Annual report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on Member States’ efforts during 2006 to achieve a sustainable balance between fishing capacity and fishing opportunities {SEC(2007) 1703} {SEC(2007) 1704}
Date: 2007-12-19
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, fishery management, fishing fleet, fishing industry, fishing regulations, report, sustainable development

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 19.12.2007 
COM(2007) 828 final 

ANNUAL REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL 

on Member States’ efforts during 2006 to achieve a sustainable balance between fishing 
capacity and fishing opportunities 

{SEC(2007) 1703} 
{SEC(2007) 1704} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

1. 

2. 

2.1. 

2.2. 

2.3. 

2.4. 

3. 

3.1. 

3.2. 

4. 

Introduction .................................................................................................................. 3 

Summary of Member States’ annual reports................................................................ 3 

Description of the fleets in relation to fisheries ........................................................... 3 

Impact of effort reduction schemes on capacity .......................................................... 6 

Compliance with the entry/exit scheme and with reference levels .............................. 8 

Strengths and weaknesses of fleet management systems............................................. 8 

Compliance with fishing capacity management rules. Overall results ........................ 9 

Results for the mainland fleet (except vessels registered in the outermost regions) ... 9 

Results for the fleets registered in the outermost regions .......................................... 10 

Conclusions from the Commission ............................................................................ 10 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
1. 

INTRODUCTION 

Article  14  of  Regulation  2371/20021  and  Article  12  of  Regulation  1438/20032  require 
Member States to submit to the Commission, before 1 May each year, a report on their efforts 
during the previous year to achieve a sustainable balance between fleet capacity and available 
fishing  opportunities.  Member  States’  reports  are  available  on  the  Europa  website3.  On  the 
basis  of  these  reports  and  the  data  in  the  Community  fishing  fleet  register  (CFR)4  the 
Commission  produced  a  summary  for  2006,  which  it  presented  to  the  Scientific,  Technical 
and  Economic  Committee  for  Fisheries  (STECF)  and  to  the  Committee  for  Fisheries  and 
Aquaculture.  This  report  from  the  Commission  now  presents  that  summary  of  the  Member 
States’ reports, plus a technical annex and the opinions of the above-mentioned committees, 
to  the  Council  and  the  European  Parliament.  The  annex  provides  detailed  comments  on 
capacity management5 together with tables and graphs showing the overall trends in the EU 
fishing  fleet  and  Member  States’  compliance  with  the  entry/exit  scheme.  In  addition,  the 
following information is available in English on the Europa website:  

–  detailed results on compliance by individual Member States; 

–  results in each of the outermost regions of the Community; 

–  Member States’ reports. 

2. 

SUMMARY OF MEMBER STATES’ ANNUAL REPORTS 

This year only 12 Member States submitted their reports on time; seven reports were between 
two weeks and two months late; the United Kingdom sent its report on 31 October 2007, too 
late to include its content in this Commission report.. Despite these delays, the Commission 
presented the summary report to the above-mentioned committees by 31 July 2007. It should 
be added that, although many Member States followed the outline laid down for the report in 
Article 13 of Regulation 1438/2003, the quality of the information provided was not always 
sufficient for the purposes of this report. 

This  report  sums  up  Member  States’  descriptions  of  their  fishing  fleets,  the  impact  of  the 
existing  schemes  to  reduce  fishing  effort,  Member  States’  compliance  with  the  entry/exit 
scheme and the weaknesses and strengths of their fleet management systems. 

2.1. 

Description of the fleets in relation to fisheries 

Member States provided a general description of their fleets based on different segmentations. 
Some maintained the old MAGP IV fleet segmentation; others used combinations of fishing 
gear,  vessel  characteristics,  target  species,  fishing  grounds  or  more  general  groupings  of 

