Commission staff working document - Accompanying document to the Commission's proposal for a Council Regulation establishing a long-term plan for the Western stock of Atlantic horse mackerel {COM(2009) 189} {SEC(2009) 525} - Impact assessment - Agenda planning : 2008/MARE/027
Date: 2009-04-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Atlantic Ocean, authorised catch, conservation of fish stocks, fishery management, fishery resources, fishing area, fishing controls, sea fish

EN 

Multi-annual plan Western Horse Mackerel 

EN 

   EN 

 
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 21.4.2009 
SEC(2009) 524 

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 

Accompanying document to the 

Commission's proposal for a 
COUNCIL REGULATION 
establishing a long-term plan for the Western stock of Atlantic horse mackerel 

{COM(2009) 189} 
{SEC(2009) 525} 

IMPACT ASSESSMENT 

Agenda planning : 2008/MARE/027 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Preface: Changes to the working document following the IA Board's opinion ....................... IV 

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................. IV 

1. 

1.1. 

1.2. 

1.3. 

2. 

2.1. 

2.2. 

2.3. 

2.4. 

Procedural issues and consultation of interested parties .............................................. 6 

Organisation and Timing ............................................................................................. 6 

Consultation and expertise ........................................................................................... 6 

Dissemination of scientific advice and the results of consultations with stakeholders 9 

Problem Definition....................................................................................................... 9 

Current political background........................................................................................ 9 

Issue requiring action ................................................................................................... 9 

Underlying driving forces .......................................................................................... 11 

Effect on the sector..................................................................................................... 12 

2.4.1. 

Identification of the sectors affected .......................................................................... 12 

2.4.2.  Effect of the regulation............................................................................................... 14 

2.4.3.  Magnitude of the effect on the sectors ....................................................................... 14 

2.4.4.  Legal basis for Community action ............................................................................. 18 

2.4.5.  Necessity and subsidiarity.......................................................................................... 18 

3. 

3.1. 

3.2. 

4. 

Objectives................................................................................................................... 18 

General objectives...................................................................................................... 18 

Operational objectives................................................................................................ 19 

Policy Options............................................................................................................ 19 

4.1. 

Description of the options .......................................................................................... 20 

4.1.1.  Option 1 - No policy change ...................................................................................... 20 

4.1.2.  Option 2 - Freezing or gradually reducing the directed fishery ................................. 20 

4.1.3.  Option 3 – Management plan..................................................................................... 21 

5. 

5.1. 

5.2. 

5.3. 

5.4. 

6. 

6.1. 

6.2. 

Analysis of Impacts.................................................................................................... 26 

Economic and social impact ...................................................................................... 26 

Environmental impacts .............................................................................................. 27 

Impacts on international relations .............................................................................. 29 

Impact summary......................................................................................................... 29 

Comparing the Options .............................................................................................. 30 

Should a long-term plan be implemented?................................................................. 30 

Alternatives concerning the biological indicators to be retained ............................... 32 

6.3.  What provision should be made if the stock should fall below the minimum level? 32 

6.4.  What additional provisions should be included concerning control measures? ........ 32 

6.5. 

Should a limit be imposed on variations in TACs between years?............................ 33 

EN 

   EN 

 
7. 

Monitoring and Evaluation ........................................................................................ 35 

Annex 1: Distribution of horse mackerel in the Northeast-Atlantic. ....................................... 37 

Annex 2: Draft long-term plan for the Western stock of Atlantic horse mackerel – calculating a 
slope for years 1, 2 and 3. .......................................................................................... 38 

Annex 3: Reorganisation of TAC areas as a condition precedent to a long-term plan for the 

Western stock of Atlantic horse mackerel. ................................................................ 39 

Glossary.................................................................................................................................... 42 

EN 

   EN 

 
PREFACE: CHANGES TO THE WORKING DOCUMENT FOLLOWING THE IA BOARD'S OPINION 

This final version of the Impact Assessment report takes into account the opinion given by the 
Commission's Impact Assessment Board on October 13, 2008. In particular: 

–  the scientific background of the proposal and its repercussion on the problem definition and 

objectives has been redrafted; 

