ANNUAL REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT on the results of the multi-annual guidance programmes for the fishing fleets at the end of 1999

Contents

Introduction

Measurement of capacity and effort

Fleet register

Entry - exit regimes

Global results

Results by Member State

Belgium

Germany

Denmark

Spain

France

Greece

Ireland

Italy

Netherlands

Portugal

United Kingdom

Sweden

Finland

Conclusions

Introduction

For each Member State in the Community, a multi-annual guidance programme (MAGP) fixes objectives for reducing the size of the fishing fleet in order to bring fishing effort into line with available resources. The fourth generation of MAGPs, adopted in December 1997 [1], fix objectives for the period 1997 - 2001.

[1] Commission Decisions 98/119/EC to 98/131/EC (OJ L39 of 12.2.98, pp. 1 - 84).

Article 5 of Council Regulation (EC) No 2792/99 [2], concerning the new Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance, requires the Member States to submit to the Commission, before 1 May each year, a report on the situation of their fleets at the end of the preceding year with respect to their MAGP objectives. Using these reports, the Commission should produce its own report to the Council and the European Parliament within three months of the 1 May deadline.

[2] OJ No L337, 30.12.1999, p. 10.

The present report is the seventh in the series [3] and the second report on the results of the fourth generation of programmes (MAGP IV). There was no report produced on the results of the MAGP IV at the end of 1998, due to late or incomplete reports from the Member States.

[3] SEC(93) 881 final and SEC(93) 881 final/2.

Measurement of capacity and effort

For the purposes of the MAGP, the capacity of a vessel is defined as its tonnage in gross tonnes (GT) and its propulsion power in kW. The fishing effort is defined as the product of capacity and the number of days spent at sea. There are therefore two measures of effort, one in GT days and the other in kW days.

Remeasurement of tonnage

The tonnage objectives of the MAGP III (1992 - 1996) were expressed in gross registered tonnes (GRT), though in almost all Member States a mixture of tonnage measurements were used to measure capacity, some vessels being measured in GRT, others in GT and others in nationally defined units of tonnage.

Council Regulation (EC) No 3259/94 [4] and Commission Decision No. 95/84/EC [5] were adopted in order to harmonise tonnage measurements, requiring that all fishing vessels be measured in GT. They also simplify the definition of GT for vessels less than 15 metres in length and specify formulae to estimate the GT of vessels between 15 and 24 metres length while awaiting full remeasurement.

[4] OJ No L 339, 29.12.94, p. 11.

[5] OJ No L67, 25.3.95, p. 33.

As agreed with the Member States, the conversion of the tonnage objectives to units of GT was done at the time the MAGP IV was adopted. However some Member States had made little progress in remeasuring their fleets at the time of adoption, so the objectives, although nominally in units of GT, remained a mixture of GT, GRT and national units.

Further progress in tonnage remeasurement since the adoption of the MAGP IV will have changed the proportions of the fleet measured in the various tonnage units. Since the GT is generally numerically larger than the GRT of a given vessel, this will have altered the comparability of the situation and the objectives that were fixed for tonnage. Strictly speaking the tonnage objectives should be recalculated every time a vessel is remeasured.

The Commission requested Member States to provide in their national reports a list of all the vessels remeasured since 1.1.1997 in order to adjust the tonnage objectives to take into account the effect of remeasurement. This adjustment has been done only for those Member States that complied or partly complied with this request. It should be noted that the adjusted tonnage objectives shown in this report have not been agreed with the Member States.

The periodic adjustment of the tonnage objectives to take into account the progressive remeasurement of the fleet will continue until 31 December 2003. This is the deadline fixed in Commission Decision 95/84/EC by which time all estimates of GT must be replaced by real values. Until that time there will always be some degree of uncertainty when comparing the situation of the fleet with the tonnage objectives.

Cumulative fishing effort objectives

For those Member States that have opted to adjust activity instead of capacity to meet the objectives, the cumulative fishing effort objectives are shown for the first time in this report. In the MAGP Decisions, only the fishing effort objectives at the start and at the end of the period are shown. The way in which the cumulative objectives have been calculated therefore merits a detailed explanation.