1 
2 
3 
4 
5 

Council Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 (OJ L 358 of 31 December 2002, pp. 59-80). 
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1438/2003 (OJ L 204 of 12 August 2003, pp. 21-28). 
http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/fleet/index.cfm?method=FM_Reporting.AnnualReport. 
Commission Regulation (EC) No 26/2004 (OJ L 5 of 9 January 2004, pp. 25-35). 
In accordance with the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) adopted in December 2002, the fishing fleets 
are managed in line with the general rule that new capacity, expressed in terms of tonnage and power, 
added to the fleet cannot be higher than the capacity withdrawn from it. 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
fishing vessels by type or activity. Many Member States reported that their small-scale coastal 
fishing fleet (which makes up more than 80% of the EU fishing fleet) has a significant socio-
economic  bearing  on  coastal  communities  and  therefore  deserves  special  attention.  The 
Estonian, Greek, Spanish, French, Italian, Cypriot, Lithuanian, Maltese and Slovenian reports 
included  no  reliable  assessment  of  fleet  capacity  in  relation  to  the  available  resources.  The 
general  impression  drawn  from  the  Member  States'  report  is  rather  optimistic;  according  to 
these reports the Community fleet seems to be in balance for the resources except for some 
particular cases. The Commission does not share this view as will be explained later. 

Belgium: A study indicated that a fleet reduction of 10 000 kW was desirable in 2006. Since 
fishing vessels with engine power over 221 kW are the main consumers of fishing quotas, one 
priority would be to withdraw capacity from that segment of the fleet. In the end, six vessels 
from  the  large-vessel  fleet  and  three  from  the  small-vessel  fleet  were  scrapped  in  2006, 
resulting  in  a  9%  reduction  in  fleet  capacity.  A  further  reduction  in  fleet  capacity  by  up  to 
10% is envisaged in the short term. 

Denmark: An economic model was used to calculate the minimum number of vessels required 
to  catch  the  allocated  quotas  in  14  fleet  segments  categorised  in  accordance  with  the  Data 
Collection  Regulation6.  The  number  of  days  at  sea  for  these  vessels  was  taken  as  the 
maximum  possible  per  year.  This  model  found  different  degrees  of  overcapacity  in  every 
segment given the current state of stocks. However, in a long-term scenario some segments 
showed  undercapacity.  The  result  is  heavily  dependent  on  the  current  TAC/quota  situation 
and the number of permitted days at sea per vessel. 

Germany: A qualitative biological approach was used to examine the balance between fishing 
capacity and fishing opportunities by fleet segment. It assessed whether the capacity trend in 
each fleet segment was in line with the trend in the abundance and level of fishing of the main 
stocks  concerned.  As  in  2005,  the  slight  decrease  in  Germany’s  fleet  capacity  during  2006 
(5% in GT, 4% in kW) was achieved without public aid. 

Estonia: In 2006 no new multiannual management and recovery plans were introduced in the 
Baltic Sea and in the NAFO regulatory area. Estonian fleets need to adapt to TAC reductions 
for cod in the Baltic Sea and to the NAFO rebuilding plan. 

Greece: Public aid continued to finance capacity reduction during 2006. The overall capacity 
reduction  (1 183  GT  and  8 926  kW)  was  almost  exclusively  attributable  to  public  aid.  The 
vast majority of the Greek fishing fleet is made up of small-scale coastal fishing boats using a 
variety of fishing gear. 

Spain: Spain continued to use public funds to reduce fleet capacity; slightly over 11 000 GT 
was  scrapped  during  2006.  The  fleet  is  managed  by  means  of  separate  segments,  as  it  was 
under MAGP IV.  

France: The capacity of the French continental fleet was further reduced by approximately 2% 
in  terms  of  both  tonnage  and  engine  power,  as  in  2005.  The  report  gives  a  summary  of  the 
management  measures,  such  as  TAC  and  quotas,  taken  during  the  year  at  different 
international or national levels.  

6 

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1639/2001 (OJ L 222 of 17 August 2001, pp. 53-115). 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Ireland: The 2005 decommissioning programme for the whitefish fleet was continued in 2006 
and resulted in a 10% reduction in this fleet segment. The scheme will continue in order to 
achieve  a  45%  capacity  reduction.  Industry-led  restructuring  of  the  pelagic  fleet  is  also 
described in the report. 

