Proposal for a Council Regulation laying down measures concerning incidental catches of cetaceans in fisheries and amending Regulation (EC) No 88/98
Date: 2003-07-24
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: by-catch, fishing controls, fishing net, fishing regulations, marine mammal, protection of animal life, signalling device

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

Brussels, 24.07.2003
COM(2003) 451 final

2003/0163 (CNS)

Proposal for a

COUNCIL REGULATION

laying down measures concerning incidental catches of cetaceans in fisheries and
amending Regulation (EC) No 88/98

(presented by the Commission)

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM

The incidental  capture  and  killing  of  small  cetaceans  in  fishing  activities  is  considered  as  a
major threat to the conservation of their populations.

Cetaceans  are  granted  strict  protection  under  Community  environmental  legislation,  namely
the Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC), with a view to maintaining those species at or restoring
them  to  favourable  conservation  status.  Article  11  of  this  Directive  requires  that  Member
States  shall  undertake  surveillance  of  their  conservation  status,  and  Article  12  further
stipulates that Member States shall take the requisite measures to establish a system of strict
protection for these animals, including a system to monitor their incidental capture or killing
with a view to further research and conservation measures as required.

As far as fisheries legislation is concerned, the Council adopted in 1997 and further amended
in 1998 the so called "drift-net limitations" (Regulations (EC) No 894/97 and No 1239/98), on
the basis, inter alia, that such gear might endanger populations of some species caught as by-
catch.

On the basis of the scientific information now available to it, however, the Commission has
come  to  the  conclusion  that  the  measures  taken  so  far  are  insufficient  or  lacking  in
coordination. Additional Community action is needed in the fisheries sector to improve, in a
consistent  and  cooperative  manner,  measures  aimed  at  the  conservation  of  small  cetaceans.
This  is  also  fully  consistent  with  the  obligation  under  the  Common  Fisheries  Policy  to
minimise the impact of fishing activities on marine ecosystems, as provided for in particular
in Article 2 of Regulation (EC) 2371/2002.

The  Commission  asked  the  International  Council  for  the  Exploration  of  the  Sea  (ICES)  to
provide  an  overview  of  fisheries  that  have  a  significant  impact  on  small  cetaceans,  an
assessment of the risks created by fisheries on identified populations and, finally, advice  on
possible  remedial  action  to  reduce  the  impact  of  fishing.  It  also  requested  the  Scientific,
Technical  and  Economic  Committee  for  Fisheries  (STECF),  in  particular  through  its
Subgroup  on  Fisheries  and  Environment  (SGFEN),  to  review  the  information  provided  by
ICES,  to  add  any  additional  information  on  cetacean  by-catch  in  European  fisheries  (in
particular  for  fisheries  not  covered  by  ICES)  and  to  provide  the  Commission  with  possible
management advice1.

According  to  the  reports  from  these  scientific  bodies,  most  of  the  fishing  gears  commonly
used in Europe result in some cetacean by-catch, although gill nets and pelagic trawls appear
to contribute most. By  way  of  example  of  the  extent  of  cetacean  by-catches,  it  is  estimated
that  each  year  several  thousand  harbour  porpoises  are  caught  in  bottom-set  gillnets  in  the
North Sea. Although data on by-catches of other cetaceans, such as dolphins, is patchy, it is
clear from fishing trials conducted by some Member States that from time to time by-catches
of these species can reach high levels (details can be found in the reports cited above).

Scientists consider that mitigation of cetacean by-catch can be primarily addressed through an
overall  reduction  in  fishing  pressure  together  with  some  additional  measures  of  a  technical

1

on 

Committee 

Advisory 
at
http://www.ices.dk/committe/ace/2002/Section-2.pdf),  and  the  report  on  incidental  catches  of  small
cetaceans  from  the  Subgroup  on  Fishery  and  Environment  (SEC(2002)1134),  as  reviewed  and
commented by the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STCEF) in November
2002 (SEC(2003)550).

Ecosystems 

(available 

report 

2002 

2

                                                
nature.  In  order  to  obtain  better  advice  on  further  mitigation  measures,  a  comprehensive
monitoring  scheme  with  a  good  geographical  and  temporal  coverage  is  also  needed.  Only
occasional,  uncoordinated  monitoring  has  so  far  been  carried  out  and  it  is,  therefore,  not
possible to ascertain the spatial and temporal patterns of by-catch distribution.

An overall reduction of fishing pressure is expected as a result of other Community measures
aimed at ensuring the sustainability of fisheries. This proposal for a Regulation completes the
response  to  scientific  advice  by  providing  additional  measures  to  address  the  incidental
catches of cetaceans in fisheries. These measures include:

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

restrictions on the use of drift-nets in the Baltic Sea (length limitation to maximum 2.5
km, and further phasing out before 1 January 2007),

the mandatory use of acoustic deterrent devices in certain fisheries, and

coordinated monitoring of cetacean by-catch through compulsory on board observers
for given fisheries.

Restrictions on the use of drift-nets in the Baltic Sea

The use of drift-nets has been severely restricted in Community law, inter alia because of its
impact on small cetaceans, but such restrictions do not apply to the Baltic Sea2.

According to the SGFEN recommendation, the maximum length of salmon drift-nets should
be brought in line with that for other Community drift-net fisheries that are still permitted, i.e.
2.5km. A timetable for banning the use of these drift-nets should also be drawn up.

This is based on the fact that  the  harbour  porpoise  (Phocoena  phocoena), the only  cetacean
for  which  there  are  records  of  capture  in  drift-nets  in  the  Baltic,  is  the  most  critically
endangered  population  of  small  cetaceans  in  Europe.  The  very  low  remaining  population
make incidental catches a rare event but one of real significance for the conservation of this
population.

A general length limitation of drift-nets to 2.5 km should, therefore, be immediately applied
in the Baltic Sea, followed by a progressive phasing out of their use in this area until they are
completely  prohibited  as  from  1  January  2007.  Although  these  measures  of  will  adversely
affect  the  profitability  of  the  salmon  fishery  concerned,  the  fact  that  the  Community  is
committed to preserving biological diversity and to preventing the possible extinction of the
harbour  porpoise  population  in  the  Baltic  area  in  the  short  to  medium  term  overrides  these
considerations.

This commitment also implies that other gear known to carry the risk of incidental catching of
harbour porpoises, in particular bottom-set  gill nets, will  also require particular  surveillance
(see below).