Noting that the cumulative fishing effort objectives would be identical whether it is capacity or activity that is reduced over the period of the programme, a curve was drawn of the continuous decrease in capacity over the period 1.1.1996 - 31.12.2001 necessary to meet each of the intermediate objectives expressed purely in terms of capacity. The area under this curve was then multiplied by the baseline level of activity to arrive at the cumulative fishing effort over the period.

A number of Member States have questioned this methodology. Discussions will continue with the Member States in order to arrive at an agreed method to calculate the cumulative effort objectives.

Fleet register

The multi-annual guidance programmes are monitored using the declarations to the fishing vessel register of the Community [6]. The register contains information on the physical characteristics of all the approximately 100 000 commercial marine fishing vessels in the European fleets, together with information on the MAGP segment to which each vessel belongs and the fishing gears that are installed. It is intended to provide the reference data on the fleet for all aspects of the Common Fisheries Policy.

[6] Articles 4 and 5 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 109/94 (OJ L19 of 22.1.94).

In previous reports on the results of the MAGP, large discrepancies were sometimes noted between the information contained in the fleet register and that supplied by the Member States in their annual national reports. One of the reasons for these discrepancies was that the declarations from the Member States were screened for errors before being accepted into the database. A rejected or suspect declaration was returned to the Member State for correction or checking. This was intended to ensure the reliability of the register, but in practise often led to a divergence between the data in the national registers and those in the Community register.

These procedures have now been changed. Member States no longer have to send their declarations to DG Fisheries for processing because they now have direct access to their own data in the Community fleet register via the internet using the FRONT (Fleet Register on the Net) application. This means that the national authorities can make immediate corrections the data in the Community register begin to diverge from those in the national database.

These steps will allow a change in approach on the part of the Commission. Any changes to the national register will automatically be reflected in changes to the Community register in order to ensure that both always contain the same information. If these changes introduce suspect values into the database these will still be queried, but the declaration itself will not be rejected.

Another important step to improve the reliability of the register is being taken at a legislative level. Article 10 of Council Regulation 2792/99 states that financial aid for fleet renewal can be withheld if a Member State does not supply information on the fleet in accordance with Community rules. This should result in a substantial improvement in the regularity with which Member States communicate changes to their fleets and therefore in the accuracy of the fleet register.

Entry - exit regimes

Article 6 of Council Regulation 2792/1999 requires Member States to submit to the Commission permanent arrangements for monitoring fleet renewal and modernisation. Where the MAGP objectives are already respected, these arrangements must demonstrate that the entries and exits will be managed such that they will not be exceeded in the future. Where the annual objectives are not already respected, the entries and exits must be such that capacity is gradually reduced in order to attain these objectives.

The services of the Commission are currently examining the entry and exit regimes that have so far been submitted. It should be noted that under Article 10 of Regulation 2792/1999, public aid for fleet renewal and modernisation may be withheld if these regimes are not submitted or if they are inadequate.

Global results

The data in the following tables are in general taken from the fishing vessel register of the Community. In some cases the data have been revised to correct certain errors that were identified in the fishing vessel register. Such cases are described under the section dealing with the results by Member State.

In each of the tables, the percentage change in tonnage and power over the period 1 January 1997 - 1 January 2000 is indicated. However, it should be noted that in the case of tonnage this figure may underestimate the real percentage change due to the progressive remeasurement of vessels in units of GT during the course of the period.

a) Compliance with capacity objectives

The tables under this heading compare the capacity of the fleet with the capacity objectives fixed by the MAGP. Compliance with the effort objectives fixed for some segments of the fleets of a number of Member States are dealt with under point b).

The following table summarises the evolution of the entire Community fleet since the start of the MAGP IV. Since 1 January 1997 the fleet has been reduced by approximately 4% in tonnage and 5.6% in power. The Community fleet is already below the capacity objectives fixed for 31 December 2001.