–  the  reasons  for  choosing  the  western  horse  mackerel  as  the  subject  of  a  management  plan 

despite there being only incomplete scientific advice have been better explained; 

–  the reasons for choosing an option have been better explained,  the options and in particular 
sub-options  of  measures  that  can  be  developed  within  a  management  plan  have  been 
described in more detail; 

–  clarity has been added to the discussion of impacts, and uncertainties in the assessment have 

been highlighted; 

–  cross-references to the discards and the control policy have been pointed out; 

–  practical and administrative aspects of policy implementation have been addressed. 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

The  Impact  Assessment  concerns  a  draft  proposal  that  would  set  long-term  management 
objectives  and  implementing  methods  concerning  the  fisheries  for  the  Western  stock  of  the 
Atlantic horse mackerel. The scope of the proposal is of medium importance, covering about 60 
million  EUR  per  year  in  terms  of  catch  value.  Approximately  60  vessels,  600  at-sea  jobs  and 
some  140,000  tonnes  of  fish  catch  for  human  consumption  would  be  affected  by  the  proposal, 
which  is  intended  to  deliver  stability  and  sustainability.  The  fleet  segments  involved  in  this 
fishery are dominated by medium to large pelagic trawlers. The Impact Assessment focuses on 
those fleet segments which have horse mackerel among their five most important species. These 
segments  cover  about  83%  of  the  overall  catch.  The  value  of  the  horse  mackerel  catches 
comprises only a small to medium important part of similar catching opportunities available to 
the same fishing fleets (between 1 and 20% according to the fleet concerned). 

The objective of the proposal is to: 

•  contribute  to  implementing  the  Common  Fisheries  Policy's  overall  objective  (ensuring  the 
sustainable exploitation of marine living resources in ecological, economic and social terms) 
for one concrete stock. This will be achieved by ensuring that the annual decision-making on 
fishing  possibilities  corresponds  to  biological  indicators  on  the  development  of  the  stock 
which the most renowned scientific bodies have confirmed as being meaningful. 

•  As  an  ancillary  objective,  the  proposal  aims  to  establish,  for  the  sector  concerned, 
predictability for the annual legislative decisions on total allowable catch for the stock, and to 
provide stability to such decision-making. 

•  As another ancillary objective, the proposal aims at attracting scientific analysis to the stock 

and increase over time the database and stock assessment quality.  

Scientific  and  Stakeholder  Committees  have  been  consulted.  In  fact,  the  proposal  mirrors  an 
initiative taken by the stakeholders organised in the Pelagic Species Regional Advisory Council 
(PelRAC). 

The proposal is supported by DG MARE as an additional element in steering decision-making 
under  the  Common  Fisheries  Policy  (CFP)  towards  a  long-term  framework  that  is  compatible 

EN 

   EN 

 
with  international  obligations  and  with  the  CFP  objectives  themselves.  Indeed,  this  text 
represents the second case where a long-term management approach is proposed for stocks that 
are not outside safe biological limits, following the management plan for herring in the west of 
Scotland.1 Furthermore, it stands out by applying a biological indicator other than stock biomass 
and  fishing  mortality,  and  relies  on  precedent  work  and  an  initiative  undertaken  within  the 
sector. 

The operational elements and options are: 

•  Option  1:  no  policy  change;  continue  fixing  the  fishing  possibilities  as  a  yearly  ad  hoc 

exercise based on annual scientific advice and political considerations; 

•  Option  2:  freezing  or  gradually  reducing  fishing  pressure  in  view  of  the  insufficient 

knowledge about the biological status of the stock; 

•  Option  3:  management  plan;  sub-options  relate  to  the  different  biological  indicators  and 
management  tools  available.  In  particular,  management  by  technical  measures  or  effort 
regulation  is  considered,  and  management  by  output-constraints.  Management  by  output-
constraints is being preferred, and here a harvest rule based on a share of the total spawning 
stock  size  is  being  discussed,  as  well  as  a  harvest  rule  based  on  the  trend  in  the  egg 
abundance.  The  latter  is  retained  as  the  preferred  sub-option.  To  this  sub-option,  possible 
complementary  elements  relating  to  catch  stability,  stock  decline  and  control  are  being 
presented. 