Mandatory use of acoustic deterrent devices

Acoustic deterrent devices (or pingers) have been widely tested and implemented in several
gillnet fisheries around the world, where they have been successful in reducing by-catches of

2

See Regulation (EC) No 894/97, as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1239/98

3

                                                
some  small  cetaceans,  in  particular  common  dolphins  (Delphinus  delphis),  striped  dolphins
(Stenella coeruleoalba) and harbour porpoises.

The mandatory use of acoustic deterrent devices should, therefore, be required in all fisheries
that  could  produce  significant  by-catch  and  in  which  an  important  reduction  of  incidental
catches  of  cetaceans  is  expected.  This  is  particularly  valid  for  fisheries  using  bottom-set
gillnets in areas of distribution of harbour porpoises (in particular the North Sea, the English
Channel and the Celtic shelf).

Given  the  significant  contribution  of  small  fishing  vessels  to  the  total  fishing  effort  with
bottom-set  gillnets  in  these  areas,  and  the  distribution  of  porpoises  near  the  shore,  the
Commission proposes that pingers should be deployed by  all vessels, independently of their
size or of the total length of set nets they use.

However, in view of concerns raised that there has been insufficient research into measuring
any possible negative impact such devices might have, at a population level, on the animals
that they are designed to deter, this large-scale use of pingers should be carefully monitored.

In  addition,  in  order  to  ensure  proper  compliance  by  means  of  reliable  monitoring  of  such
measures,  it  is  of  the  utmost  importance  to  adopt  Community  rules  on  the  marking  and
identification of static  gear. The  Commission  intends  to  proceed  in  the  near  future  with  the
adoption of detailed rules, pursuant to Articles 5 (c) and 20a (3) of Council Regulation (EEC)
No 2847/93 and in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 36 of this Regulation.

By-catch monitoring

The above-mentioned  mitigation  measures are  considered  as a first, short-term step  towards
addressing the by-catch problem. The Commission is conscious of the need to develop wider
and  more  strategic  measures.  However,  the  design  of  such  a  strategy  requires  a  better
knowledge  of  the  problem  by  means  of  appropriate  monitoring  of  fishing  activities  and
improved assessment and surveillance of cetacean populations.

The  effective  design  of  mitigation  measures  is  highly  dependent  on  a  comprehensive
monitoring  scheme  with  sufficient  geographical  and  temporal  coverage.  Independent  and
representative  observations  of  fishing  activities  are  essential  to  provide  adequate  by-catch
estimates.

The  Commission  therefore  proposes  that  Member  States  set  up,  as  a  matter  of  priority,  on-
board observer schemes to monitor the incidental capture and killing of cetaceans in several
"high risk" fisheries where pelagic trawls or gillnets are used.

The  SGFEN  has  identified  a  number  of  fisheries  which  would  require  the  establishment  of
monitoring schemes and most of those are covered by the scope of the proposed Regulation.
Generally speaking, the appropriate level of observer coverage should depend on the desired
level  of  precision  in  the  estimate  of  by-catch  and  on  the  statistical  properties  of  by-catch
events  within  a  particular  fishery.  In  the  absence  of  sufficient  data  to  define  a  statistically-
robust level of coverage, the SGFEN has recommended that 5-10 % of the total effort should
be  monitored;  the  Commission  has,  in  most  cases,  chosen  to  propose  the  lower  figure.
Wherever  possible,  programmes  to  monitor  incidental  catches  of  cetaceans  should  benefit
from  existing  observer  programmes  established  for  other  purposes  (e.g.  data  collection  on
discards).

4

For vessels that are unable to allow an additional person on board as observer (e.g. because of
lack  of  space  or  for  safety  reasons),  the  Member  States  should  establish  other  appropriate
method of independent monitoring at sea.

Follow-up and review of these measures

The  proposed  measures  concerning  pinger  use  and  on-board  observer  programmes  will  be
carefully  monitored  and  assessed  to  enable  them  to  be  adapted  within  a  few  years  if
necessary.  There  should  be  regular  reporting  at  Community  level  to  allow  an  overall
assessment of the progress made and possible new recommendations by the STECF.

The information gathered when monitoring the use of pingers and data collected through the
independent  observer  schemes  should  be  supplemented  with  other  relevant  information,
including  research  on  new  mitigation  measures  (e.g.  trials  of  acoustic  deterrent  devices  in
pelagic trawls or of possible alternative netting materials for gillnets).

The burden placed on the fishery sector by some of the proposed measures will, however, be
difficult  to  justify  in  the  long  term  if  they  are  not  properly  complemented  by  action  to
improve  the  general  information  and  knowledge  on  the  conservation  of  cetaceans.  This
follow-up needs to be accompanied by full and proper surveillance by the Member States of
the conservation status of cetaceans as provided for in the Habitats Directive. The design of a
long-term, comprehensive and reliable strategy for the conservation of these species will only
be possible if all these conditions are fulfilled.

5

2003/0163 (CNS)

Proposal for a

COUNCIL REGULATION

laying down measures concerning incidental catches of cetaceans in fisheries and
amending Regulation (EC) No 88/98

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article
37 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission3,

Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament4,

Whereas:

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

(4) 

3

4

5

6

The  objective  of  the  common  fisheries  policy,  as  defined  in  Article  2  of  Council
Regulation (EC) No 2371/20025, is to ensure exploitation of living aquatic  resources
that provides sustainable economic, environmental and social conditions. To this end,
the Community shall, among other things, minimise the impact of fishing activities on
marine  ecosystems,  and  the  Common  Fisheries  Policy  shall  be  consistent  with  other
Community policies, in particular with environmental policy.

Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna
and  flora6  gives  strict  protection  status  to  cetaceans  and  requires  Member  States  to
undertake surveillance of the conservation status of these species. Member States shall
also establish a system to monitor the incidental capture and killing of these species, to
take  further research and conservation measures  as required  to ensure that  incidental
capture or killing does not have a significant impact on the species concerned.

The scientific information available and the techniques developed to reduce incidental
capture and killing of cetaceans in fisheries justify additional measures being taken to
further the conservation of small cetaceans in a consistent and cooperative manner at
Community level.

Some acoustic devices have been developed to deter cetaceans from fishing gear, and
have proven successful in reducing by-catch of cetacean species in static net fisheries.
The use of such devices should therefore be required in areas and fisheries with known
or  foreseeable  high  levels  of  by-catch  of  small  cetaceans.  It  is  also  necessary  to

OJ C […] du […], p.[…]
OJ C […] du […], p.[…]
OJ L 358, 31.12.2002, p. 59.
OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7. Directive as last amended by Directive 97/62/CE, OJ L 305, 8.11.1997, p.
42.