Total Community fleet

>TABLE POSITION>

In the MAGP IV special treatment is given to the small scale coastal segment of the fishing fleet, containing vessels of less than 12 metres overall length that fish with passive gears. No capacity reductions are required for these vessels. The evolution of the small scale coastal segment in each of the Member States and for the Community as a whole is shown in table below.

Small scale coastal segments

>TABLE POSITION>

Note: Belgium and Ireland did not define small scale coastal segments of their fleets. For the Netherlands, the vessels have not yet been allocated to the segment.

Bold type indicates that the objectives have been exceeded.

The evolution of the capacity by Member State of the remaining fleet segments is shown in the table below. The shaded rows indicate the Member States that have chosen to achieve the objectives of one or more segments of their fleets by the adjustment of both activity and capacity (see point b).

Segments other than small scale coastal

>TABLE POSITION>

Bold type indicates that the objectives have been exceeded.

Summary of compliance with capacity objectives by segment

>TABLE POSITION>

b) Compliance with effort objectives

Six Member States chose to achieve their MAGP IV objectives by managing activity as well as capacity in one or more segments of their fleets. In order to do this the Member States were obliged to define one or more fisheries in each of the segments concerned. Fishing effort objectives were then defined for each of these fisheries. All of the fishing effort exerted by vessels in the segment must be accounted for in this way; there can be no fishing effort in a segment that is not attributed to any of the fisheries that have been defined.

Unlike capacity, fishing effort cannot be measured for a particular point in time. The effort objectives are therefore cumulative over the period of the programme. The following table shows the effort exerted in each of the fisheries from 1 January 1997 until 31 December 1999 compared with the cumulative effort objectives for the end of 1999. The last two columns in this table show the extent to which the objectives have been met. Where the objectives have been exceeded, this is shown in bold.

units in '000 GT days and '000 kW days

>TABLE POSITION>

Bold type indicates that the objectives have been exceeded.

Results by Member State

The following tables and charts summarise the results of the MAGP IV at the end of 1999 for each of the Member States.

The MAGP IV is a more complex instrument than the MAGP III, largely because of the use of cumulative effort objectives in certain segments. There is now a large amount of information to present for the results in each of the Member States.

For this reason the results are usually presented at face value, with few or no qualifications as to their reliability. There are some exceptions in cases where a comment is thought particularly necessary, but the reader of the report is left to do much of his or her own interpretation of the figures.

The following is an explanation of each of the tables and charts presented.

The table under point a), "capacity objectives", shows the intermediate capacity objectives for the end of 1999 and the final capacity objectives for the end of 2001. It does not show the effort objectives for those segments where the objectives are to be achieved by a mixture of capacity and activity reductions. In this table, the columns headed "GT rev" give the revised GT objectives after adjusting for the effect of remeasurement.

The table under point b), "situation of the fleet", shows the situation at the end of each of the years 1997, 1998 and 1999 as taken from the fleet register (the row labelled "FR") and as indicated in the national reports submitted by the Member States (the row labelled "MS" and shown in italics). In principle the two rows should contain the same information, since the national and Community fleet registers should be identical. In this table, the row labelled "Unk"(for "Unknown") shows the capacity of vessels that have not been allocated to a MAGP IV segment in the fleet register.

The table under point c), "fishing effort" gives the fishing effort by segment. The information in this table is the information provided by the Member States in their national reports. Where fisheries are identified within segments (the shaded rows labelled F1, F2 etc.), the objectives for the segment are expressed in terms of fishing effort in the MAGP IV Decision, so activity limitations contribute to the achievement of the objectives

Finally, under point d) "cumulative fishing effort", the table shows the cumulative intermediate fishing effort objectives for each of the segments and fisheries in which the objectives are expressed in terms of fishing effort. The charts following this table, compare the cumulative fishing effort declared by the Member States (white bars) with the cumulative intermediate effort objectives under the MAGP IV (shaded bars).