Italy: The capacity of the Italian fleet was further decreased by means of scrapping backed by 
public aid. During 2006, 137 vessels with a combined tonnage of 7 267 GT and total engine 
power  of  27 016  kW  were  decommissioned.  According  to  the  Italian  report,  the  average 
number  of  fishing  days  stabilised  at  134,  the  same  as  in  2005,  after  a  sharp  reduction  in 
previous years. 

Cyprus: Under a 2004-2006 decommissioning scheme, five polyvalent vessels were scrapped 
with  public  aid  in  2006.  A  significant  reduction  in  fleet  capacity  was  achieved  in  2006  by 
exporting the largest Cypriot fishing trawler to the USA. This trawler accounted for about one 
third  of  the  Cypriot  fleet  capacity  and  its  export  for  87%  of  the  total  capacity  reduction  in 
2006, in terms of GT. 

Latvia: For the high-seas fleet, the fishing opportunities are considered sufficient to guarantee 
full  employment.  In  the  Baltic  Sea  (including  the  Gulf  of  Riga)  fleet,  the  largest  catches  of 
cod,  sprat  and  herring  were  made  by  vessels  over  24  metres  long.  More  than  half  the  cod 
catch  is  made  by  vessels  from  24  to  40  metres  long.  Therefore  these  vessels  have  a  heavy 
impact on the cod stocks in the Baltic Sea. 

Lithuania: In 2006 five fishing vessels were removed from the register. In the same year, the 
capacity removed without EU assistance made way for the entry of six new vessels. 

Malta:  The  fleet  is  made  up  of  full-time  and  part-time  vessels.  The  fleet  operates 
predominantly  on  a  small  scale.  In  general,  the  seasonal  and  fishing  patterns  during  2006 
remained the same as in previous years with no indication of any increase in fishing effort in 
any fishery. The catches of blue fin tuna remained well below the allocation set for Malta by 
the ICCAT. 

The Netherlands: The capacity of the cutter fleet has not followed the downward trend of the 
plaice  and  sole  stocks.  For  the  remainder  of  the  fleet,  the  current  capacity  is  considered 
balanced with the situation of fish stocks. For the Dutch fleet 2006 was a relatively quiet year. 

Poland: From an economic viewpoint, cod is of central importance to Polish fishermen, but no 
significant improvement in the biomass of this species is expected in the next five years. The 
total capacity of the Polish fleet has been reduced by permanent withdrawals with public aid: 
by 18 840 GT and 54 500 kW, i.e. 39.8% and 36% respectively, compared with the situation 
on 1 May 2004. 

Portugal: During 2006 an appreciable reduction was recorded in both the number of vessels 
and fishing capacity compared with 2005. This reduction was greater in terms of number of 
vessels (4.4%) than in gross tonnage (0.72%) or engine power (0.2%). 

Slovenia:  In  2006  the  fishing  fleet  was  beset  by  persistent  structural  problems,  notably  the 
obsolete and inadequate fishing fleet, the seasonal nature of fishing and the high probability 
that fish stocks will further decline. In addition, fishing activities are affected by the small size 
of the sea-fishing area which extends over about 180 km². 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
Finland: The number of vessels and the capacity of the Finnish fleet decreased in all but one 
segment during 2006.  Compared with the starting level on 1 January 2003 there has been a 
decrease of 17% in GT and 11% in kW. 

Sweden: Some 40% of landings in Sweden were on the east coast, but in terms of value 60% 
was landed on the west coast, around 30% on the south coast and only 10% on the east coast. 
Large pelagic trawlers over 24 metres long, demersal trawlers over 12 metres long and fishing 
vessels  under  12  metres  long  with  passive  fishing  gear  account  for  most  of  the  value  of 
landings. 

2.2. 

Impact of effort reduction schemes on capacity 

Member States reported various recovery measures and effort reduction schemes applicable in 
2006. In particular, they concerned fisheries in the Kattegat, North Sea and Skagerrak, West 
of  Scotland,  Eastern  Channel,  Irish  Sea,  Bay  of  Biscay,  Cantabrian  Sea  and  Western  Iberia 
and  the  Baltic  Sea.  Generally,  Member  States  reports  do  not  clearly  show  whether  fishing 
effort schemes have been or will be an effective tool to achieve a sustainable balance between 
capacity and resources. The Commission believes the overall results in terms of fleet size are 
poor and more efforts need to be done. 