6

                                                
(5) 

(6) 

(7) 

(8) 

establish  the  technical  specifications  for  the  efficiency  of  the  acoustic  deterrent
devices to be used in such fisheries.

Scientific  and  technical  research,  in  particular  on  new  forms  of  active  deterrent
devices,  should  not  be  hindered  by  this  Regulation.  While  Member  States  should,
therefore, be allowed, for the purpose of this Regulation, to authorise the use of newly
developed and efficient types of acoustic deterrent devices not in conformity with the
technical  specifications  laid  down  in  this  Regulation  on  a  temporary  basis,  it  is  also
necessary  to  provide  for  technical  specifications  of  acoustic  deterrent  devices  to  be
brought  up  to  date  as  soon  as  possible  in  accordance  with  Council  Decision
1999/468/EC  laying  down  the  procedures  for  the  exercise  of  implementing  powers
conferred on the Commission7.

Independent  observations  of  fishing  activities  are  essential  to  provide  reliable
estimates  of  the  incidental  catch  of  cetaceans,  and  to  increase  knowledge  about  the
effects  of  the  use  of  acoustic  deterrent  devices  when  used  on  a  large  scale.  It  is
therefore necessary for monitoring schemes with independent on-board observers to be
set up and for the designation of the fisheries where such monitoring should be given
priority  to  be  coordinated.  In  order  to  provide  representative  data  on  the  fisheries
concerned,  the  Member  States  should  design  and  implement  appropriate  monitoring
programmes  for  vessels  flying  their  flag  and  engaged  in  these  fisheries.  For  small-
sized  fishing  vessels,  other  suitable  ways  of  monitoring  at  sea  should  be  set  up.
Common monitoring and reporting tasks also need to be set.

To  enable  regular  evaluation  at  Community  level  and  thorough  assessment  in  the
medium  term  to  take  place,  the  Member  States  should  report  annually  on  the  use  of
pingers and the implementation of the on-board observer programmes and include all
information collected on the incidental capture and killing of cetaceans in fisheries.

The risk created by drift-net fishing to the critically endangered population of harbour
porpoise in the Baltic area requires the use of drift-nets in this area to be stopped. The
length of drift-nets kept on board or used by a vessel should be reduced immediately.
Community vessels which fish with drift-nets in this area will be subject to economic
and technical constraints necessitating a phasing-out period before a total ban on this
gear  by  1  January  2007.  Regulation  (EC)  No  88/98  laying  down  technical  measures
for the conservation of fishery resources in the waters of the Baltic Sea, the Belts and
the Sound8 should be amended to incorporate these measures,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1
Subject-matter

This Regulation lays down measures aimed  at mitigating  incidental  catches  of  cetaceans  by
fishing vessels in the areas indicated in Annexes I and III.

7

8

OJ L 184, 17.7.1999, p. 23.
OJ L 9, 15.1.1998 p.1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 48/99, OJ L 103, 18.1. 1999,
p. 1.

7

                                                
1.

2.

3.

1.

2.

3.

1.

2.

Article 2
Use of acoustic deterrent devices

Without  prejudice  to  other  Community  provisions,  it  shall  be  prohibited  to  use  the
fishing  gear  defined  in  Annex  I  in  the  areas  and  for  the  periods  indicated  therein
without the simultaneous use of active acoustic deterrent devices.

The masters of the Community fishing vessels shall ensure that the acoustic deterrent
devices are fully operational when setting the gear.

By  way  of  derogation,  paragraph  1  shall  not  apply  to  fishing  operations  conducted
solely  for  the  purpose  of  scientific  investigation  which  are  carried  out  with  the
authorisation  and  under  the  authority  of  the  Member  States  or  Member  States
concerned  and  which  aim  at  developing  new  technical  measures  to  reduce  the
incidental capture or killing of cetaceans.

Article 3
Technical specifications of acoustic devices and conditions of use

Acoustic deterrent devices used in application of Article 2(1) shall comply with one
set of the technical specifications and conditions of use defined in Annex II.

By  way  of  derogation  to  paragraph  1,  Member  States  may  authorise  the  temporary
use  of  acoustic  deterrent  devices  which  do  not  fulfil  the  technical  specifications  or
conditions of use defined in Annex II, provided that their effect on the reduction of
incidental  catches  of  cetaceans  has  been  sufficiently  documented.  An  authorisation
shall be valid for no more than two years.

Member States shall inform the Commission of the authorisations in accordance with
paragraph  2  within  two  months  of  the  date  of  issue.  They  shall  provide  the
Commission  with  technical  and  scientific  information  on  the  acoustic  deterrent
device authorised and its effects on incidental catches of cetaceans.

Article 4
Requirement for at-sea observer schemes

Member  States  shall  design  and  implement  monitoring  schemes  for  incidental
catches  of  cetaceans  using  observers  on  board  the  vessels  flying  their  flag  for  the
fisheries  and  under  the  conditions  defined  in  Annex  III.  The  monitoring  schemes
shall be designed to provide representative data of the fisheries concerned.

If,  in  order  to  provide  representative  data  of  the  fishery  concerned,  the  monitoring
scheme involves small-sized fishing vessels where technical or safety considerations
would  prevent  the  presence  of  an  observer  on  board  the  fishing  vessel,  Member
States shall take the necessary steps to establish independent observations at sea by
other  means,  such  as  accompanying  vessels  or  specific  monitoring  of  nets  in
operation by inspection vessels.

8

Article 5
Observers

1.

In  order  to  discharge  their  obligation  to  provide  observers,  Member  States  shall
appoint  independent  and  properly-qualified  and  experienced  personnel.  In  order  to
carry out their tasks the personnel selected must have the following qualifications:

2.

3.

(a)

sufficient experience to identify cetacean species and fishing practices;

(b)

basic maritime navigation skills and appropriate safety instruction;

(c)

the  capacity  to  accomplish  elementary  scientific  tasks,  for  example  taking  of
samples where necessary and making accurate observations and records in that
connection;

(d)

a satisfactory knowledge of the language of the flag Member State of the vessel
being observed.

