Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament — Implementing sustainability in EU fisheries through maximum sustainable yield COM(2006) 360 final
Date: 2007-04-25
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: ESC opinion, common fisheries policy, conservation of fish stocks, fishery management, fishery resources, fishing industry, sustainable development

C 168/38

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

20.7.2007

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Communication from the
Commission to the Council and the European Parliament — Implementing sustainability in EU fish-
eries through maximum sustainable yield

COM(2006) 360 final

(2007/C 168/07)

On 4 July 2006, the Commission decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under
Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned proposal.

The Section for Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment, which was responsible for preparing
the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 21 March 2007. The rapporteur was Mr Sarró
Iparraguirre.

At its 435th plenary session, held on 25 and 26 April 2007 (meeting of 25 April), the European Economic
and Social Committee adopted the following opinion with 131 votes in favour and 3 abstentions.

1. Conclusions and recommendations

1.1
The EESC considers that, although the new maximum
sustainable yield (MSY)-based policy guideline for EU fisheries
management will be beneficial in the long term, it could have
economic and social consequences that Europe's fisheries sector
would find very hard to accept. The Committee therefore
recommends that the pros and cons of implementing this guide-
line be considered extremely carefully from the economic, social
and environmental points of view.

1.2
Because it is hard accurately to estimate the maximum
sustainable yields of the different fish stocks, the EESC recom-
mends that in its long-term plans the Commission set reason-
able, gradual and flexible annual adjustments, on which all the
sectors concerned agree. The Regional Advisory Councils, the
EU Advisory Committee on Fisheries and Aquaculture (ACFA)
and the Social Dialogue Committee for Maritime Fisheries
should, therefore, be consulted at the earliest opportunity, giving
them sufficient time to ensure that their members can discuss
the terms of the proposals that have been put forward.

The EESC thus recommends that the Commission take
1.3
particular care over setting the annual mortality rates per fish,
with the aim of obtaining the maximum sustainable yield for
mixed fisheries in the long term.

1.4
The Committee does not agree with the European
Commission's argument that this fisheries management policy
will improve the balance of trade, because the gap left in market
supply by Community enterprises will be filled immediately by
imports from outside the Union. The EESC therefore urges the
Commission to be particularly vigilant in observing and moni-
toring these imports into the Community market.

1.5
The Committee considers that the Commission and the
EU Member States should take account of the ‘other environ-
mental factors’ referred to in this opinion and which also influ-
ence changes in marine ecosystems. The Committee also recom-
mends that they impose restrictions equivalent to those sought
for the fisheries sector on economic players whose activities
affect marine ecosystems.

yield,

the maximum sustainable

1.6 With regard to the adjustment requested in order to
achieve
the Committee
considers that the two approaches proposed by the Commission
could complement one another, because the Member States will
have to implement the measures that are most appropriate
bearing in mind the economic and social effects in their respec-
tive fisheries sectors. The EESC wishes to express its concern at
the fact that the European Fisheries Fund (EFF) does not have
sufficient means to cope with the impact of this new manage-
ment system's implementation.

2. Reasons

2.1
The Commission Communication on Implementing
sustainability in EU fisheries through maximum sustainable yield (1),
the subject of this opinion, sets out the Commission's position
on improving the economic performance of the fisheries sector
in accordance with the common fisheries policy.

2.2
The Commission's way of achieving this improvement in
economic performance is gradually to phase out overfishing,
because it takes the view that this would bring about economic
benefits for the fishing industry in terms of reducing costs,
improving catches, improving the profitability of the fishery and
reducing discards.

2.3
To achieve these goals, the Commission considers that it
is time to manage European fisheries in a different way, actively
looking for success rather than merely seeking to avoid failure.

2.4
The Communication sets out a new policy guideline for
EU fisheries management, based on obtaining the maximum
sustainable yield from fish stocks by setting long-term mortality
rates.

2.5
This new policy guideline is based on the international
political commitment, given by EU Member States at the World
Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) held in Johannes-
burg in September 2002, to ‘maintain or restore stocks to levels
that can produce the maximum sustainable yield with the aim
of achieving these goals for depleted stocks on an urgent basis
and where possible not later than 2015’.

(1) COM(2006) 360 final of 4.7.2006.