Belgium

In the discussions for the preparation of the MAGP IV, Belgium presented economic arguments for maintaining the objectives of the its fleet at the level set by the transitional multi-annual guidance programme of 1992. The Council accepted that these objectives represented the minimum viable capacity of the Belgian fleet. The objectives of the MAGP IV are therefore to stabilise capacity at that level.

a) Capacity objectives

No information was provided on the vessels re-measured in GT since the start of the MAGP IV, so the GT objectives remain unchanged.

>TABLE POSITION>

b) Situation of the fleet

>TABLE POSITION>

c) Fishing effort

No fishing effort data were provided.

Germany

After the adoption of the MAGP IV Decision for Germany, it was discovered that certain logbook data had not been included in the original baseline activity figures for the beam trawler segment, which contains just 7 vessels. The Decision was therefore amended by Decision 1999/447/EC [7] of 14 June 1999 in order to correct this. The capacity objectives were not affected by the amendment.

[7] OJ No L175, 10.7.1999, p. 66.

a) Capacity objectives

No information was provided on the vessels re-measured in GT since the start of the MAGP IV, so the GT objectives remain unchanged.

>TABLE POSITION>

b) Situation of the fleet

>TABLE POSITION>

Note: The power of segment 4C6 at 1 January 2000 should be taken to be 11749 kW, as indicated by the German authorities.

Bold type indicates that the objectives have been exceeded

c) Fishing effort

Germany intends to control fishing effort in two segments of the fleet, the beam trawlers operating in the North Sea (4C4) and the pelagic trawlers (4C6). Germany has introduced regimes to manage fishing effort in these two segments, by the allocation of days at sea to individual vessels in the case of beam trawlers and by limiting the aggregate effort of the pelagic trawlers. However the services of the Commission have queried certain details concerning the calculation of the number of days spent at sea, in particular regarding the apparent exclusion of time spent fishing species that are not listed in Annex 1 of Council Decision 97/413/EC.

>TABLE POSITION>

d) Cumulative fishing effort objectives

units in '000 GT days and '000 kW days

>TABLE POSITION>

4C4 Beam trawlers

GT days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

// kW days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

4C6 Pelagic trawlers

GT days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

// kW days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

Denmark

a) Capacity objectives

No information was provided on the vessels re-measured in GT since the start of the MAGP IV, so the GT objectives remain unchanged.

>TABLE POSITION>

b) Situation of the fleet

Denmark stated that the difference between the GT figures provided in their report and the figures obtained from the fleet register are due to estimates of GT being used in the report in cases where only GRT figures are available in the register. Under Community legislation the estimates of GT should in fact have been reported to the fleet register. The figure provided by Denmark should be considered the most reliable.

For 1.1.1998 and 1.1.1999, the differences in power between the figures supplied by Denmark and those in the fleet register can be largely attributed to the declaration of the maximum power in the report and the de-rated power in the fleet register. Provided that the de-rated engine power is an accurate representation of the power actually developed the fleet register information should be considered more reliable. For 1.1.2000 Denmark provided the de-rated engine power.

>TABLE POSITION>

c) Fishing effort

Overall fishing effort data were provided, but not broken down by fleet segment.

Spain

a) Capacity objectives

No information was provided on the vessels re-measured in GT since the start of the MAGP IV, so the GT objectives remain unchanged.

>TABLE POSITION>

b) Situation of the fleet

>TABLE POSITION>

c) Fishing effort

>TABLE POSITION>

France

The MAGP IV Decision was modified by Decision 1999/442/EC [8]of 7 June 1999 in order to fix the objectives for the segments operating in the French Overseas Departments, as envisaged in a footnote to the table of objectives of the earlier Decision.

[8] OJ No L 172, 8.7.1999, p. 45.

a) Capacity objectives

France provided a list of all vessels operating from the mainland that were remeasured since the start of the MAGP IV. Of these, only the vessels that were active at 1.1.1997 were used to calculate for each fleet segment the change in the situation at 1.1.1997 attributable purely to the change in units from GRT to GT. The objectives for 31.12.1996 were adjusted by the same proportion and the objectives for 31.12.2001 recalculated accordingly.