The  main  task  of  observers  is  to  monitor  incidental  catches  of  cetaceans  and  to
collect the data necessary to extrapolate the by-catch observed to the  whole  fishery
concerned. In particular, designated observers shall:

(a) monitor  the  fishing  operations  of  the  vessels  concerned  and  record  the
appropriate data on fishing effort  (gear,  location and  timing  of  beginning  and
end of effective fishing operation…);

(b) monitor incidental catches of cetaceans;

(c) monitor  the  use  of  acoustic  deterrent  devices,  when  observers  are  on  board  a
fishing vessel subject to the provisions established under Article 2 and 3 of this
Regulation.

The observer shall send a report containing all the data collected on the fishing effort
and observations on incidental catches of cetaceans, including a summary of his main
findings, to the competent authorities of the flag Member State concerned.

The  report  shall  contain  in  particular  the  following  information  for  the  period  in
question:

(a)

the vessel's identity;

(b)

(c)

(d)

the  name  of  the  observer  and  the  period  during  which  the  observer  was  on
board;

the  type  of  fishery  concerned  (including  gear  characteristics,  areas  with
reference to the Annexes I and III and target species);

the duration of the fishing trip and the corresponding fishing effort (expressed
as total net length x fishing hours for passive gear and numbers of fishing hours
for towed gear);

(e)

the  number  of  incidentally-caught  cetaceans,  including  species  and  where
possible  additional  information  on  size  or  weight,  sex,  age,  and,  where

9

appropriate,  indications  on  animals  lost  during  hauling  the  gear  or  released
alive;

(f)

any additional information the observer deems useful to the objectives of this
Regulation, including any failure of acoustic deterrent device during a fishing
operation, or any additional observation on cetacean biology (such as sightings
of cetaceans or particular behaviour in relation with the fishing operation).

The master of the vessel may request a copy of the observer’s report.

The flag Member State shall keep the observer's reports for at least five  years after
the end of the relevant reporting period.

Article 6
Annual reports

Each  year,  Member  States  shall  send  the  Commission,  by  1  June  at  the  latest,  a
comprehensive  annual  report  on  the  implementation  of  the  Articles  2,  3,  4  and  5
during the previous  year. The first report shall cover both the remaining part of the
year following the entry into force of this Regulation and the entire year that follows.

On the basis of the observers' reports provided according to Article 5(3) and all other
appropriate  data,  including  those  on  fishing  effort  collected  in  application  of
Regulation  (EC)  No  1543/20009,  the  annual  report  shall  include  estimates  of  the
overall incidental catches of cetaceans in each of the fisheries concerned. This report
shall include an assessment of the conclusions of the observers' reports and any other
appropriate information, including any research conducted within the Member States
to reduce the incidental capture of cetaceans in fisheries.

4.

1.

2.

Article 7
Overall assessment and review

One year at the latest after the submission by Member States of their second annual report, the
Commission shall report to the European Parliament and the Council on the operation of this
Regulation  in  the  light  of  the  assessment  by  the  Scientific,  Technical  and  Economic
Committee for Fisheries of the reports of the Member States.

Article 8
Adaptation to technical progress and additional technical guidance

1.

The following shall be  adopted  in  accordance  with  the  management  procedure  laid
down in Article 30(2) of Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002:

(a)

operational and technical  guidance on the tasks of  the  observers  as  set  out  in
Article 6;

(b)

detailed rules on reporting requirements as set out in Article 6.

9

OJ L 176, 15.7.2000, p. 1.

10

                                                
2.

Amendments  to  Annex  II  which  are  necessary  in  order  to  adapt  it  to  technical  and
scientific progress shall be adopted in accordance with the regulatory procedure laid
down in Article 30(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002.

Article 9
Amendment of Regulation (EC) No 88/98

The following Articles 8a and 8b are inserted in Regulation (EC) No 88/98:

"Article 8a

Restrictions on drift-nets

1.

2.

3.

4.

From 1 January 2007, it shall be prohibited to keep on board, or use for fishing, drift-
nets.

Until  31  December  2006,  a  vessel  may  keep  on  board,  or  use  for  fishing  drift-nets
whose individual or total length is not more than 2.5 kilometres if authorised to do so
by the competent authorities of the flag Member State.

In 2005  and  2006,  the  maximum  number  of  vessels  which  may  be  authorised  by  a
Member State to keep on board, or use for fishing, drift-nets shall not exceed 60 % of
the fishing vessels which used drift-nets during the period 2001 to 2003.

Member States shall communicate to the Commission by 30 April of each year, the
list of vessels authorised to carry out fishing activities using drift-nets; for 2004, the
information shall be sent not later than 31 August 2004.

Article 8b

Conditions for drift-nets

1.

All fishing vessels using drift-nets shall operate under the following conditions:

(a)

(b)

during  fishing  activity,  the  vessel  must  keep  the  net  under  constant  visual
observation;

floating  buoys,  with  radar  reflectors,  must  be  moored  to  each  end  of  the
netting, so that its position can be determined at any time. The buoys must be
permanently marked with the registration letter(s) and number of the vessel to
which they belong.

2.

The master of a fishing vessel using drift-nets shall keep a logbook in which he must
record the following information on a day-to-day basis:

(a)

the total length of the nets on board;

(b)

the total length of the nets used in each fishing operation;

(c)

the quantity of by-catches of cetaceans;

(d)

the date and position of such catches.

11

3.

All fishing vessels using drift-nets shall keep on board the authorisation referred to in
Article 8a (2).

Article 10
Entry into force

This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 July 2004.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels,

For the Council
The President

12

ANNEX I

Fisheries in which the use of acoustic deterrent devices is mandatory.

Area

Gear

Period

thence  due  east 

A. Baltic sea : Area delimited by
a  line  running  from  the  Swedish
coast at the point at longitude 13°
E,  thence  due  south  to  latitude
55°  N, 
to
longitude 14 °E, thence due north
to the coast of Sweden;
and,
Area  delimited  by  a  line  running
from the western coast of Sweden
at the point at latitude  55° 30'  N,
thence  due  east  to  longitude  15°
E, thence due north to latitude 56°
N,  thence  due  east  to  longitude
16°  E  thence  due  north  to  the
coast of Sweden

B. ICES sub area IV and division
III a

a)  Any  bottom-set  gillnet  or
entangling net

All year

b) Any drift-net

All year

a)  Any  bottom-set  gillnet  or
entangling  net,  or  combination  of
these nets, the total length of which
does not exceed 400 metres

a)  1  August  -  31
October

b)  Any  bottom-set  gillnet  or
entangling  net  with  mesh  sizes  >
220 mm

b) All year

C. ICES divisions VII d, e, f, g, h,
and j

a)  Any  bottom-set  gillnet  or
entangling net

a) All year

13

ANNEX II

Technical specifications and conditions of use of acoustic deterrent devices

Any  acoustic  deterrent  devices  used  in  application  of  Article  2(1)  shall  meet  one  of  the
following sets of signal and implementation characteristics:

