ARCHIVES HISTORIQUES 
DE LA COMMISSION 
 
 
 
COLLECTION RELIEE DES 
DOCUMENTS "COM" 
 
 
 
 
COM (83) 324 
 
 
 
Vol. 1983/0 132 
  
 
Disclaimer  
Conformém ent au règlement (CEE, Euratom) n° 354/83 du Conseil du 1er février 1983 
concernant l'ouverture au public des archives historiques de la Communauté économique 
européenne et de la Communauté européenne de l'énergie atomique (JO L 43 du 15.2.1983, 
p. 1), tel que modifié par le règlement (CE, Euratom) n° 1700/2003 du 22 septembre 2003 
(JO L 243 du 27.9.2003, p. 1), ce dossier est ouvert au public. Le cas échéant, les documents 
classifiés présents dans ce dossier ont été déclassifiés conformément à l'article 5 dudit 
règlem ent. 
In accordance with Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom) No 354/83 of 1 February 1983 
concerning the openi ng to the public of the historical archives of the European Econom ic 
Community and the European Atomic Energy Communit y (OJ L 43, 15.2.1983, p. 1), as 
amended by Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1700/2003 of 22 September 2003 (OJ L 243, 
27.9.2003, p. 1), this f ile is open to the public. Where necessary, classified documents in this 
file have been declassified in conformity with Article 5 of the aforementioned regulation.  
In Übereinstimmung mit der Verordnung (EWG, Euratom) Nr. 354/83 des Rates vom  1. 
Februar 198 3 über die Freigabe der historischen Archive der Europäischen  
Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft und der Europäischen Atomgem einschaft (ABI. L 43 vom  15.2.1983,  
S. 1), geändert durch die Verordnung (EG, Euratom) Nr. 1700/2003 vom 22. Septem ber 2003  
(ABI. L 243 vom 27 .9.2003, S. 1), ist diese Datei der Öffentlichkeit zugänglich. Soweit  
erforderlich, wurden die Verschlusssachen in dieser Datei in Übereinstimmung mit Artikel 5  
der genannten Verordnung freigegeben.  
COMMISSION OF THE  EUROPEAN  COMMUNITIES 
COM(83)  324  final 
Brussels,  3rd  June  1983 
REPORT  OF THE  COMMISSION  TO THE  COUNCIL 
on by-catches  in  fisheries 
(Response  to the  Council Declaration  of 25  January  1983 
concerning Article  4 of  Regulation  (EEC)  172/83) 
COM(83)  324  final 

By-catches:  request  of the Danish  government  to allow  sorting  in all 
circumstances. 
1. The Danish government has  requested  that  Council  Regulation  (EEC)  172/82 
of 25/1/83  (1) be  amended  to permit  the  sorting  of permitted  by-catches 
of human  consumption species  from  the catches of species used for re­
duction  to meal and oil,  whether  a member  State  has a  quota  for the human 
consumption species or not. 
The Council of  25/1/83  noted  the  request  from  the Danish  government  that 
the present  by-catches  rules  should be changed. 
This  paper  examines  the  arguments  of the Danish  government  and the  probable 
consequences of  implementing  its  request  and  draws  the conclusions of the 
Commission. 
2. The Danish Government appears to base its  case  on four main arguments, 
which are  that  sorting: 
(i) would not result in adverse conservation effects, 
(ii) would make control of the by-catch regulations easier, 
(iii) would result in a better utilisation of resources, because the 
by-catch can only be used for reduction to meal and oil under 
existing regulations, 
(iv) would allow the sorted fish to be sold for human consumption 
purposes  at a higher price than  that  sold for reduction thus 
avoiding the adverse economic effect of the existing regulations 
which  is critical for the Danish fleet fishing for species used for 
reduction to meal and oil. 
3. The  first  argument of the Danish Government is based on the fact  that. 
for the zones in which Denmark does not have a quota, by-catches are 
not included in the scientific assessments and are therefore 
additional to the TAC (see Annex I). The Commission  agrees  that  this 
is a correct statement. 
(1) OJ No L 24 of 27 January 1983 / P- 30. 