The  service  has  undertaken  a  basic  simulation  of  the  mid-term  economic  effects,  at  the 
aggregated  fleet  level,  on  the  profit  margins  of  the  two  options  retained  (option  1  and  3).  It 
shows  that  the  difference  is  marginal,  and  that  option  3  might  even  have  a  slightly  more 
beneficial  effect  in  relative  terms.  The  presented  impact  assessment  compares  the  possible 
scenarios and comes to the conclusion that the most suitable is the one that consists of proposing 
a long-term management plan, which sets TACs stable for 3 years according to a harvest control 
rule based on a precautionary advice for the harvest level adjusted by a trend that reflects the tri-
annual results of egg surveys. 

Details of the consultation processes, options and impacts are provided. 

1 

OJ L 344 of 20.12.2008, p. 6; proposal: COM (2008)240 final dated 6.5.2008. 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
1. 

PROCEDURAL ISSUES AND CONSULTATION OF INTERESTED PARTIES 

1.1. 

Organisation and Timing 

This  impact  assessment  concerns  a  proposal  for  a  Council  Regulation  establishing  a  long-term 
plan for the Western stock of Atlantic horse mackerel (trachurus trachurus). 

Its  development  is  foreseen  in  Agenda  Planning  (MARE/2008/027)  and  in  the  2008  Annual 
Management  Plan  of  the  Directorate-General  of  Maritime  Affairs  and  Fisheries  under  the 
specific objective "Conservation, Management and exploitation of living aquatic resources". An 
adoption was originally planned for late 2008, and will now be carried over to early 2009. 

The  reform  of  the  Common  Fisheries  Policy  set  the  basis  in  2002  for  changing  to  long-term 
plans  and  away  from  annual  decision-making.  The  stocks  that  were  most  problematic  were 
addressed  first.  Long-term  plans  to  provide  for  stock  recovery  for  several  stocks  have  been 
adopted since 2003. The Commission is now starting to propose long-term plans for species that 
are less problematic, but which can benefit greatly from regulations that would seek to prevent 
stocks from falling into critical situations. The first among this group of proposals has been the 
long-term plan for the management of Western Scotland herring, adopted end of 2008, and the 
plan concerning the Western stock of horse mackerel is following the suit. 

The  proposal  builds  on  a  concrete  and  scientifically  underpinned  initiative  by  the  sector 
concerned,  channelled  through  the  Pelagic  Stocks  Regional  Advisory  Council  in  mid  2007,  an 
initiative  that  the  European  Association  of  Producers  Organisations  had  already  taken  some 
years before2. 

At  the  same  time,  the  approach  presented  will  enter  uncharted  waters,  as  it  would  be  the  first 
time  that  a  management  plan  is  agreed  for  a  stock  the  status  of  which  is  only  rudimentarily 
known, and therefore the Commission does not have at its disposal a full stock assessment.  

DG MARE held a series of meetings to discuss this legislative initiative with DG ENV, as the 
associated  service  primarily  concerned.  Much  progress  has  been  achieved  through  these 
consultations, particularly during the summer months of 2008. The outcome of these discussions 
has  provided  the  essential  elements  for  the  inter-service  dialogue  and  steering  work  under  the 
formal impact assessment procedure reported here. 

1.2. 

Consultation and expertise 

Advice has been sought from relevant scientific organisations since 2006. The impact assessment 
is  prepared  by  DG  MARE  on  the  basis  of  scientific  advice  concerning  long-term  management 
and  is  complemented  with  economic  analysis  using  available  information.  Consultation  with 
stakeholders has taken place with the relevant representative body. 

