Transcript Governance of fishing in Eurpean Marine Sites

Managing Damaging fishing in
N2K
Jean-Luc Solandt,
Marine Conservation Society, UK
(Seas At Risk member)
Sandy Luk, Sarah Gregerson, Catherine Weller
ClientEarth
Tom Appleby
University of the West of England
UK marine N2K sites: ‘paper parks’ (up to 2012)
Waddenzee sea ruling (2003)
Annually licensed cockle dredging fishing qualifies as a ‘plan or project’
Stadt Papenburg ruling (2010)
Regularly licensed projects starting before SAC
designation are still subject to contemporary
HRA assessment.
• All UK fishing vessels licensed every two years
Evidence of encroaching fishing into sensitive
Results
MPA habitats
(reefs
and maerl)
SECONDARY
FONT
Scallop dredging intensity (1990 – 2007)
Pikesely et al (2015) Marine Policy in press
Solandt JL, Appleby T, and Hoskin M. 2013. Up Frenchmans creek: A case study on managing commercial fishing in an
English Special Area of Conservation and its implications. Environmental Law and Management 25 (4): 133-139.
Increased reports of scallop dredging
between 2005-2009
• In individual sites (Falmouth, Lyme Bay,
Berwickshire in England. Cardigan Bay,
Pembrokeshire marine in Wales)
• Regulators at the site level don’t issue
license.
• Regulator at national level do issue the
license.
• No single organisation takes the lead.
• Reactive protection in Lyme Bay (2008),
Falmouth (2008); Wales (2010) to avoid
EU infractions (from NGO case work).
• STILL SYSTEMIC MANAGEMENT FAILURE
‘New approach’ for England (2012-2016)
• Instigated by national central government (Defra).
• ‘Implementation Group’ set up (regulators, government,
NGOs, fishermen, scientists, conservation agencies).
• Group reviewed and uses a gear damage ‘matrix’.
• Clear roles of regulators (0-6nm / 6-12nm / 12-200nm)
• Priorities (reds) managed by May 2014 (reefs, maerl,
biogenic reef, eelgrass).
• Other (amber) features (sandbanks) by 2016.
• Offshore measures being introduced to other MS fishers.
In order to be legally compliant with the Directives, and meet
international targets
‘the matrix’
Detail on ‘reds’
Reef, maerl and eelgrass beds sites protected from winter
2013 to Spring 2014 by local regulators (about 3000km2)
Rich sedimentary habitats adjacent to
reefs also protected
Enforcement? Use mobile phones!
Rees et al., (2013). A legal and ecological perspective of ‘site integrity’ to inform policy
development and management of European MPAs. Mar Poll Bull.
Summary
• Damaging fishing is happening in EMS across EU.
• Article 6 requires protection and assessment before
damage can occur.
• An EU gear – feature document exists (‘matrix’).
• Similar regulations can now happen in offshore and
other MS based on the matrix.
• Where possible, local and regional groups should
promote ‘new’ laws (e.g. Inshore Fisheries and
Conservation Authorities; RACs).
Without implementation of management, how can
MSFD measures (e.g. seafloor integrity) be met?
Toolkit for ensuring management of fishing in EMS
Key scientific references to show damage to reefs, maerl, and rich sandbank features.
1.
Bradshaw et al (2001) Impacts of scallop dredges on soft and harder seabeds.
2.
Sheehan et al (2013) Recovery of seabeds (soft and hard grounds) after cessation of trawling and dredging.
3.
Rees et al (2013) Legal and ecological definitions of ‘site integrity’ (particularly for reef and rich cobble habitats).
4.
Solandt et al (2013) protecting SACs with maerl/sandbank features from scallop dredging.
Legal briefings and analysis of issues.
1.
Site Integrity of marine EMS.
2.
Application of article 6(2) and 6(3) with specific regard to licensed fishing activities.
3.
A document setting out the main legal arguments that can be used in a campaign and/or correspondence with
regulators.
4.
Environmental NGO critique of legality of byelaws by local fisheries regulators in England.
The ‘new policy’ approach to dealing with fishing in English N2K sites.
1.
The development of a ‘new’ precautionary approach by UK government (policy documents from government).
2.
The matrix of SAC ‘FEATURE’ Vs ‘FISHING GEAR’ vulnerability (linked excel spreadsheet)
3.
Specific habitat papers (from sandbanks to reefs) detailing damage risk evidence from UK government.
4.
A list of the specific location (site names) of sites where high risk (red) features are, and where they were protected
from bottom towed fishing gears between December 2013 and May 2014.
5.
This presentation of the history of the case also given at a recent EU N2K marine conference (St Malo, May 2015).
EU documents
1.
The Marine Expert Group has created a feature-gear interaction matrix. This identifies activities that could have a
priori significant negative impacts on features for which Natura 2000 sites have been selected.
Thanks
Dr Jean-Luc Solandt,
Marine Conservation Society, UK
[email protected]
www.mcsuk.org
Sandy Luk, Catherine Weller
www.ClientEarth.org