.2. 
The Commission  considers,  however, that the  conclusion  drawn by the 
Danish  Government  from this statement of fact is  based  on an incorrect 
analysis  of the effects of  changing  the regulation. 
Given  that there is a significant  economic  advantage in selling the 
by-catches  for human consumption  purposes,  a change  in the regulation would 
provide  fishermen with a very strong economic incentive to fish directly for 
human  consumption  species  up to the permitted limits and to  claim  these 
catches  as  "by-catches".  In many  fisheries,  the true by-catch is much  less  than 
the permitted limit of 10%; for  example  it is 1-2% in the fishery for  sandeel. 
Such"by-catches"would  have  to be deducted from existing  TACs  for human 
consumption  species  in order to maintain the conservation objectives of the 
Common  Fisheries  Policy.  Thus,  accepting  the argument of the  Danish 
Government  and following it to its  logical  conclusion  would result in a 
reduction  of the  shares  of other  Member  States  in the  TACs. 
4. The  Danish  Government  considers  that sorting would permit both fishermen and 
fisheries  inspectors  to control more  easily  the 10% permitted  by-catch.  The 
Commission  considers  that this is not the  crucial  question in relation to control. 
As stated in paragraph 3, the proposed change in the regulations would provide 
a very strong  economic  incentive to fish directly for human consumption  species 
up to the permitted limit of 10% and to  claim  that all  these  fish were  by-catches. 
In the opinion of the Commission the crucial control question is  whether, 
if the regulation  were  changed as requested, it would be possible to 
determine effectively whether human consumption species had been caught 
legitimately as an incidental by-catch in the same haul of the net as 
species  caught for reduction to meal and oil or whether they had been 
taken  illegitimately in a .directed fishery for human consumption species at a 
different  tiwe and,,  possibly,,  place  to the  species  caught for reduction to 
meal and oil. In this context "to determine effectively " means "to the 
point of obtaining a legal sanction against an infringement of the 
regulation;". 
Information  provided to the Commission on the proportion of boats inspected 
at sea which are found to have infringed the existing by-catch regulations 
indicates  that  the probability of inspection at sea is too low to provide 
an effective  deterrent.  The existing regulations rest on proving the 
factual issue of whether the by-catch exceeds or does not exceed the 
permitted 10 % of human consumption species. Under the proposed changes 
it would be necessary to prove  that  part  or all of the human consumption 
by-catch had been caught as a by-catch in a directed fishery. It would be 
impossible  to prove this either at sea or on landing. 
./... 

.3. 
With  the  existing fisheries,  the  total  potential  for  such illegitimate catches 
is of the  order  of  129.000  t in the  North  Sea  (ICES sub-area  IV) and  16.500  t 
in the  areas west  of the  United Kingdom, south  and  west  of Ireland  and  west  of 
France  (ICES sub-areas  VI, VII and VIII).  (Annex  II). 
5. The  Danish Government refers  to the  better utilisation  and to the  economic 
advantages which would result  from  using  the  sorted by-catches  for  human 
consumption purposes. 
It is the  case  that  the  quotas  for  human consumption species available  to 
Denmark  in the  North  Sea do not  limit  the  sorting  of  by-catches.  The 
limitation  affects,  in  fact, only  the  areas where Denmark does  not  have  a 
quota,  ICES  sub-areas  VI, VII and VIII. 
Even  if it is  assumed  that  the  maximum allowable by-catch  of species listed  in 
Annex  V of  Council Regulation  (EEC)  171/83  (1) is  taken  in all  fisheries 
and that  it consists entirely  of  fish suitable  for  human consumption,  in the 
case  of Denmark  the  wasted resources  on  which  it bases  its  case  would  total 
at maximum, 3.300  t (Annex  II,  Table  2). 
The real figure would  be  much less because: 
- part  of the  by-catches  in the  Norway  pout  and  sprat fisheries would 
consist  of  fish which  are too  small  to sort, 
- the  percentage by-catch  in the  sandeel  and  blue  whiting  fisheries would 
ordinarily  be  much less than  10%, 
Finally,  while  it would  be  economically advantageous  to Danish fishermen  to 
sell  sorted by-catch  for  human consumption purposes  r the  predictable abuse  of 
this concession would  be to the  economic disadvantage  of fishermen  of other 
Member  States, whose quotas would have  to be  reduced  for the  reasons 
described  in paragraph  3. 
6. The  Commission considers  that  the  Danish Government,  in  failing  to  consider 
the likely outcome  of the  proposed change  in the  regulation, also does  not  fully 
appreciate  the  wider political implications  for the  Community. 
(1) 0J No L  24 of 27  January  1983 ,  P-1-