External expertise has been sought from the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea 
(ICES)  concerning  long-term  management  of  fisheries  resources  of  interest  to  the  European 
Community. This organisation collates the expertise of fisheries scientists mostly working in the 
national  fisheries  laboratories  of  Member  States  and  provides  a  systematic  and  standardised 
advice to the European Community and to Member States.  
The spawning-stock biomass (SSB) of the Western horse mackerel stock has been dominated by 
an outstanding 1982 year class ( 18 times the long-term average). The strong 1982 year class has 
been gradually fished down, whereas recruitment has remained low, resulting in a steady decline 

2 

See 19th report of the STECF, SEC(2005) 369, page 111, http://fishnet.jrc.it/web/stecf 

EN 

   EN 

 
                                                 
of  SSB  since  its  peak  in  1988.  The  ongoing  decline  made  it  difficult  to  provide  advice  on 
sustainable  management,  so  in  response  to  a  joint  EU–Norway  request  to  ICES  to  "advise  on 
appropriate  management  systems  including  management  strategies,  objectives  and  ecosystem 
considerations" for the stock, several stock assessment approaches and management based on a 
simulation study were first evaluated in 20053. 

In 2006 ICES advised for the first time that harvest control rules based on the trend in the egg survey 
data  appeared  promising4.  Simulations  were  undertaken  within  the  Study  Group  on  Management 
Strategies in 2006 and 2007, as requested by the EU jointly with Norway5. Based on this work 
and  assisted  by  a  separate  group  of  scientists,  the  Pelagic  RAC  (PelRAC)  presented  to  the 
Commission  a  management  plan  outline  in  July  20076.  The  Commission  asked  ICES  for  a 
valuation  of  this  plan.  ICES  in  2007  concluded  that  the  plan  was  consistent  with  the 
precautionary approach in the short term, and advised to follow the plan for the period 2008 to 
20107. The Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries endorsed ICES' advice8. 

A  research  project  concerning  the  horse  mackerel  stock  identity  was  also  funded  by  the 
European Community9. It confirmed in 2004 previous assumptions about a stock distribution of 
the  Western  stock  larger  than  previously  held,  in  particular  covering  also  the  waters  off  the 
Northern  coast  of  Spain  (ICES  division  VIIIc).  Following  this  evidence  and  preparing  for  a 
management  of  the  stock,  the  Commission  is  working  for  a  re-definition  of  the  management 
areas  defined  for  the  setting  of  TACs,  a  topic  discussed  with  RACs  in  the  context  of  the 
"frontloading" of the TAC&Quota Regulation 2009. It is foreseen to achieve this rearrangement 
together with the entry into force of the management plan. 

Stakeholders were consulted by means of verbal and written communication with the PelRAC. 
This body has been established10 for consultations with parties having an interest in the Common 
Fisheries Policy in respect of pelagic fish stocks. Its members come from the catching sector. Its 
members  come  from  the  catching  sector  (ship  owners,  small-scale  fishermen,  employed 
fishermen and producer organisations), from processors and traders, from environmental NGOs, 
from  aquaculture  producers, and  from  the  recreational  activity.  Given  that  the  initiative  for  a 
management plan for the Western horse mackerel came from the PelRAC itself, discussion took 
place  upon  the  formal  submission  of  the  PelRAC's11  proposal  during  2007  and  2008,  in  the 
PelRAC's  working  group  II  (dedicated  to  blue  whiting,  sprat  and  horse  mackerel)  and  the 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

Report  of  the  ad  hoc  Group  on  Long  Term  Advice  (AGLTA).  (2005b)  126.  12–13  April  2005,  ICES 
Headquarters. ICES Document CM 2005/ACFM: 25.  
ICES, 2006. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee on Fishery Management, Advisory Committee on the 
Marine Environment and Advisory Committee on Ecosystems, 2006. ICES Advice, Book 9, p.70. 
ICES SGMAS Report 2007. Report of the Study Group on Management Strategies (SGMAS), p. 28. ICES 
CM 2007/ACFM:04. 
Based on the study "Towards a management plan for western horse mackerel", Ad hoc group of scientists 
in collaboration with members of the Pelagic RAC, Pelagic RAC et .al., 2007. 
ICES, 2007. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee on Fishery Management, Advisory Committee on the 
Marine Environment and Advisory Committee on Ecosystems, 2007. ICES Advice, Book 9, p.13 and 55. 
Report of the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries. Review of scientific advice for 
2007. Consolidated advice on stocks of interest to the European Community in the ICES areas, endorsed at 
the 26th STECF Plenary session November 2007, http://www.ices.dk/products/icesadvice.asp  
HOMSIR project, A multidisciplinary approach using genetic makers and biological tags in horse mackerel 
(trachurus trachurus) stock structure analysis, QLK5-Ct1999-01438.  
2005/606/EC:  Commission  Decision  of  5  August  2005  declaring  operational  the  Regional  Advisory 
Council  for  Pelagic  stocks  under  the  Common  Fisheries  Policy.  OJ  L  206,  09.08.2005,  p.  21. 
http://www.pelagic-rac.org 
Based on the study "Towards a management plan for western horse mackerel", Ad hoc group of scientists 
in collaboration with members of the Pelagic RAC, Pelagic RAC et .al., 2007. 