20.7.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 168/39

2.6
The aim is therefore to move towards a longer-term
management system that focuses on obtaining the best from the
productive potential of Europe's living marine resources. This
approach is fully consistent with the broader objective of the
common fisheries policy, which is
to ensure sustainable
economic, environmental and social conditions.

The Communication's overall approach for

3.8
the new
management system is to reduce the fishing mortality rate. In
order to allow fish to grow more and achieve a higher value
and yield when they are caught, the proportion of fish captured
from the sea must be reduced.

As the Communication states, the economic benefits can
2.7
only be obtained by exercising more restraint in fishing during a
transitional period. All parties concerned should be involved in
the process of deciding the pace of this change. Financial assis-
tance, such as that provided for under the proposal for a Euro-
pean Fisheries Fund, must help to mitigate the social and
economic repercussions during the transitional phase.

3.9
Nevertheless, the Communication acknowledges that fish
populations are difficult to measure, and while fishing (fish
mortality) is the major influence on stock health, other factors
such as environmental changes and the influx of young fish also
play a role.

3. General comments

The principle guiding the Commission's decision to
3.1
implement MSY-based fisheries management in the Community
is that there has simply been too much fishing in relation to the
productive potential of some stocks.

3.2
Recognising that some fish stocks in European waters
have declined very severely over the last 30 years, principally as
a result of over-fishing, the Committee agrees that it will be
desirable to move to more sustainable levels of fishing.

The Commission considers

3.3
implementing MSY-
based fish stocks management systems will ensure that stocks
do not collapse and at the same time allow larger fish stocks to
build up.

that

The EESC considers that the principle is correct, because
3.4
the maximum sustainable yield of a fish population is the quan-
tity of biomass (quantity of fish) that can be exploited in such a
way that future production is not affected. Consequently, it fully
supports basing fisheries management policy on this principle.

3.5
Nevertheless, the Committee wishes to point out to the
Commission that any change of management system entails
risks and that the advantages and drawbacks should therefore be
weighed up extremely carefully.

3.6
the
The Communication discusses the advantages of
MSY-based fish stocks management system in considerable
detail, especially the environmental advantages, but does not
dwell on the system's economic and social advantages for the
fisheries sector and in particular fails to mention the drawbacks.

3.7
One of the advantages highlighted by the Commission
that the EESC does not agree with is the argument that this fish-
eries management policy will improve the balance of trade; this
is because the void left by Community enterprises going out of
business as a result of complying with MSY targets will be filled
immediately by operators from outside the Union, as the fish-
eries products market is driven by the need to ensure a constant
supply.

3.10
The Communication therefore puts forward a long-
term strategy for rebuilding fish stocks based on seeking to
balance fishing activity against the productive capacity of the
stocks and suggests that this can be done gradually, by reducing
the number of vessels fishing or the vessels' fishing efforts.

3.11
In order to implement this strategy in such a way that
fishermen are able to obtain the maximum sustainable yield
from the stock, the appropriate target rate of fishing and the
annual mortality rate must first be set for each stock, per fish,
on the basis of the best available scientific advice. The rate at
which annual adjustments will be made to reach this target rate
must also be decided on. As set out in the common fisheries
policy, these decisions should be implemented through long-
term plans.

Community fisheries management is currently imple-
3.12
mented in line with the principles of safety and precaution for
fish stocks. Annual TACs (Total Allowable Catches) and catch
quotas are based on comparative scientific reports, and recovery
plans provided for under the common fisheries policy are
implemented for some fish stocks that have deteriorated in
order to return them to sustainable biological levels.

that

3.13
The EESC considers that the change of management
system is significant, because it means adopting a biological
target
is more ambitious than that under the current
management system. In turn, this change will also mean, with
each annual adjustment, considerable fish mortality reductions,
which will undoubtedly require reductions in fleets and fishing
efforts and therefore considerable sacrifice on the part of Com-
munity fishing enterprises. The EESC wishes to express its
concern at the fact that the European Fisheries Fund (EFF) does
not have sufficient means to match this considerable sacrifice.
Nevertheless, if the targets are achieved, the situation could be
extremely favourable to those fishing enterprises that continue
to operate.