>TABLE POSITION>

Note: For the DOMs an increase in capacity is foreseen. The intermediate objectives are therefore equivalent to the final objectives

Bold type indicates that the objectives have been exceeded.

b) Situation of the fleet

>TABLE POSITION>

Bold type indicates that the objectives have been exceeded.

c) Fishing effort

France has opted to control fishing effort in four segments of the fleet, but the services of the Commission have raised certain reservations concerning the efficacy of certain provisions of the fishing effort management regimes that have been introduced, notably the weekend prohibition of fishing in segment 4F8.

>TABLE POSITION>

d) Cumulative fishing effort objectives

units in '000 GT days and '000 kW days

>TABLE POSITION>

4F3 Trawlers > 30 metres

GT days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

// kW Days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

4F6 Pelagic trawlers > 50 metres

GT days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

// kW days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

4F8 Mediterranean trawlers

GT days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

// kW days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

4F9 Mediterranean seiners : Fishery F1 : Tuna

GT days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

// kW days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

4F9 Mediterranean seiners : Fishery F2 : Small pelagics

GT days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

// kW days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

Greece

a) Capacity objectives

No information was provided on the vessels re-measured in GT since the start of the MAGP IV, so the GT objectives remain unchanged.

>TABLE POSITION>

b) Situation of the fleet

The tonnage values communicated by Greece separated the totals of vessels for which a GRT measure was available and those for which a GT value was available. No total was given in which a GT was used if available and a GRT if not. The tonnage figures from Greece have therefore been omitted from the following table.

>TABLE POSITION>

c) Fishing effort

>TABLE POSITION>

Ireland

a) Capacity objectives

No information was provided on the vessels re-measured in GT since the start of the MAGP IV, so the GT objectives remain unchanged.

>TABLE POSITION>

b) Situation of the fleet

>TABLE POSITION>

Note : The objectives for segment 4G1 were increased at the start of the MAGP IV in order to take into account the capacity of previously unregistered vessels. The registration of these vessels has not yet been completed, with approximately 400 of a total of about 1000 applications as yet unprocessed. The capacity of this segment is therefore underestimated in the table.

Bold type indicates that the objectives have been exceeded.

c) Fishing effort

>TABLE POSITION>

d) Cumulative fishing effort objectives

units in '000 GT days and '000 kW days

>TABLE POSITION>

4G2 Pelagic

GT days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

// kW days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

4G3 Beam trawl

GT days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

// kW days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

Italy

In that MAGP IV Decision for Italy, a footnote to the table of objectives stated that the figures would be revised in the light of the conclusions of a working group set up between the Commission and the Italian authorities to review the data on the Italian fleet, which were considered at the time of adoption to be unreliable.

Based on the results of the working group, the Italian MAGP was amended by Decision 2000/279/EC [9] of 30 March 2000. However it should be noted that although the revised figures are a much more accurate representation of the Italian fleet, further revisions are envisaged before the end of 2000.

[9] OJ No L 90, 12.4.2000, p. 12.

a) Capacity objectives

>TABLE POSITION>

b) Situation of the fleet

In the following table there are very large discrepancies for certain segments between the data in the fleet register and those supplied by Italy. These arise because the allocation of vessels to their correct segments in the Community fleet register is not yet complete.

>TABLE POSITION>

Bold type indicates that the objectives have been exceeded.

c) Fishing effort

>TABLE POSITION>

Netherlands

In 1999 the Commission began an infringement procedure against the Netherlands for non compliance with the objectives for 31 December 1996 fixed by the MAGP III (1992 - 1996). This action has prompted a thorough examination of the historical data on the Dutch fleet and the potential for additional fishing opportunities. On the basis of these analyses the Dutch authorities have requested (i) a revision of the objectives for 31 December 1986 fixed by the MAGP I, and consequently the revision of the objectives fixed by the MAGPs II - IV, and (ii), an increase in the objectives of the pelagic segment in order to exploit additional fishing opportunities in third country and international waters.