EN 

   EN 

 
                                                 
executive  committee.  The  Commission  welcomed  the  sector's  initiative,  discussed  possible 
alternatives  and  impacts  of  such  a  plan  with  the  stakeholders  and  used  its  legislative  right  of 
initiative for putting such a plan into practice. The key elements and recommendations retained 
to feed into the legislative process were as follows:  

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

The TAC would be stable for a period of 3 years following the year of the most recent 
survey;  

In the event of a survey result not being available, the TAC would in principle be based 
on annual scientific advice; 

The introduction of special fishing permits would be considered; 

The plan would be scientifically evaluated in intervals.  

Criteria for the evaluation might be the following: 

•  SSB has been maintained above SSB1982 (150,000t); 

•  Knowledge about the stock increases due to cooperation with the sector; 

•  The  uncertainties  and  bias  in  the  fishery  and  biological  system  remain  within  the 

bounds of those tested; and 

•  The assumptions made in the simulation testing phase are still valid; 

•  Catch levels have increased together with the biological indication of increased stock 

abundance, if any; 

•  Discarding  and  misreporting  do  not  increase  in  a  period  of  increased  stock 

abundance and could be taken into account in the TAC-setting process. 

6. 

Control  measures  would  include  special  fishing  permits;  harvest  monitoring  would 
benefit  from  increased  observer  coverage  as  programmed  in  national  data  collection 
programmes with the support from the harvesting sector; 

7. 

The TAC would be set according to the following harvest control rule:  

•  One  half  of  the  total  TAC  consists  of  75.000  tonnes,  being  one  half  of  the  harvest 
level  that  for  already  some  time  has  been  considered  as  being  precautionary  with 
regard to a stock that does not produce large year classes; 

•  One half of the total TAC consists of one half of the latest TAC set before the latest 
egg  survey,  multiplied  by  a  factor  which  represents  the  slope  in  egg  abundance 
confirmed by the latest three European egg surveys; 

•  The  total  TAC  will  be  reduced  by  discard  or  unreported  landings  where  estimates 

exist, and  

•  The  total  TAC  will  be  increased  by  7%,  resulting  from  a  simulation  of  the  harvest 
control rule that produces less than 5% risk for a precautionary level of biomass.  

The factor representing the slope would be calculated as shown in picture 1 which can be found 
in Annex 2. 

The Advisory Committee on Fisheries and Aquaculture (ACFA) was not consulted as that body 
advises on cross-cutting issues whereas this plan concerns a specific regional issue. 

EN 

   EN 

 
1.3. 

Dissemination of scientific advice and the results of consultations with stakeholders 

The scientific advice from ICES and from STECF and the advice from the PelRAC are available 
on  the  websites  of  ICES,  the  PelRAC  and  the  STECF,  the  latter  being  administered  from  the 
Joint Research Center12. 

2. 

2.1. 

PROBLEM DEFINITION 

Current political background 

The  reform  of  the  Common  Fisheries  Policy  set  the  basis  in  2002  for  changing  to  long-term 
plans  and  reducing  discretion  of  annual  decision-making  to  ensure  sustainable  exploitation  of 
fisheries  resources.  The  stocks  that  were  most  problematic  were  addressed  first.  The 
Commission has started to propose long-term plans also for the less problematic species, with the 
objective  of  avoiding  these  stocks  from  falling  into  critical  situations,  and  also  aiming  at  the 
side-effect of increased scientific coverage. The Western horse mackerel belongs to this category 
of stocks. 