Set 1

Set 2

SIGNAL CHARACTERISTICS

* Signal synthesis

Digital

Analogue

* Tonal/wide band

Wide band / tonal

Tonal

* Source levels (max - min)

145 dB

130-150 dB

re 1 (cid:1)Pa@1m

* Fundamental frequency

a)  20  -  160  KHz  wide  band
sweeps

10 KHz

b) 10 KHz tonal

* High-frequency harmonics

Yes

* Pulse duration (nominal)

300 ms

Yes

300ms

* Interpulse interval

a) 4 - 30 seconds randomised;

4 seconds

b) 4 seconds

IMPLEMENTATION CHARACTERISTICS

* Maximum spacing  between
two acoustic deterrent devices
along nets

200  m,  with  one  acoustic
device  fixed  at  each  end  of
the  net  (or  combination  of
nets attached together)

100  m,  with  one  acoustic
device  fixed  at  each  end  of
the  net  (or  combination  of
nets attached together)

14

ANNEX III

Fisheries to be monitored and minimum level of fishing effort subject to on-board
observers.

Monitoring schemes shall be designed and established to monitor, in a representative manner:

a)

b)

at  least  5  %  of  the  total  fishing  effort  of  each  fishery  subject  to  Article  2(1)  and
defined in Annex I,

and,

the  minimum  percentage  of  fishing  effort  for  each  fishery  defined  in  the  following
table:

Area

Gear

Minimum % of the
fishing effort covered
by on-board observers

A.  Baltic  sea 
waters 
Regulation 
88/98

:  all
by
(EC)  No

covered 

Drift-nets

10 %

Drift-nets

5 % (at least 3 vessels)

B.  ICES  sub  area  IV,
division  VI  a,  and  sub
area  VII  with 
the
exception  of  divisions
VII c and VII k

C.  ICES  sub  areas  VI,
VII and VIII.

Pelagic  trawls  (single  and
pair)

5  %  (at  least  3  vessels)
(from April to November

10  %  (at  least  3  vessels)
to
(from  December 
March)

D.  ICES  sub  areas  III
IV, and IX

Pelagic 
pair)

trawls  (single  or

5 % (at least 3 vessels)

E.  ICES  sub  areas  VI,
VII and VIII and IX

F..  Mediterranean  Sea
(of  the  east  of  line  5°
36' west)

G.  ICES  sub  area  III,
divisions VI a, VII a, b,
d,  e,  f,  g,  h,  and  j,  VIII
a, b and c, and IX a

High-opening trawls

5 % (at least 3 vessels)

Pelagic  trawls  (single  and
pair)

5 % (at least 3 vessels)

Bottom-set 
entangling nets

gillnet 

or

5 %

15

IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM

TITLE OF PROPOSAL

Proposal  for  a  Council  Regulation  laying  down  measures  concerning  incidental  catches  of
cetaceans in fisheries and amending Regulation (EC) No 88/98

DOCUMENT REFERENCE NUMBER

THE PROPOSAL

1.

Taking  account  of  the  principle  of  subsidiarity,  why  is  Community  legislation
necessary in this area and what are its main aims?

Community legislation, namely Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural
habitats  and  of  wild  fauna  and  flora  (the  so-called  "Habitats"  Directive),  already
requires  the  Member  States  to  establish  a  system  to  monitor  the  incidental  capture
and killing of cetaceans, and to take further research or conservation measures, in the
light  of  the  information  gathered,  to  ensure  that  such  incidental  capture  or  killing
does  not  have  a  significant  negative  impact  on  the  species  concerned.  In  addition,
there is a clear political and legal commitment to integrate environmental concerns in
the  Common  Fisheries  Policy  (cf.  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  2371/2002,  and  in
particular its Article 2).

Several  surveys  or  pilot  surveys  on  incidental  catches  or  research  on  mitigation
measures in some fisheries have been undertaken, but generally in a separate and non
co-originated  manner  between  Member  States.  One  Member  State  has  adopted
additional  legislative  measures  (applicable  to  vessels  flying  its  flag)  to  reduce
incidental  by-catches  of  harbour  porpoises  in  the  North  Sea.  However,  as  far  as
incidental catches of cetaceans by fisheries in waters surrounding the Community are
concerned, there is a need to increase conservation measures of these species in a
consistent and cooperative manner at Community level.

In order to have a good scientific and technical basis for its action, the Commission
asked  the  International  Council  for  the  Exploration  of  the  Sea  (ICES)  and  the
Scientific,  Technical  and  Economic  Committee  for  Fisheries  (STECF)  to  provide
information and advice on a number of issues. These issues include an overview of
fisheries that have a significant impact on small cetaceans, an assessment of the risks
created by fisheries on identified populations and finally, advice on possible remedial
action to reduce the impact of fishing.

Fishing  effort  reductions  already  in  place  or  to  be  further  envisaged  as  part  of  the
management  and  sustainable  exploitation  of  commercial  fish  stock  are  likely  to
reduce  by-catch  of  cetaceans  and  therefore  be  an  effective  mitigation  measure.
However,  this  is  insufficient  to  give  cetacean  populations  the  protection  required.
Consequently, the proposed regulation puts forward a number of additional measures
that could be taken in the short term to address the problem of incidental catches of
cetaceans in fisheries.

16

The proposed measures aim at :

a)  for  the  Baltic  sea,  restricting  and  further  phasing  out  the  use  of  drift-nets.
Comparable measures are already established by Community law in all other waters.
The proposed restrictions in the Baltic consist in limiting immediately the length of
drift-nets to maximum 2.5 km, associated with a phasing out process with a view to a
total ban on this gear in the Baltic Sea as  from 1 January 2007. Such  measures are
recommended  because  of  the  extremely  poor  state  of  the  Baltic  harbour  porpoise
population and the fact that even low levels of incidental catches of these cetaceans
within this type of gear are not compatible with a favourable state of conservation of
this population.