3.14
In the light of this approach, the EESC wishes to point
out to the Commission that there is a high degree of uncertainty
as regards the MSY estimates for the different species stocks.
Given this uncertainty, the Committee recommends that the
Commission strive to make the annual adjustments in its long-
term plans reasonable.

C 168/40

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

20.7.2007

3.15
The challenge therefore is to find ways of helping
fishing communities and businesses to get through the adjust-
ment phase in good order. The Committee believes that this will
require more generous and imaginative support measures than
the Commission has so far put forward. Such measures are fully
justified as a means of securing early transition to a more
sustainable pattern of fisheries activity for the future.

In any event, the Committee considers that, as stated in
3.16
the Communication,
it is necessary that all those affected be
involved in the decision-making on long-term plans, the pace at
which they are implemented and their impact; thus the Regional
Advisory Councils (RAC) should be frequently consulted. The
EESC also considers that the EU Advisory Committee on Fish-
eries
and the Social Dialogue
Committee for Maritime Fisheries should be included in these
discussions.

and Aquaculture

(ACFA)

4. Specific comments

4.1
Putting in place an MSY-based fisheries management
system requires analysing — as the Communication does —
another set of issues that have a direct impact on this type of
management:

— environmental effects and their

impact on changes

in

marine ecosystems;

— applying the management system to mixed fisheries;

— managing long-term plans.

Environmental effects and their impact on changes in

4.2
marine ecosystems

4.2.1
The Communication accepts that it is highly uncertain
how marine ecosystems will develop in relation to changes in
climate and weather and that these and other environmental
factors may certainly affect fish stocks.

4.2.2
Although it cannot determine the impact of all envir-
onmental effects, the Commission considers that fishing itself is
often the most influential factor and that exploiting fish stocks
at a lower rate of fishing will make stocks more resistant to
ecological change.

The Communication therefore

4.2.3
reducing
fishing at a steady and sustainable rate, to ensure that, as fishing
mortalities are reduced and stocks rebuilt, more knowledge will
be gained about ecosystems and their productive potential,
which will help with the process of adjusting long-term manage-
ment targets.

advocates

4.2.4
The EESC agrees with this principle, provided that
fishing mortalities are indeed reduced at a steady and sustainable
rate in species where this is needed. The Commission recognises
that attempting to manage a fish biomass towards a target size
could generate unacceptable instability for the industry in the
short term.

4.2.5
environmental

Nevertheless,

the Committee considers

‘other
factors’, which the Communication does not

that

such as predator behaviour, pollution,

even mention,
the
exploration and exploitation of oil or gas deposits, offshore
windparks, marine sand and aggregate extraction, etc., also
influence changes in marine ecosystems.

4.2.6
The EESC calls on the Commission and the EU
Member States to impose restrictions equivalent to those sought
for the fisheries sector on economic players whose activities also
influence the size of fish stocks and changes in marine ecosys-
tems.

4.3 Applying the management system to mixed fisheries

4.3.1
system is most difficult to apply is that of mixed fisheries.

The area where the MSY-based fisheries management

4.3.2
The Communication recognises how difficult this is
and it does not consider the management system for mixed fish-
eries in any great detail. The EESC considers that contacts
between the Commission and the RAC and ACFA should be
strengthened regarding this type of fisheries.

4.3.3
The Communication states that it is important to keep
marine ecosystems in balance and the EESC fully agrees. Fishing
down one species in order to favour the yield of another would
be a high-risk approach.

The complexity of the system lies in the fact that, as
4.3.4
the Communication states, fishing on all species in an ecosystem
should normally take the form of catches (target rate) that corre-
spond to obtaining a maximum sustainable yield in the long
run. This means that, with regard to the maximum sustainable
for the different stocks within an ecosystem
yield rates set
forming a mixed fishery, under
the
maximum catch will be determined by the species for which the
lowest long-term rate is set for obtaining a maximum sustain-
able yield.

the long-term plans

4.3.5
The Communication also states that, in order to avoid
the accidental overfishing of a species as by-catch, additional
measures such as modifications to fishing gear and closed areas
and seasons may be necessary components of some long-term
plans.

4.3.6
In the EESC's view, although this management system
approach tallies with the broader aim of the common fisheries
policy, the Commission should carry out a very detailed evalua-
tion of the different rates used to obtain the MSY and should
consult all parties
involved with mixed fisheries on the
economic and social repercussion of long-term plans.

