Transcript Choke-Symposium-De-Minimis-High-Survival

NSAC Choke Avoidance
Measures Symposium
De-Minimis & High Survival
Exemptions
Copenhagen – 2 November 2016
Rederscentrale
Emiel Brouckaert
Choke Avoidance Measures
Approach from a Belgian fisheries perspective
• Mixed fisheries mainly targeting flat fish.
• Successfully putting >30 species on the market.
• MCRS = reference for marketing or not.
 Spatial and technical avoidance of having under MCRS
fish in the net.
• 100% avoidance impossible in mixed fisheries.
 Objective to minimise under MCRS catches.
Rederscentrale
Emiel Brouckaert
Choke Avoidance Measures
Avoidance & minimisation of unwanted catches
• Objective of fishermen not to have fish in the net that
cannot be marketed = avoid work without being paid.
• Tradition to put undersized catches back in the sea, to
give the fish a chance to grow and contribute to a next
generation.
Rederscentrale
Emiel Brouckaert
Choke Avoidance Measures
Landing Obligation
• Landslide change to tradition and limitation of
operational options to achieve sustainable fisheries.
• Regulation that leads to potential closure of a fishery
when a (by-catch) species quota is fully used
= choke situation.
Rederscentrale
Emiel Brouckaert
Choke Avoidance Measures
Toolbox
• Measures to deal with chokes in CFP art. 15 §4:
- Prohibited species.
- Survival exemption.
- De-minimis exemption.
• §5: in MAPs - how to apply de-minimis under which
conditions.
• §6 & §7: de-minimis application when not in MAPs.
Rederscentrale
Emiel Brouckaert
Choke Avoidance Measures
Survival Exemption:
“The landing obligation shall not apply to species for which
scientific evidence demonstrates high survival rates, taking
into account the characteristics of the gear, of the fishing
practices and of the ecosystem.”
Rederscentrale
Emiel Brouckaert
Choke Avoidance Measures
De-Minimis Exemptions:
“The landing obligation shall not apply to catches falling
under the de-minimis exemptions.”
Applicable to “up to 5% of the total annual catches of all
species subject to the landing obligation,
• where scientific evidence indicates that increases in
selectivity are very difficult to achieve,
• or to avoid disproportionate costs of handling unwanted
catches… “ + limitations.
Rederscentrale
Emiel Brouckaert
Choke Avoidance Measures
Application of art. 15 exemptions to the LO
Request for scientific evidence or a plan in case of
disproportionate costs to use high survival or de-minimis
exemptions
vs.
All species subject to catch limits under LO by 1 January
2019
=> Lack of time and funds for scientific analysis.
Rederscentrale
Emiel Brouckaert
Choke Avoidance Measures
Solution in interpretation of survival exemption in art. 15:
• Slightest indication of survival => apply exemption.
• Plan monitoring and obtaining scientific advice whilst
exemption is applied.
• Not applying exemption can result in unnecessary
increase of mortality of under MCRS fish.
Rederscentrale
Emiel Brouckaert
Choke Avoidance Measures
Solution in interpretation of de-minimis exemption in art.
15:
• Realisation that further increased selectivity is very
difficult => use de-minimis exemption.
• Plan monitoring and obtaining scientific advice whilst
applying de-minimis of up to 5% of total annual catches
for all species risking to become a choke.
Rederscentrale
Emiel Brouckaert
Choke Avoidance Measures
Conclusions – Topics for seminar discussion:
• In some fisheries survival and de-minimis exemptions
can contribute to completely mitigate choke situations
when regulations are interpreted in a flexible manner.
• After asking industry to find a pragmatic approach of the
Landing Obligation it has been established that
administrations should apply a pragmatic approach in
interpreting art. 15 in order to achieve the CFP
objectives.
Rederscentrale
Emiel Brouckaert
Thank you for your attention!
([email protected])
Rederscentrale
Emiel Brouckaert