Belgium:  The  fishing  fleet  was  subject  to  the  Annex  II7  scheme  and  the  Western  Waters 
regime. The total number of days at sea for the entire fleet was not exceeded because certain 
vessels underused their allocation. Restricting days at sea did not result in the available quotas 
being  underused.  The  available  fishing  opportunities  for  scallops  were  almost  fully  used. 
However,  in  ICES  area  VIII,  the  fishing  effort  allocation  was  insufficient  and  a  substantial 
exchange of quotas with the Netherlands was required. 

Denmark: In line with Annex II, as part of the cod recovery plan, the number of vessels fell 
by 149. This added up to 3 676 GT or 4% of total capacity. During 2006, 652 vessels were 
fishing using gear covered by the Days at Sea Regulation, as opposed to 697 in 2005, which is 
a  reduction  of  6%.  In  2006,  61 062  days  at  sea  were  used  as  opposed  to  71 701  in  2005,  a 
reduction of 15%. The reduction in terms of total kW-days was 15%. 

Germany: As in 2005, effort reduction schemes had a minor impact on the fleet, primarily in 
the Baltic Sea. This has not been quantified. 

Estonia:  During  2005  and  2006,  fleet  capacity  decreased  by  17%.  In  2006  vessel 
modernisation  activities  increased,  although  pressure  on  fishery  resources  is  not  believed  to 
have increased. 

Greece: Fishing capacity has been stabilised by granting professional fishing licences solely 
in cases of fleet renewal. Various national measures have been introduced to manage fishing 
effort, such as limitations on the types and specifications of vessels and fishing gear, bans on 
certain  periods  and  fishing  gear  and  imposition  of  minimum  distances  and  depths  beyond 
which fishing is permitted. 

Spain: The fleet has been affected by effort reduction measures for deep-sea species and for 
southern  hake  and  nephrops  (Annex  IIB).  Management  plans  have  also  been  adopted  at 
national level for the Mediterranean, Gulf of Cadiz and Canaries waters. However, the report 

7 

Council Regulation (EC) No 51/2006 (OJ L 1 of 20 January 2006, pp. 1-183). 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
does not explain how far the permanent capacity reduction, with public aid, of approximately 
100 vessels and 12 000 GT is linked to such effort reduction measures. 

France:  The  reduction  in  fleet  capacity  with  public  aid  during  2006  totalled  85  vessels  and 
6 162  GT,  mainly  as  a  consequence  of  measures  to  reduce  fishing  effort  for  cod,  hake  and 
sole. The trawler fleet operating in Mediterranean waters has been reduced by 21 vessels or 
1 800 GT, but it is not clear if this was the result of measures to reduce fishing effort. 

Ireland: Fisheries falling within the scope of stock recovery plans (ICES areas VIa and VIIa) 
are of a highly mixed nature. It is therefore difficult to gauge the impact of effort reduction. 
Under the Western Waters regime, the decommissioning of scallop vessels in 2005 resulted in 
a better balance between capacity and the effort allocations available. 

Italy:  Although  there  are  no  mandatory  fishing  effort  management  schemes  for  the  Italian 
fleet,  Italy  reported  a  gradual  reduction  in  fishing  effort,  in  terms  of  both  capacity  and 
activity, which has led to an increase in catch per unit of effort. The particularly positive trend 
in  landings  per  vessel  is  combined  with  growth  which  has  been  more  than  proportionate  to 
turnover per vessel, thanks to the increase in production prices. 

Cyprus:  No  compulsory  effort  reduction  schemes  are  applied  to  the  Cypriot  fisheries.  The 
scrapping scheme mentioned earlier is therefore not the result of effort limitations introduced 
by fisheries managers. 

Latvia:  The  only  fishing  effort  reduction  scheme  applying  in  2006  was  a  decommissioning 
programme  financed  by  public  aid  provided  by  the  FIFG.  Since  1  May  2004,  when  the 
scrapping scheme has been being applied, 59 vessels mainly targeting cod in the Baltic Sea 
have  been  withdrawn  from  the  fleet.  Latvia  is  planning  to  reduce  its  fishing  fleet  capacity 
further by scrapping some 133 vessels in the next few years. 