4.4 Managing long-term plans

4.4.1 Long-ter m plans

4.4.1.1
The Communication states that these will be drawn
up by the Commission in consultation with the sectors
concerned, on the basis of impartial scientific advice and taking
fully into account
the economic, social and environmental
repercussions of the proposed measures.

20.7.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 168/41

4.4.1.2
They will define a fishing target rate, and a means to
reach that target gradually, diminishing any harmful impact of
fishing on the ecosystem. Plans for mixed fisheries should
include technical measures aimed at ensuring that the different
fish stocks are harvested in line with their respective targets and
the possibility of exploiting some stocks more lightly than at
MSY levels in order to achieve some productivity gain in other
species.

4.4.1.3 Where scientific advice does not help to quantify the
measures needed to reach maximum sustainable yield condi-
tions,
the precautionary
the
approach.

long-term plans will

adopt

4.4.1.4
periodic review.

Lastly, the plans and their targets will be subject to

4.4.1.5
The EESC considers that this new fisheries manage-
ment policy guideline, which could have clear advantages once
the MSY of all fish stocks has been achieved, could have drastic
consequences for the fisheries sector: catches would be lower,
which would lead to fleet reductions and job losses in the short
term, thus weakening the economic fabric of fishing commu-
nities.

4.4.1.6
The Committee therefore urges the Commission to
ensure that the consultations it intends to hold with the fisheries
sector are reasonably flexible as regards the pace of
imple-
menting the long-term plans, to enable fishermen to adjust
gradually to this new management system.

4.4.1.7 With regard to mixed fisheries, the EESC considers
that the greatest flexibility should be shown where stocks can
be fully exploited because they are in good condition.

4.4.2 Managing change

4.4.2.1
Once long-term plans establishing appropriate stock
targets are drawn up and adopted, Member States will have to
decide on the pace of change for reaching these targets, and
how to manage the transition.

4.4.2.2
approaches for managing this change:

The Communication puts

forward two broad

— Reducing fishing capacity (catches)

to the levels strictly
necessary to achieving the MSY rate. In very broad terms,
this approach would require greater economic efficiency on
the part of fleets remaining in business, with a consequent
loss of fishing vessels and jobs.

Brussels, 25 April 2007.

— Maintaining the size of the fleet but limiting vessels' capacity
to catch fish (e.g. by limiting their size, power or fishing
gear) and possibly imposing limitations on days-at-sea. This
approach would maintain current employment levels but
implies economic inefficiency.

4.4.2.3
Each Member State is free to choose its economic
approach or strategy, whilst the Community will provide the
management framework for gradually phasing out overfishing,
through the financial instrument provided by the European Fish-
eries Fund.

4.4.2.4
The Communication reveals the Commission's clear
preference for the first approach, based on reducing national
fleet capacity, because it would be easier
to monitor and
because experience teaches that reducing fleet capacity is more
readily accepted by the public and is less difficult to implement
than other solutions.

4.4.2.5
The EESC recognises that reducing fleet capacity is
the most effective way of gradually phasing out overfishing.
Nevertheless, the Committee considers that each Member State
should select the approach that best suits it, having analysed the
economic and social effects, not forgetting that both options
could be used concurrently until the MSY target for fish stocks
is reached.

The EESC agrees with the proposal for the economic
4.4.2.6
and social effects of change to be analysed at regional, rather
than at European level, because the specifics of each fleet can
vary greatly between the Member States.

Long-term plans will be fishery-based, addressing
4.4.2.7
groups of
together, and should
fish stocks that are caught
include elements such as limits on the extent to which fishing
opportunities can change from one year to the next,
thus
ensuring a stable and smooth transition.

4.4.2.8
Lastly, the Communication considers that putting a
complete set of long-term plans in place to achieve the MSY
target will take time. The Community should, therefore, with
effect from 2007, adopt management decisions that ensure that
there is no increase in the fishing rate for any stock that is
already overfished. The EESC considers that
the European
Commission should consult the Regional Advisory Councils, the
EU Advisory Committee on Fisheries and Aquaculture (ACFA)
and the Social Dialogue Committee for Maritime Fisheries
before taking any decisions for 2007.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Dimitris DIMITRIADIS