The Commission is currently examining these requests with a view to amending the MAGP IV for the Netherlands in the last quarter of 2000.

a) Capacity objectives

The objectives for segments 4J1 and 4J5 could not be fixed at the time of adoption of the MAGP IV Decision for the Netherlands because there was insufficient information to classify the small vessels into those using passive gears and those using active gears. These objectives will be fixed when the MAGP IV Decision is modified later this year.

>TABLE POSITION>

b) Situation of the fleet

>TABLE POSITION>

Bold type indicates that the objectives have been exceeded.

c) Fishing effort

>TABLE POSITION>

d) Cumulative fishing effort objectives

units in '000 GT days and '000 kW days

>TABLE POSITION>

4J2 Pelagic Trawlers

GT days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

// kW days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

4J3 Cutters > 221 kW

GT days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

// kW days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

4J4 Eurocutters < 221 kW

GT days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

// kW days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

Portugal

a) Capacity objectives

Portugal provided a list of vessels that were remeasured since the start of the MAGP IV. Of these, the vessels that were active at 1.1.1997 were used to calculate for each fleet segment the increase in the situation at 1.1.1997 attributable purely to the change in units from GRT to GT. The objectives for 31.12.1996 were adjusted by the same proportion and the objectives for 31.12.2001 recalculated accordingly.

>TABLE POSITION>

b) Situation of the fleet

>TABLE POSITION>

c) Fishing effort

>TABLE POSITION>

United Kingdom

a) Capacity objectives

The United Kingdom supplied a list of all vessels active at 1 January 1997 that have been remeasured in GT since that date. The change in the situation at 1.1.1997 attributable purely to the change in units from GRT to GT was calculated for each fleet segment. The objectives for 31.12.1996 were adjusted by the same proportion and the objectives for 31.12.2001 recalculated accordingly

>TABLE POSITION>

b) Situation of the fleet

>TABLE POSITION>

Bold type indicates that the objectives have been exceeded.

c) Fishing effort

>TABLE POSITION>

d) Cumulative fishing effort objectives

units in '000 GT days and '000 kW days

>TABLE POSITION>

4N2 Pelagic : Fishery F1. North Sea herring

GT days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

// kW days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

4N2 Pelagic : Fishery F2. Western pelagic

GT days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

// kW days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

4N2 Pelagic : Fishery F3. Atlanto Scandian herring

GT days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

// kW days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

NB: A footnote to the table of objectives in the MAGP Decision states that the objectives for this fishery are subject to review in the light of the development of the fishery

4N2 Pelagic : Fishery F4. Blue whiting

GT days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

// kW days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

NB: A footnote to the table of objectives in the MAGP Decision states that the objectives for this fishery are subject to review in the light of the development of the fishery

4N3 Beam trawl : Fishery F1 Flatfish IV

GT days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

// kW days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

4N3 Beam trawl : Fishery F2 Flatfish VII, VI

GT days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

// kW days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

4N4 Demersal trawl, seines, Nephrops

GT days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

// kW days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

4N8 Distant water

GT days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

// kW days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

Sweden

In order to accommodate a change from industrial to human consumption fishing by a number of vessels, Sweden requested a transfer of capacity from the objectives of the bottom trawl segment to those of the pelagic trawl segment. Given that the overall objectives of the MAGP would be unaffected and that the change would result in better product quality and improved use of resources, the MAGP IV Decision for Sweden was amended by Commission Decision 1999/446/EC [10] of 14 June 1999.

[10] OJ No L175, 10.7.1999, p.63.

a) Capacity objectives

Sweden provided a list of vessels that were remeasured since the start of the MAGP IV. Of these, the vessels that were active at 1.1.1997 were used to calculate for each fleet segment the change in the situation at 1.1.1997 attributable purely to the change in units from GRT to GT. The objectives for 31.12.1996 were adjusted by the same proportion and the objectives for 31.12.2001 recalculated accordingly.