Lithuania: In order to balance fishing effort and adjust the fishing capacity to the fish stocks 
available, the authorities continued with permanent withdrawal of certain fishing vessels from 
active operations.  

Malta: During 2006 three vessels stopped fishing operations and their fishing effort was not 
replaced. However, the impact on overall fishing capacity was minimal. 

The Netherlands: The fleet is subject to the “days at sea” limitation in the North Sea (Annex II 
regime).  The  number  of  fishing  days  was  reduced  by  8%  in  relation  to  2005.  When 
implementing  Annex  IIA,  the  Netherlands  opted  to  apply  as  much  flexibility  as  possible 
within  the  limits  of  the  rules:  transfers  of  days  between  vessels  and  transfers  between 
management periods were permitted. 

Poland:  As  a  result  of  the  fishing  effort  reduction  programme,  in  2006  the  number  of  days 
spent fishing by the Baltic fleet fell by as much as 36% compared with 2004 and by almost 
70% in the case of 24-25 metre cutters. In the period from 2004 to 2006 the number of days 
that vessels fishing for cod spent at sea fell by about 30%. 

Portugal:  The  recovery  plan  for  hake  and  nephrops  (Annex  IIB  to  the  TAC  Regulation) 
produced no further capacity reductions in the fleet targeting these species. As a result of the 
Greenland halibut recovery plan (NAFO), the number of licences was reduced but, since the 
vessels  were  transferred  to  other  fisheries,  there  was  no  need  for  capacity  reductions. 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
Restrictions on sardine fishing remained in force in application of the national recovery plan 
for these stocks. 

Slovenia: The fishing fleet is not fully in equilibrium with the fishing resources available in 
territorial waters, where the majority of the fleet fishes. 

Finland:  The  size  of  the  fishing  fleet  has  gradually  decreased  over  recent  years.  Because  of 
overcapacity in the herring and sprat fisheries and following the driftnet ban in the Baltic Sea 
and the Salmon Decree regulating the salmon fishery, a special decommissioning scheme was 
implemented  during  2004-2006.  Capacity  totalling  1 378  GT  and  6 025  kW  has  been 
withdrawn with public aid. Overall, the total effort by the fleet shows an upward trend, even if 
fleet capacity has decreased in recent years. 

Sweden: The fleet is covered by Annex IIA and fishing effort has been gradually reduced as a 
result of smaller TACs and fewer days at sea. National rules restricting coastal fishing and the 
introduction  of  compulsory  size-selective  trawls  have  further  reduced  fishing  effort.  The 
number of permitted days at sea fishing for cod in the Baltic Sea fell, leading to a reduction in 
fishing  effort.  The  number  of  driftnet  fishermen  fell  from  53  to  35  in  2006  and  driftnet 
fishermen were, temporarily, offered increased aid for scrapping. However, only two vessels 
were scrapped in 2006. 

2.3. 

Compliance with the entry/exit scheme and with reference levels 

According  to  the  CFR  data  available  on  23  October  2006,  almost  every  Member  State  was 
within its maximum fleet capacity ceiling at the end of 2006. Although some Member States 
slightly exceeded their entry/exit ceilings in 2006, as in previous years (see section 3.1), the 
overall trend in EU fleet capacity shows a steady decrease. All the Member States concerned 
complied with the reference levels for the mainland fleet. 

2.4. 

Strengths and weaknesses of fleet management systems 

The  main  strength  underlined  by  many  Member  States  is  that  the  entry/exit  scheme  and 
maximum  fleet  capacity  ceilings  were  closely  adhered  to  by  the  national  fisheries 
managements. Furthermore, a number of Member States stated that the present fishing effort 
reduction  scheme  has  helped  to  achieve  a  better  balance  between  fishing  effort  and  the 
resources  available.  Naturally,  the  reduction  in  fishing  capacity  has  led  to  a  reduction  in 
fishing  pressure.  Most  Member  States  also  underlined  the  importance  of  the  various 
management  and  recovery  plans  implemented,  including  better  management  of  fishing 
licences and careful follow-up of quota allocations.  