b) requiring the use of acoustic deterrent devices (pingers) in fisheries where the
effectiveness  of  such  devices  has  been  confirmed  in  reducing  incidental  catches  of
cetaceans.  In  view  of  the  present  state  of  development  of  pingers,  these  provisions
focus  only  on  their  use  in  passive  gear,  primarily  to  reduce  by-catches  of  harbour
porpoises.  The  particular  behaviour  of  porpoises  renders  bottom-set  gillnets
particularly  at  risk  of  entanglement,  but  drifting  gillnets  are  also  of  concern.
Requiring the use of such pingers also entails establishing general provisions on the
technical characteristics concerning the pingers that may be used, as well as general
provisions concerning their use and monitoring.

c)  establishing  monitoring  programmes,  using  independent  observers,  for
gathering extended information on by-catch of cetaceans for numerous fisheries with
a potentially high risk of incidental catches of cetaceans. The fisheries concerned are
essentially those using pelagic trawls or similar towed nets, but the use of drift-nets is
also of concern. In addition, given that the effectiveness of pingers and their effects
on the behaviour and distribution of cetaceans are still uncertain, pinger application
must be monitored and evaluated. Requirements for placing observers on board need
to  be  accompanied  by  general  provisions  defining  the  tasks  and  responsibilities  of
both vessels (or masters of vessels) and observers.

The above-mentioned set of measures also needs general provisions for reporting
and overall assessment to allow for possible revision of the proposed measures.

THE IMPACT ON BUSINESS

2.

Who will be affected by the proposal?

–  which sectors of business

The  proposed  measures  primarily  concern  the  fisheries  sector,  essentially  its
extractive branch (fishermen and vessel owners). There is no reason  to  believe that
the  processing  sector  and  fish  markets  will  be  affected,  except  perhaps  in  a  very
marginal  manner  for  Baltic  salmon,  depending  on  how  fishermen  react  to  the
restrictions  on  drift-nets  (reconverting  to  other  fishing  techniques,  targeting  other
fish, etc).

They could also affect the manufacturers and providers of acoustic deterrent devices
or pingers. At present, only a few types of pingers with proven records in reducing
cetacean by-catches exist on the market. They are manufactured on a small scale by a
limited  number  of  firms.  These  firms  have  already  indicated  that  they  can  increase

17

production capacity, as making the pinger use mandatory would expand the present
market.

–  which sizes of business (proportion of small and medium-sized firms)

The proposed measures are essentially based on the type of gear in use, rather than
the size of the firm involved as measured by the size or the number of crew members
of the fishing vessels concerned. In the fisheries sector, most of the business relies on
small and medium sized firms.

–  are there particular geographical areas of the Community where these businesses

are found

The  proposed  measures  should  be  implemented  within  particular  areas  of
Community waters or adjacent waters. The proposals concerning the use of drift-nets
in the Baltic Sea  (and the  Belts and the Sound)  can be seen  as  an extension to this
area of restrictive measures already applied to the use of this gear in all other waters.
The  mandatory  use  of  pingers  is  applicable  mainly  along  the  western  coasts  of
Europe on the North East Atlantic (including the North Sea and a small southern part
of the Baltic). The proposed observer schemes cover the majority of waters bordering
European coasts (North East Atlantic, including the North Sea and the southern part
of the Baltic, and the Mediterranean).

3.

What will need to be done to comply with the Regulation?

–  What will business have to do to comply with the proposal?

In  order  to  comply  with  the  proposed  new  technical  measures,  the  fishing  vessels
concerned will have to adapt their fishing practices. In the Baltic, salmon drift-netters
in particular will have to reduce the maximum length of their gear from up to 21 km
down  to  a  maximum  of  2.5  km  and  stop  using  this  gear  completely  by  the  end  of
2006.

The number of pingers fishermen will have to acquire will depend on the total length
of nets they use and the kind of fishing in which they are engaged.

If it is involved in a mandatory on-board observers scheme, the fishery sector should
ideally coordinate and cooperate with the competent national authorities to establish
the most  appropriate way for proper implementation of  the  scheme  since  observers
will be placed on board only some of the vessels engaged in a given fishery.

–  What will national (or subnational) administrations have to do to comply with the

proposal?

Notwithstanding  their  role  in  ensuring  proper  implementation  and  control  of  these
measures,  including  setting  appropriate  sanctions  in  case  of  contravention,  the
essential  task  of  the  competent  authorities  of  the  Member  States  will  consist  in
designing and establishing monitoring schemes based on on-board observers, with a
representative coverage of the fisheries  concerned by this  proposal. Where it  is not
possible to put observers on board (e.g. on small vessels), Member States will have
to introduce other means of monitoring at sea (e.g. using accompanying vessels). To
do this, and in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, Member States will be
given complete freedom for set up these schemes according to what is considered at

18

a  national,  or  sub-national  level,  to  be  the  most  appropriate  way  to  achieve  the
required  results.  The  criteria  on  which  they  may  base  such  schemes  include  their
detailed  knowledge  of  the  relevant  fisheries,  existing  structures  and  fisheries
organisations, observer programmes already available, cost, efficiency, etc.

This  proposal  identifies  the  fisheries  for  which  data  on  incidental  catches  of
cetaceans  need  to  be  collected  in  a  coordinated  manner  at  Community  level  as  a
matter  of  priority,  using  at-sea  observations.  It  does  not  restrict  the  ways  in  which
Member States implement their general obligations to monitor the incidental capture
and  killing  of  cetaceans  or  to  undertake  surveillance  of  the  conservation  status  of
these species as provided for by the Habitats Directive (32/43/EEC) on a larger scale.

Finally, the competent  authorities will  have to  organise the  collection of  data,  their
analysis and the relevant reporting to the Commission.

4.

What economic effect is the proposal likely to have?

a) Limitation of drift-nets to 2.5 km per boat in the Baltic Sea and subsequent ban on
their use

Drift-nets in the Baltic Sea are primarily used to catch salmon. Salmon drift-netting
is a seasonal activity, with peaks in September-October and April-May.

According  to  data  available  from  ICES10,half  the  total  effort  in  salmon  offshore
fishing  in  the  recent  years  has,  very  approximately,  been  by  drift-net  and  half  by
longlines11.

In 2001, the number of boats engaged in offshore salmon fishing (233 EU and no EU
drift-netters  and  longliners)  decreased  by  24  %  compared  to  2000.  Of  these,  131
vessels fished for less than 20 days (Finland: 35; Sweden: 33; Denmark: 11) and 59
for more  than  40 days (Denmark: 9  ;  Finland:  8;  Sweden:  7;  Poland:  34).  It  seems
likely that only vessels fishing more than 40 days per annum may get more than 50
% of their annual income from this kind of fishing.

