red pandora Pagellus bellottii Teleost demersal high

Blackspot seabream Pagellus bogaraveo Teleost demersal medium

Pandora Pagellus spp. Teleost demersal high

Bastard grunt Pomadasys incisus Teleost demersal medium

Grunt Pomadasys spp. Teleost demersal high

cuttlefishes Sepia spp. Mollusc demersal medium

Seabream Sparus spp. Teleost demersal high

Seabream Sparidae Teleost demersal high

Smal

l pel

agic

sp

ecie

s Anchovy Engraulis encrasicolus Teleost pelagic high

Sardine Sardina pilchardus Teleost pelagic high

Round sardinella Sardinella aurita Teleost pelagic high

Short-body sardinella Sardinella maderensis Teleost pelagic high

Chub mackerel Scomber japonicus Teleost pelagic high

Other Mackerel Scomber spp. Teleost pelagic high

Atlantic horse mackerel Trachurus trachurus Teleost pelagic high

Cunene horse mackerel Trachurus trecae Teleost pelagic high


47

Table A.8.2.- Species indicated by CECAF to be included in the EU MAP. FAO division 34.1.3.


Dem

ersa

l sp

ecie

s









Grunt Brachydeuterus spp. Teleost demersal high







White grouper Epinephelus aeneus Teleost demersal high

Lesser African threadfin Galeoides decadactylus Teleost demersal high





Blue spotted seabream Pagrus caeruleostictus Teleost demersal high



West African croakers Pseudotolithus spp. Teleost demersal high



Smal

l pel

agic

sp

ecie

s Anchovy Engraulis encrasicolus Teleost pelagic high

Sardine Sardina pilchardus Teleost pelagic high








48

Table A.8.3 - Species indicated by CECAF to be included in the EU MAP. FAO division 34.3.1.


Dem

ersa

l sp

ecie

s


























Cuttlefishes Sepia spp. Mollusc demersal medium


Smal

l pel

agic

sp

ecie

s

Anchovy Engraulis encrasicolus Teleost pelagic high







Bonga shad Ethmalosa fimbriata Teleost pelagic high

Jack Caranx spp. Teleost pelagic high

Scad Decapterus spp. Teleost pelagic high


49

Table A.8.4 - Species indicated by CECAF to be included in the EU MAP. FAO division 34.3.3-6.


Dem

ersa

l sp

ecie

s




























Canary drum Umbrina canariensis Teleost demersal medium

Smal

l pel

agic

sp

ecie

s

Anchovy Engraulis encrasicolus Teleost pelagic high







Bonga shad Ethmalosa fimbriata Teleost pelagic high

Jack Caranx spp. Teleost pelagic high

Scad Decapterus spp. Teleost pelagic high

Report of the Regional Co-ordination Meeting for the Long Distance Fisheries (RCM …LDF_2015.pdf · 2015-11-19 · The RCM DCF briefly discussed project proposal on “Strengthening

Documents