It is a pelagic stock meaning it builds schools in the water column, not in permanent contact with 
the  seabed.  The  commercially  most  relevant  widely  distributed  pelagic  fish  stocks  are  already 
subject to international management instruments, which are agreed with neighbouring countries 
from the North, because those stocks are exploited also by those parties and agreement has been 
reached  over  the  years  on  carrying  out  a  joint  management.  This  proves  beneficial  in  bringing 
stability  into  the  decisions  on  annual  fishing  opportunities  both  at  the  international  and  the 
Community  level.  The  stocks  concerned  are  Northeast  Atlantic  Mackerel,  Blue  Whiting, 
Atlanto-Scandian  herring,  and  North  Sea  herring.  The  Western  Scotland  herring  was  thus  the 
first  of  the  pelagic  stocks  for  which  a  management  plan  only  at  Community  level  could  be 
developed,  and  the  Western  horse  mackerel  is  the  second  one.  The  reasons  for  choosing  the 
Western  horse  mackerel  as  the  next  candidate  for  introducing  a  Community  management  plan 
are the following: 

1) 

2) 

3) 

4) 

Strong sector initiative; 

Highest  commercial  importance  among  the  pelagic  stocks  not  jointly  managed  with 
neighbouring countries; 

Exploitation by a large number of Member States; 

Circumstances  of  the  fishery  conducive  to  improved  effectiveness  of  management 
measures, given that discrepancy between lawful harvest limitations and actual harvest 
has considerably decreased in recent years (see point 2.3 below). 

Based on the above, a new approach to managing the Western horse mackerel - based on long-
term  sustainability  and  improved  assessment  of  the  stock  –  is  being  proposed  by  the 
Commission. 

2.2. 

Issue requiring action 

The  current  management  system  as  it  applies  in  the  EU  does  not  serve  the  horse  mackerel 
situation very well. The TAC is set every year following negotiations with Member States during 
which  political  pressure  and  short-term  economic  goals  often  take  precedent  over  a  long-term 
maximum sustainable yield (MSY) approach to fishery. 

12 

Please refer to previous references for websites addresses 

EN 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Moreover, the scientific advice for the stock is based on only a poor assessment. Generally, the 
stock  assessment  of  mackerel  and  horse  mackerel  is  difficult.  For  those  assessments,  scientists 
need standardised fishery-independent sources of information which they can use to "tune" the 
data  they  have  received  via  commercial  landings.  Concerning  acoustic  surveys,  mackerel  and 
horse  mackerel  cannot  easily  be  detected  and  differentiated  acoustically  because  they  lack  a 
swim-bladder.  As  the  most  important  fishery-independent  source  of  information,  international 
egg surveys for mackerel and horse-mackerel have been conducted every three years since 1977. 

Using  the  information  from  the  egg  surveys  and  knowledge  about  how  many  eggs  a  female 
produces during spawning time, scientists estimate the spawning biomass of the stock. However, 
the models so far applied for estimating the size of the stock of Western horse mackerel cannot 
be  considered  robust,  as  the  knowledge  about  the  spawning  behaviour  has  changed  over  time, 
rendering old models less reliable. The mortality caused by fishing is not well understood, due to 
the  fact  that  the  stock  has  long  been  dominated  by  only  one  "year-class"  of  recruits,  due  to 
insufficient catch data sampling in Member States, and due to the fact that the relevant band of 
year-classes to be examined has changed in more recent years, thus hampering the continuity in 
establishing longer time series. Therefore, a target mortality rate that would render MSY cannot 
be established at present. 