.4. 
In the view of the Commission, these are: 
- that  the consequences would run counter to the political foundations of the 
Common  Fisheries  Policy as the concept of relative stability as 
described  in Article  4 (1)  of Council Regulation (EEC)  170/83  would 
be nullified because illegitimate "by-catches" would benefit those 
Member  States which carry out the industrial fisheries to the disadvantage 
of those which do not; 
7_ The Commission considers  that  fisheries for species used for reduction 
to meal and oil already benefit  from  provisions made in the regulation 
which are to the disadvantage of the directed fisheries for human 
consumption species (Annex III). 
8, The Danish Government also draws  attention  to the by-catch of cod allowed 
in the Greenland redfish fishery to Member States  that  have a quota for 
redfish but no quota for cod in  that  geographical area. 
The question of taking a cod by-catch when fishing for other human consumption 
species  in Greenland waters falls outside the  remit  of the Council 
Declaration  on by-catches of 25 January 1983 which is concerned  with  by-
catches  of human consumption species when fishing for species used for 
reduction. Apart  from  this  important  distinction the fact is  that  the 
cod by-catch possibility was created during the years when directed 
fishing for cod was reserved to Greenland fishermen only (1978-1981). This 
reservation could only be tolerated if, in the course of fishing for other 
abundant human consumption  species,  a by-catch of cod  within  reasonable 
limits was also tolerated for other Member States. 
(1) 0J No L  24 of 27  January  1983 

.5. 
9. The Commission concludes  that  if the request of the Danish Government were 
accepted,  it would: 
(D result in uncontrollable abuse of the by-catch provisions, 
(2) require, in order to avoid adverse conservation effects, deduction 
of the predicted by-catches  from  the  TAC  before quota allocations were 
made, 
(3) result in a redistribution of resources between Member States, 
(4) affect fundamentally the basis of the Common Fisheries Policy  with 
politically unacceptable consequences. 
The Commission cannot therefore recommend accepting the request of the Danish 
Government . 

Annex  I 
Effects of the inclusion or exclusion of by-catches  from  the scientific 
assessments. 
To achieve the conservation objectives of the Common Fisheries Policy, 
catches  must be limited to the  TACs  agreed by the  Council. 
To ensure this, estimated by-catches are deducted  from  the shares of 
the TACs  available to the Community for those stocks for which the 
scientific assessments include the by-catches  (North  Sea haddock and 
whiting). 
For other stocks, for which information on the quantities caught as by-
catches  is not available, the  TACs  do not include by-catches. Consequently, 
it is not necessary to make any deductions. If the by-catches were 
included in the assessments, the  TACs  would be bigger but the estimated 
by-catches  would then have to be deducted  from  them and the share of the TAC 
available for the human consumption fisheries would remain un­
changed.  No additional fish would be available in the human consumption 
fisheries. 

Annex II 
The potential  for illegal  by-catches. 
An illegitimate  by-catch  is defined  as human  consumption species which 
have been caught in a directed  fishery  for these species  and not 
incidentally  together  with the species used  for reduction  to meal and 
oil, although claimed  to be so  caught.  The potential  is 10 % of the 
total weight  of both types  of species  (i.e. one ninth of the  tonnage  of 
the industrial  species caught). 
The total  potential  for the  North Sea fisheries  (ICES sub-area  IV) 
is 129.305  t of which the share of Denmark  is 119.608t (Table  1). 
For the area west of the  United  Kingdom,  west and south of Ireland  and 
west of France (ICES sub-areas VI,'VII  and VIII) the total potential  is 
41.194 t (Table  2). 
If the request  of the  Danish government  were allowed, there would 
be no limit to the  by-catches  of species which  can be  fished  with 
small mesh nets (Article  3 of Council  Regulation  (EEC) 171/83 but 
which are not  listed in Annex V of this regulation. 
Under existing  regulations  it is not  permitted  to retain on board 
any percentage  of such by-catches  (Article  4 of Council  Regulation 
172/83) if a member  State does not have a quota, but allowing  the Danish 
request  would make it  necessary  to introduce  a new regulation  to fix a limit 
to such by-catches. 
In order to achieve  the conservation  objectives  of the  Common  Fisheries  Policy, 
potential  illegitimate  catches  in excess of quotas would  have to be 
deducted from  the TACs, or the  Community  shares  of the  TACs, before 
quota allocations  were made. The  potential  by-catch species  are cod, 
haddock,  saithe and whiting,  the proposed  1983 quotas for which are 
shown in Tables 1 and 2. 