The ICES data also indicate that there has been a decline in the total salmon fishing
effort  in  the  main  Baltic  basin  from  the  early  1990s  up  to  1997,  and  some
stabilisation in drift-net effort as from 1998, although there was an 11% decrease in
drift-net  fishing  in  2001,  and  a  simultaneous  increase  in  longline  fishing  effort  by
25%.

The  Scientific,  Technical,  and  Economic  Committee  on  Fisheries  had  already
considered the consequences of a possible limitation on drift-nets in the Baltic some
years  ago12.  Although  the  detailed  figures  on  drift-net  fisheries  have  changed
somewhat since then, the general trends documented by ICES and referred to above
strongly  suggest  that  the  following  STECF  comments  and  general  conclusions
remain valid today.

10

11

12

In  Particular  the  2002  report  of  the  Baltic  Salmon  and  Trout  assessment  Working  group  of  ACFM
(Riga, 3-12 April 2002).
See in particular Chapter 3.3, and tables 3.3.1and 3.3.2 thereof.
STECF subgroup on drift-net fisheries for salmonids and other species, doc. SEC(95)550, 31.3.1995.

19

                                                
In the Baltic, most professional fishermen use nets with a total length up to 15 - 21
km.  A  restriction  to  2.5  km  per  boat  would  make  the  salmon  drift-net  fishery
uneconomic, simply because if catches were reduced by the same proportion as the
length of the nets (i.e. up to 88%), they would be insufficient to cover operating costs
and, for those vessels most dependent on offshore salmon drift-netting, fixed costs as
well.  This  would  probably  cause  some  reduction  in  fishing  activities  for  all  these
vessels and possibly in employment, in particular for vessels critically dependent on
offshore  drift-netting.  However,  its  main  effect  would  probably  be  to  cause  a
redistribution of fishing effort either towards alternative fish stocks (already fully- or
over-exploited)  or  to  alternative  salmon  fishing  activities  such  as  salmon  longline
fishery (which is of restricted seasonal duration) or, where possible, inshore salmon
fishing (e.g. using trap nets).

The cost of the technical adjustment related to the proposed restrictions on the use of
the  drift-nets  in  the  Baltic  may  benefit  from  Community  support,  as  under  the  EU
Fisheries  Instrument  for  Fisheries  Guidance  (FIFG)  (Article  16(2)  of  Regulation
(EC)  No  2792/99),  the  Member  States  may  grant  financial  compensation  to
fishermen  and  owners  of  vessels  where  a  Council  Decision  imposes  technical
restrictions on the use of certain gear or fishing methods.

The net economic effect of the proposed restriction on drift-netting could be positive
or negative, depending on :

– 

– 

the benefits resulting directly from the proposed limitation  on  drift-net length
which  could  make  for  an  increased  value  in  salmon  fishing  for  sport  and
increased  profitability  of  commercial  salmon  fishing  activities  using  fishing
gear other than drift-nets (e.g. longlines and trap nets). In addition there might
also be indirect social benefits, in particular those resulting from the expected
reduction in the incidental mortality of small cetaceans;

costs,  including  the  lost  profits  in  drift-netting,  and  possibly  employment,  at
least for  vessels not  able  to  convert  to  alternative  fishing  gear,  and  the  lower
profitability  in  fisheries  for  other  species  (by  shifting  fishing  effort  towards
other fish species).

However,  a  more  in-depth  assessment  of  all  these  factors  and  their  relative
importance cannot be done in a reliable manner at present, as it would require some
knowledge, or at least some indications, of how the individual economic operators,
including skippers and shipowners, will adapt or react to the proposed measures, as
well as estimates of the indirect benefits or costs related to other activities (e.g. sport
fishing for salmon, protection of small cetaceans and related tourism…).

b) Mandatory use of pingers

According  to  the  evidence  available,  the  use  of  pingers  does  not  affect  the  fishing
efficiency  of  gear,  although  some  concerns  have  been  raised  with  regard  to  the
additional  manipulation  needed  to  equip  the  nets,  and  some  possible  practical
consequences when setting or hauling the nets. However, the design of such devices
generally takes into account these technical aspects.

The  cost  of  equipping  nets  with  pingers  has  often  been  identified  as  possibly  the
major burden on the fisheries sector. It is largely dependent on the purchasing price

20

of a pingers, the total number of pingers needed per vessel (which is directly related
to  the  total  length  of  nets  in  use)  and  on  the  lifetime  of  the  pinger  battery  (itself
dependent  on  technological  development  and  type  of  signal  emitted).  While
manufacturers will have to adapt their production capacity to increased demand from
fishermen  having  to  comply  with  the  proposed  measures,  increased  competition,
technological  development  and  reduction  of  manufacturing  costs  per  unit  could
reduce  the  overall  cost  of  equipping  nets.  The  reduction  of  gear  damage  due  to
incidental catches of cetaceans has also been pointed out as a possible benefit of the
measure.

Some of the initial cost of purchasing pingers could be met by funding under the EU
Fisheries  Instrument  for  Fisheries  Guidance  (FIFG)  as  such  funding  is  available  to
adopt more selective fishing method.

Among the various types of pingers available and considered suitable for use (i.e. at
this stage primarily to reduce by-catches of harbour porpoises in gillnets), the most
expensive device costs about €100, but it does have the best lifetime (operating time
of around 10 000 hours, i.e. app. 18 months to 2 years of use before renewal)13. The
recommended spacing between two pingers is 200 m.

On  this  basis  equipping  a  vessel  using  between  5  to  20  km  of  nets  would
theoretically  represent  an  initial  cost  of  around  2500  to  10000  €  (or  an  additional
fishing cost of 0.05 € per km of nets and hour of fishing).While this would represent
an  additional  variable  cost  of  1250  to  6700  €  per  vessel  per  year,  this  needs  to  be
compared to total variable costs per vessel per year. As an indication, some economic
indicators  for  Finnish  gill-netters  targeting  salmon  and  cod  in  2000  and  2001  are
given below14:

2000

2001

1.2

0.2

0.4

0.6

1.3

0.1

0.8

0.9

Value of landings (M€)

Fuel costs (M€)

Other running costs (M€)

Total variable costs (M€)
(excluding crew salaries)

c) On-board observers

As mentioned above, it is proposed that appropriate observer schemes be introduced
and  designed  by  the  competent  authorities  of  Member  States  on  the  basis  of  the
criteria  they  would  consider  most  appropriate.  It  is  therefore  not  possible  for
Commission  services  to  assess  the  different  scenarios  which  the  competent
authorities,  be  it  at  national  or  sub-national  level,  may  envisage  and  their  impact
when optimising the design of observer schemes to reach the targets proposed within
the proposed regulation.