It  is  by  no  means  unusual  that  scientific  advice  for  a  stock  cannot  be  based  on  a  full  stock 
assessment. This is indeed the rule rather than the exception, and reasons for the shortcomings of 
scientific advice are manifold, including for example reduced indicative strength of data coming 
from fisheries which  are  in  decline.  So far, the Commission has introduced  management plans 
only to stocks which status is relatively well understood. In the case of horse mackerel, waiting 
for  science  to  develop  a  full  stock  assessment  before  taking  regulatory  action  is  not  the  right 
direction. Knowledge on the stock has improved only recently, and the wide distribution of the 
stock, as well as the erratic recruitment that has been observed, make unpredictable the amount 
of time necessary to significantly improve the assessments. In the meantime, the egg survey data 
can indeed serve as biological indicator for the stock size. Therefore, basing a TAC-calculation on 
the development of the egg survey results every 3 years would be a possible solution to the problem 
of  poor  stock  assessment.  In  view  of  the  revision  clauses  built  into  the  Commission's  long-term 
plans, the plan could be adapted to more precise stock assessment once those are available. 

Taking into account scientific advice on an ad hoc basis is hampered by the fact that the stock 
areas  of  scientific  advice  do  not  coincide  with  the  areas  for  which  total  allowable  catches  are 
fixed. The problem of this area mismatch should be resolved no later as a long-term management 
will be implemented13. 

The current system, with its annual approach to setting the TAC and the lack of predictive power 
in the assessment, means that the stock may not be optimally harvested. For example, in periods 
of elevated stock productivity, due to pulse recruitment, optimal catches cannot be advised for in 
the  current  management  system.  This  is  contrary  to  the  overall  objective  of  the  Common 
Fisheries  Policy,  namely  to  provide  for  sustainable  exploitation  in  ecological,  economic  and 
social terms. 

13 

For a detailed discussion see Annex 2. For the latest scientific contribution to the discussion on the stock 
boundaries  see  Abaunza  et  al.,  Stock  identity  of  horse  mackerel  (Trachurus  trachurus)  in  the  Northeast 
Atlantic  and  Mediterranean  Sea:  Integrating  the  results  from  different  stock  identification  approaches, 
Fisheries Research 89 (2008) 2, 196. 

EN 

   EN 

 
                                                 
2.3. 

Underlying driving forces 

The  main  long-term  drivers  of  the  fisheries  system  is  the  pursuit  by  the  harvesting  sector  of  a 
production  increase,  fuelled  by  growing  demand  and  often  not  more  than  steady  prices.  The 
growing harvest potential of the fleet (production capacity) would allow for such increases, but 
the resource availability is limited by the resources' natural growth potential. Reducing the stock 
size  to  a  low  level  (while  maintaining  high  catches  for  a  short  period)  lowers  the  productive 
potential of the stock in the longer term. This has happened with the vast majority of commercial 
fish  stocks  in  the  Community,  partly  sanctioned  by  the  annual  decision-making  mechanism, 
partly  due  to  illegal  landings.  In  short-term  perspective  it  can  often  be  economic  and  social 
pressures  which  predominate  in  the  dynamics  of  the  system  and  lead  to  decisions  on  fishing 
opportunities  that,  cumulatively,  can  become  unsustainable.  In  consequence,  less  or  lower-
quality fish is harvested despite an increase in effort and running costs. 

Seen from the ecological perspective, fishing is the most important driving force of changes to 
the  biodiversity.  In  fact,  the  pressure  exerted  on  a  stock  by  fishing  can have  a  more  important 
impact on the stock than all the biological conditions in which the stock develops. 

In administrative and political terms, this means that economic and social pressure exist which 
have led to TACs being set higher than those recommended according to sustainability criteria, 
and many fish stocks being fished outside safe biological limits14. 

In  case  of  the  Western  horse  mackerel,  the  discrepancy  between  scientific  advice  and  TAC 
cannot be easily identified, as the areas concerned are not identical, so that three different TACs 
concern  partly  this  stock,  partly  other  stocks.  However,  as  a  general  assessment,  TACs  were 
drastically higher than the advice up and until 2004. Likewise, landings of horse mackerel well 
exceeded  the  TACs  set  for  this  stock  from  1988  for  about  a  decade.  In  1988  the  stock's  mass 
peaked  with  the  exhaustion  of  growth  potential  of  the  1982  class.  Since  2004  -  TACs  being 
stable  and  the  scientific  advice  indicating  a  trend  towards  possible  higher  catch  rates  -  the 
discrepancies  between  advice,  TACs  and  catches  have  levelled  out.  Indeed,  the  catches  have 
even decreased in recent years, a fact that can be explained by the presence of better alternatives 
(in  particular  mackerel)  for  the  fishing  fleets  involved,  horse  mackerel  being  often  a  "second 
choice" compared to more valuable pelagic fish. 