Annex III 
Existing  provisions  in the  fisheries  for species  which are used 
for reduction  to meal and oil 
Part of the  by-catch  taken in the  fisheries  for species  used for reduction 
to meat and oil consists  of small,  immature  fish, some of  which would have 
survived  to be caught as large, edible  fish in the  fisheries  *or human 
consumption  purposes.  As the  by-catch  is unavoidably  caught  when fishing  for 
certain  industrial  species,  it would not be  possible  to fish for the  majority 
of species  which are used for reduction  to meal and oil, if a by-catch  was 
not permitted.  The Commission  recognizes that  fishing  for industrial  species 
is a legitimate  fishing  activity  and that it l  logical  to make use of 
these resources,  which would  otherwise  be wa  ted. To allow these  fisheries 
to be carried  out, the Council permitted nets with small  meshes  to be used 
(Article  3 and Annex II of  Regulation  171/83  for certain  species  (Article  3 
and Annex II of  Council Regulation  (EEC)  171/83  subject  to 
a maximum  by-catch  limit of 10% of human  consumption  species  or of  Sepia (1). 
Similar  provisions apply  to herring  which is taken as a by-catch (2)  . These 
provisions  strike  a balance  between  the economic  disadvantage  to the 
fisheries  for human  consumption  species  resulting  from the losses to 
these fisheries  caused  by the  by-catch  and the  economic  advantage  of 
permitting  the fisheries  for industrial  species. 
Additionally,  the Council  has agreed  by its declaration  of 25/1/83,  that 
if a member  State has a  quota for a  species  and that its  quota is not  exhausted 
or, if .there is a Community  share of a TAC not  allocated  between  member 
States and that share is not  exhausted,  its fishermen  may sort out and 
land by-catches  of fish suitable  for human  consumption.  This recognizes 
that it would be a waste of valuable resources  to convert  such fish into 
meal and oil. The Council could  accept  such landings only  because  they 
count against  the quota or Community  share of the TAC  (Article  4 of Council 
Regulation  (EEC)  172/83)  and therefore,  do not  nullify  the conservation 
objectives  of the  Community. 
(1) Council Regulation (EEC)  171 /83 of  25/1/83;  Article 8 (1) and Annex V 
(2) Council Regulation (EEC) 172  /83 of  25/1/83;  Article 8 

Table 1 Average  catches  (1977-81)of  the four main species caught with  Article  3 nets in 
ICES sub-area  IV (North Sea) and  potential  maximum by-catches  of Annex V  species 
at 10 %. d> 
Species 
Blue whiting 
Norway pout 
Sandeel 
Sprat 
Total 
Potential  by-catch 
at 10 % (D 
species (2) EEC D F NL B UK DK IRL 
22.849 367 0 0 0 215 21.718 549 
240.411 0 0 25 0 2.749 237.459 178 
591 .888 0 0 0 0 30.604 561.274 10 
308.585 4.869 455 2 1 47.242 256.017 0 
1.163.734 5.236 455 2 1 80.810 1.076.468 0 
h 
129.305 582 51 3 0 8.979 119.608 82 
559.450(3) 54.020 79.950 37.180 13.520 293.850 80.930 0 
(1) The by-catch  is defined  as the  weight of the  by-catch species expressed  as a percentage  of the  total 
weight of both the by-catch species  and the species used for reduction  to meal and oil: that is,  one ninth 
of the Latter.  For example: 
129.305 x 100 = 10 % 
(1.163.734  + 129.305) 
(2) Proposed  Community  shares of the TACs for 1983 for cod, haddock,  saithe and whiting  (C0MC83)  213). 
(3) excluding  5.500 t of haddock  and 22.180 t of  whiting 

"i U u - fe d. Average catches (1977-81)of  the  five main species caught with  Article  3 nets in 
ICES sub-areas  VI , VII and  VIII (west  of the  United  Kingdom,  west and south of Ireland  and 
west of France)  and potential  maximum. 
SPECIES -
Actual catches EEC D F ML B UK DK IRL 
Blue whiting 22.267 2.755 0 1.166 0 5.279 12.691 376 
Norway pout 9.811 0 0 "l .456 0 1 .101 7.254 0 
Sandeel 1.527 0 265 0 0 1.240 22 0 
• Sprat 26.244 .2.274 946 2.943 . 0 9.306 4.355 6 = 420 
Horse mackerel  (1) 88.588 . 2.163 0 72.515 5 8.641 5.264 o - -
Total 148.437 7.192 1 .211 78.080 5 25.567 29.586 6.796 
Potential  by-catch  at 10 % • 16.494 799 135 8.676 1 2.841 3.287(2) 755 
EEC share of TACs  less actual  catche: 
Blue whiting 216.884(3) NOT ALLOCATED BETWEEN MEMBER STATES 
—.a 
Horse mackerel 5.412 
Potential  by-catch  at -10 % 24.7A0' 
• 
Total potential  by-catches 41.194 
Directed  catch of by-catch specie 174.670 2.410 57.640 240 1.160 78_020 0 35.200 
i 
i 
(1) Figures reported  by member  States  for 1982 
(2) Maximum  actual  loss of human  consumption species  (see  paragraph  5) 
(3) 262.000  t less actual  catches  in sub-areas  IV, VI and VII 
(4) Proposed  1983  TACs and quotas for cod,  haddock,  saithe  and whiting  (C0M(83)  213)