By the end of 2006 the majority of Member States had comprehensive integrated IT systems 
for  fisheries  management,  comprising  various  software  sub-applications,  such  as  a  fleet 
register, capacity management, licences, log-books, landings, sales notes, VMS, quotas, catch 
reporting,  etc.  In  most  cases  these  IT  systems  link  several  administrative  bodies,  and  also 
central administrative bodies with local ones, and have thus resulted in considerably stronger 
national fishing fleet administrations. 

Nevertheless, some Member States stressed that difficulties remain with the human capacity 
and  resources  available  for  administration  of  the  fishing  fleet.  Furthermore,  some  Member 
States  recognised  that  management  and  assistance  to  small-scale  fisheries  should  be 
improved. 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
3. 

COMPLIANCE WITH FISHING CAPACITY MANAGEMENT RULES. OVERALL RESULTS 

3.1. 

Results  for  the  mainland  fleet  (except  vessels  registered  in  the  outermost 
regions) 

According  to  the  CFR,  during  the  four–year  period  2003–2006,  the  overall  capacity  of  the 
Community  fleet  was  reduced  by  217 000  GT  and  773 000  kW,  giving  a  net  reduction  of 
approximately 10%. The contribution by the “EU-15 fleet” to this reduction was 167 000 GT 
and  645 000  kW,  compared  with  51 000  GT  and  128 000  kW  withdrawn  by  the  “EU-10 
fleet”.  In  relative  terms,  the  reduction  of  the  “EU-10  fleet”  since  the  date  of  accession  has 
been  stronger  than  the  reduction  of  the  “EU-15  fleet”  over  the  period  2003-2006  (23% 
compared with 9%, in both tonnage and engine power). 

Over  the  four-year  period  2003-2006  approximately  173 000  GT  and  560 000  kW  were 
withdrawn  from  the  EU  fleet  (except  for  the  outermost  regions)  with  public  aid,  of  which 
40 000 GT and 127 000 kW were withdrawn in 2006. 

Generally speaking, the net reductions in the EC fleet still appear insufficient, considering the 
constant technological improvements that neutralise the effects of capacity reduction and the 
poor state of most Community fisheries, particularly for demersal species, which require very 
drastic reductions in fishing effort. 

Tables 1 and 2 in the annex to this report summarise compliance by Member States with the 
entry/exit  scheme  and  the  reference  levels  on  31  December  2006.  A  majority  of  Member 
States have complied with these rules. However, according to the CFR data, Spain exceeded 
its  entry/exit  tonnage  ceiling  by  1.66%,  although  the  figures  given  in  the  Spanish  annual 
report  claim  that  the  Spanish  fleet  did  comply  with  the  tonnage  ceiling.  The  French  fleet 
exceeded its tonnage ceiling by 0.21%. 

More detailed data (tables and graphs) on trends in the capacity of Member States’ fleets are 
available  on  Europa8.  These  allow  verification  of  Member  States’  compliance  with  the 
capacity  limits  at  any  time  from  1  January  2003  to  31  December  2006.  They  indicate  that 
France and Italy exceeded the GT ceiling over the above-mentioned reference period. A slight 
overshoot of the engine power ceiling is also shown for Denmark and Greece. 

In  July  2007  the  Council  adopted  an  amendment  to  the  fleet  management  provisions  which 
allows  Member  States,  with  effect  from  1  January  2007,  to  re-allocate  4%  of  the  capacity 
scrapped  with  public  aid  in  order  to  improve  safety  on  board,  working  conditions,  hygiene 
and  product  quality.  The  amendment  also  includes  the  possibility  to  re-allocate  for  the 
purpose  of  the  aforementioned  safety  improvements  4%  of  the  average  annual  tonnage 
withdrawn with public aid between 1 January 2003 and 31 December 2006 for Member States 
that  were  part  of  the  Community  on  1  January  2003,  and  between  1  May  2004  and  31 
December 2006 for the Member States that acceded to the Community on 1 May 2004. Rules 
for implementing these provisions, in the form of an amendment to Commission Regulation 
1438/2003, were being prepared by the Commission at the time of drafting this report. 