13

14

Cf. the report on incidental catches of small cetaceans from the Subgroup on Fishery and Environment
(SEC(2002)1134), 22.10.2002, and the report 2002 of ICES Advisory Committee on Ecosystems.
Extract  from  the  annual  report  2002  of  project  CA-2001-01502:  Economic  performance  of  selected
European fishing fleets.

21

                                                
It  should  nevertheless  be  underlined  that  existing  on-board  observer  programmes
have  generally  not  been  considered  as  having  a  direct  economic  impact  on  the
fisheries sector. In addition, it is likely that whenever possible, observation schemes
on incidental catches of cetaceans would benefit from existing observer programmes,
in  particular  those  established  on  the  basis  of  Regulation  (EC)  No  1543/2000
establishing a Community framework for the collection and management of the data
needed to conduct the  Common Fisheries Policy.  This  would  allow  also  the  use  of
Community funding available in support of the implementation of this Regulation.

It  seems  unlikely  that  the  establishment  of  observer  schemes  by  the  Member  Sates
could  have  any  direct  impact  on  employment  in  the  harvesting  sector,  or  any
significant impact on fishing profitability or on competition within the fishery sector.
Indeed,  such  schemes  might  well  have  a  positive  impact  on  employment,  as  they
would generate at least some job opportunities for on-board observers.

As for assessing the total financial costs involved in such observer programmes, the
information  available  at  Community  level  on  fleets  and  their  activities  makes  it
impossible  for  the  Commission  services  to  produce  reliable  estimates,  since  the
database  on  the  European  fishing  fleet  does  not  contain  data  on  effort  levels,  their
geographical or seasonal distribution and the gear in use. However, some illustrative
figures  have  been  made  available  by  the  STECF  subgroup15.  As  an  example,
assuming a cost of € 500 per observer per day at sea, it estimated that monitoring 10
%  of  French  pelagic  trawlers  operating  in  ICES  areas  VII,  VIII  and  IX  (fisheries
targeting  either  sea  bass,  albacore  or  anchovy)  would  cost  around  €  462.000.
Monitoring 10 % of the British fleet using trawls in these areas (mainly ICES areas
VIII) would have a notional cost of € 75.000. Given the number of fisheries that are
considered  in  need  of  priority  monitoring  at  this  stage,  the  total  cost  for  some
Member  States could be of an order  of magnitude  of  from  1  to  several  million  €  a
year.

It  should  be  pointed  out  that  this  economic  burden  does  not  appear  "ex  novo"  as  a
consequence of this Regulation proposal, since the requirement to monitor incidental
catches of cetaceans is already laid down in the "Habitats" Directive 92/43/EEC.

5.

Does the proposal contain measures to take account of the specific situation of
small and medium-sized firms (reduced or different requirements etc)?

The  risk  of  incidental  catches  of  cetaceans  is  not  related  to  the  size  of  fishing
enterprises,  but  depends  on  the  fishery  concerned  (area,  gear,  seasons,  target
species…). The proposal does not, therefore, contain specific measures for small and
medium-sized firms.

On  average,  the  Baltic  drift-netters  have  a  crew  of  2-3  people,  with  larger  vessels
sometimes carrying 5 crew16. The bottom-set gillnet fisheries in which it is proposed
to make the use of pingers mandatory consists for a significant part in a large fleet of
small-sized  vessels.  These  vessels  may  represent  an  important  proportion  of  the
fishing  effort  in  some  areas,  in  particular  coastal  areas  where  harbour  porpoise
densities  are  usually  high.  However,  placing  an  observer  on  board  a  small  fishing

15

16

SEC(2002)1134
Cf. SEC(95)550

22

                                                
vessel is usually impossible in practice, these vessels having neither the capacity nor
the  safety  levels  to  accept  additional  people  on  board.  The  proposal  therefore  lays
down  specific  provisions  requiring  Member  States  to  establish  different  at-sea
monitoring  systems  to  tackle  the  problem  of  putting  additional  persons  on  small-
sized vessels.

CONSULTATION

6.

List the organisations which have been consulted about the proposal and outline
their main views.

This  proposal  is  based  on  the  most  recent  scientific  advice  and  recommendations
from  the  International  Council  for  the  Exploration  of  the  Sea  (ICES)  and  the
Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF) 17 concerning
the impact of fisheries on small cetaceans.

These  recommendations,  and  particularly  those  that  are  part  of  this  legislative
proposal, have been discussed several times with the interested stakeholders. A first
consultation  /  expert  meeting  was  hold  on  11  December  2002  to  discuss  such
possible  measures  with  representatives  of  the  fishery  sector,  of  Non-Governmental
Organisations (NGOs), of competent authorities of Member States and in association
with some scientists involved in the advice. These proposals were further discussed
in  February  2003  within  the  Advisory  Committee  for  Fisheries  and  Aquaculture
(ACFA).

including  amongst 

the  different  stakeholders, 

The  views  of 
the  different
organisations  representing  the  fishery  sector,  did  not  provide  a  consensus.  While
certain  professional  organisations  recognised  the  need  to  take  additional  action  on
cetacean by-catch, in particular to collect more precise information on the issue, and
recognised the positive effects of using pingers in view of what is already in place,
they all expressed concerns with regard to the possible impact and the costs of these
measures on the sector.

While  generally  welcoming  such  proposals,  the  NGOs  usually  considered  that
additional steps were  needed,  in particular  the setting up of a long term  strategy  to
cope with immediate and tailored responses to by-catch problems when these occur.
The  Commission  acknowledges  the  need  for  a  management  framework,  but
considers that it is not possible to put together a solid, comprehensive strategy at this
stage,  given  the  absence  of  precise  information  on  by-catch  patterns  and  of  proper
assessment and surveillance of the conservation status of cetacean populations. The
Commission  believes  that  the  measures  proposed  in  this  Regulation  will  serve  to
provide appropriate information for the design of such a strategy in the future.

17

on 

Committee 

Advisory 
at
http://www.ices.dk/committe/ace/2002/Section-2.pdf),  and  the  report  on  incidental  catches  of  small
cetaceans  from  the  Subgroup  on  Fishery  and  Environment  (SEC(2002)1134),  as  reviewed  and
commented by the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STCEF) in November
2002 (SEC(2003)550).

Ecosystems 

(available 

report 

2002 

23