>TABLE POSITION>

b) Situation of the fleet

>TABLE POSITION>

Bold type indicates that the objectives have been exceeded.

c) Fishing effort

>TABLE POSITION>

d) Cumulative fishing effort objectives

units in '000 GT days and '000 kW days

>TABLE POSITION>

4M4 Bottom Trawlers

GT days ('000)

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

// kW day ('000)s

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

Finland

Following the submission by the Finnish authorities of new data concerning the composition of the fleet, it was necessary to introduce a minor correction to the allocation of vessels to fleet segments. The MAGP IV Decision for Finland was therefore amended by Commission Decision 1999/448/EC [11] of 14 June 1999.

[11] OJ No L175, 10.7.1999, p.68.

a) Capacity objectives

Finland provided a list of vessels that were remeasured since the start of the MAGP IV. Of these, the vessels that were active at 1.1.1997 were used to calculate for each fleet segment the change in the situation at 1.1.1997 attributable purely to the change in units from GRT to GT. The objectives for 31.12.1996 were adjusted by the same proportion and the objectives for 31.12.2001 recalculated accordingly.

>TABLE POSITION>

b) Situation of the fleet

>TABLE POSITION>

c) Fishing effort

No fishing effort data were provided.

Conclusions

During the first three years of the MAGP IV, the Community fleet was reduced by 82439 GT and 447148 kW, which represent reductions in fleet capacity of approximately 4% and 5.6% respectively. At 1 January 2000 the Community fleet was already approximately 17% below the final MAGP IV objectives in terms of tonnage and 6% below the final MAGP IV objectives in terms of power.

These figures would seem to confirm the success of the MAGP in reducing fleet capacity. However, closer examination shows that these reductions were achieved because some Member States far exceeded the reductions called for by the MAGP while others failed to achieve the target reductions by a substantial margin. The Member States that exceeded the required reductions must have been motivated by factors other than the MAGP objectives, whereas those that failed to achieve the required reductions largely ignored the MAGP objectives.

The reasons for this have been discussed at length in the recently published report from the Commission to the Council for the preparation of a mid term review of the MAGP IV [12]. The reductions called for by the MAGP IV were so modest (about 3% in capacity over the 5 year period) that the Community fleet as a whole was already within the final objectives before the start of the programme. A reduction of 3% in capacity over 5 years would certainly not be sufficient to counter increases in fishing effort due to technological progress over the same period, and must be contrasted with the scientific advice that there is currently about 40% over-capacity in the European fleet.

[12] COM(2000) 272 final, 10.5.2000.

In this context it is also interesting to note that with the exceptions of Italy and Greece the countries opting to achieve their objectives purely in terms of capacity have reached their objectives in all segments, whereas all of the countries the opted to reduce activity as well as capacity have all failed to reach their capacity objectives in one or more segments. In addition, there remain some doubts concerning the adequacy of the effort regimes to ensure a real and permanent reduction of activity in several of the countries concerned.

Whilst the MAGPs do not seem to have been directly responsible for the major part of the reductions in fleet capacity in recent years, the eligibility for public aid for the renewal and modernisation of the fishing fleet under the Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance does provide an incentive to meet the objectives, at least for some Member States.

This makes the measurement and control of fleet capacity of great importance. From the results presented in this report it would appear that the coherence between the data in the fishing vessel register of the Community and those in the national registers is now improving, though by no means perfect. Further improvements are to be expected as the Member States take greater responsibility for this coherence by having direct access to the Community register through the FRONT application.

A greater problem concerns the measurement of capacity itself. The problems of comparing fleet tonnage with the objectives of the MAGP as the fleet is progressively re-measured is evident in this report. There are also less obvious but perhaps more difficult problems associated with the measurement and control of vessel power. Where a 1% change in capacity can mean the difference between eligibility or non-eligibility for public aid for modernisation and renewal the importance of ensuring reliable capacity measurement is clear.