8 

http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/fleet/index.cfm?method=FM_Reporting.AnnualReport. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
                                                 
3.2. 

Results for the fleets registered in the outermost regions 

The  capacity  of  the  fleets  registered  in  the  outermost  regions  and  its  variation  between 
1 January 2003 and 31 December 2006 are shown in Table 4 of the annex to this report. The 
results show that the fleet registered in the outermost regions of Spain and Portugal has been 
significantly reduced, in terms of both tonnage and power. In the French overseas departments 
there has been a slight decrease in the total number of vessels, a decrease in tonnage and an 
increase in engine power. 

At  the  end  of  2006,  as  in  previous  years,  three  out  of  the  17  segments  for  the  outermost 
regions were exceeding their reference level. Segment 4FJ (vessels under 12 metres long) for 
the  French  department  of  Martinique  exceeded  its  power  reference  level  by  5 622  kW.  The 
situation was the same in segment 4K9 in the Azores Islands where the reference level was 
exceeded  by  138  kW.  Segment  CA3  (vessels  more  than  12  metres  long,  registered  in  the 
Canary  Islands  and  fishing  in  international  and  third-country  waters)  exceeded  its  tonnage 
reference level by 795 GT. 

4. 

CONCLUSIONS FROM THE COMMISSION 

The  quality  of  the  Member  States’  reports  has  steadily  improved  since  the  first  report, 
covering  the  year  2003,  was  presented.  However,  as  in  previous  years,  the  majority  of  the 
Member  States’  reports  did  not  describe  their  fleets  in  relation  to  fisheries,  as  required  by 
Article 13(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 1438/2003 in a manner allowing the Commission to 
analyse the efforts made to achieve a balance between the capacity of the fishing fleet and the 
available fishing opportunities, as stipulated by Article 14 of Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002. 
Instead, Member States emphasised the national fleet management systems implemented and 
the trends in fleet capacity in relation to the entry/exit scheme. 

All parties involved (the Commission, Member States, STECF and the European Parliament 
Fisheries  Committee)  agree  that  the  quality  of  Member  States’  annual  reports  should  be 
improved,  which  implies  that  more  detailed  guidelines  should  be  defined  for  them.  To  this 
end,  the  Commission  has  convened  an  ad  hoc  working  group  within  STECF  to  draw  up  a 
harmonised  method  to  assess  the  balance  between  fishing  capacity  and  available  fishing 
opportunities.  This  group  met  at  the  end  of  October  2007  and  a  follow-up  meeting  is 
scheduled  early  in  2008.  This  issue  will  also  remain  on  the  agenda  of  the  Committee  for 
Fisheries and Aquaculture. 

During 2006 the fishing capacity of the EU fleet continued its slow but steady reduction at an 
annual rate of between 2% and 3%. Figures 3 to 5 in the annex show that generally this has 
been the trend for the last 15 years. This reduction appears too modest when compared with 
the big reductions in effort required for some major fish stocks, the steady technological creep 
and the poor economic performance of large parts of the fleet. 

The impact of fishing effort measures on capacity reduction has been low, generally speaking. 
This means that the approach adopted during the CFP reform, i.e. to use effort management as 
the main driving force for fleet adjustment, has not yet yielded the expected results. This is 
due,  in  part,  to  the  absence  of  effort  management  systems  for  several  fisheries  or  to  the 
ineffectiveness  of  the  existing  ones  (Annex  II,  Western  Waters,  deep-water  fisheries,  some 
national schemes, etc.). Here, the CFP has ample room for improvement and future proposals 
to  that  end  are  already  being  considered.  But  another  important  point  to  underline  is  that 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
Member  States  should  provide  better  incentives  for  capacity  adjustment.  The  operational 
programmes for the period 2007-2013 in the context of the European Fisheries Fund offer an 
opportunity that cannot be missed to ease the transition towards a more efficient Community 
fleet in economic, environmental and social terms. 

EN 

11 

   EN