Table 1: TAC horse mackerel for Western area, compared with landings as estimated by ICES 

Year 

1999 

2000 

2001 

2002 

2003 

2004 

2005 

2006 

2007 

265 

240 

233 

150 

137 

137 

137 

137 

170 

274 

175 

191 

172 

* 

* 

182 

155 

123 

TAC (in 
thousand 
tonnes) 

Landings 
(in thousand 
tonnes) 

Source: ICES advice 2008, Book 9, page 91. In view of the discrepancy of TAC areas and stock 
area, the table is indicative only. 

* Data for these years not comparable as they cover a larger region. 

14 

A  detailed  analysis  is  given  in  Commission  Communication  "Fishing  Opportunities  for  2009:  Policy 
Statement from the European Commission", COM(2008)331final. 

EN 

   EN 

 
                                                 
This situation can be seen as a unique opportunity that could be used for introducing a harvest 
control  rules  based  on  available  biological  information,  thereby  avoiding  short-term  negative 
economic  effects  that  are  a  common  determinant  of  long-term  plans  which  aim  at  recovering 
depleted stocks, rather than keeping abundant stocks at a high level. 

2.4. 

Effect on the sector 

Identification of the sectors affected 

2.4.1. 
The Western horse mackerel is one of three widely dispersed stocks of Trachurus trachurus in 
the Northeast Atlantic, extending from the Gulf of Cadiz to the Norwegian Sea (see Annex 1).  

The  principal  sectors  affected  are  the  owners,  operators  and  crews  of  pelagic  fishing  vessels 
operating in the distribution area of the Western stock of the Atlantic horse mackerel, that is the 
Northern North Sea, the Norwegian Sea, areas West of the British Islands, the Western English 
Channel, waters West of Brittany, the Bay of Biscay and North and Northwest Spain. 

Today,  several  important  fisheries  for  western  horse  mackerel  can  be  distinguished:  Dutch, 
German and French pelagic freezer trawlers operating in the Western English Channel and other 
parts  of  ICES  sub-area  VII,  as  well  as  in  the  Southern  North  Sea;  an  Irish  pelagic  seawater 
(fresh-fish)  trawler  fleet  operating  in  ICES  sub-areas  VI  and  VII  in  coastal  and  shelf  waters 
along  the  Northwest  and  West  coast  of  Ireland;  Danish  trawlers  operating  in  the  Channel. 
Furthermore, a sporadic, occasionally very important and unregulated15 Norwegian purse seine 
fishery operates in the Northern North Sea in late autumn, the latter depending on the intensity of 
water  influx  from  the  Atlantic  into  that  area1617.  In  addition,  Spanish  and  Portuguese  bottom 
trawlers and purse seiners operate along the Atlantic coast of the Iberian peninsular, partly in a 
targeted  and  partly  in  a  mixed  fishery.  Finally,  a  part  of  the  Lithuanian  long-distance  fleet 
catches horse mackerel in the regulatory area of NEAFC18. 

The vessel owners and crews which will mostly be affected by the legislative initiative can be 
summarised as shown in the tables (see Table and 3) below. The figures are based on Member 
States'  data  and  are  regularly  channelled  into  DG  MARE's  economic  report19.  The  table  also 
gives account of the employment involved and the relative importance of horse mackerel in the 
catches and revenues. Only those fleet segments are shown which carry horse mackerel among 
their  five  most  important  species  (by  weight  or  value).  To  be  noted  that  the  source  does  not 
distinguish  between  the  different  stocks  of  horse  mackerel  and  might  therefore  particularly 
include  horse  mackerel  from  the  North  Sea  stock  or  third  county  waters.  However,  the  data  is 
still meaningful given that the Western stock is by far the most important stock.  

Table 2 - Basic data on fleet segments most concerned (2006) 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

Only subject to a by-catch limitation and a discard prohibition, see 2007 Report of the ICES working group 
on  the  assessment  of  Mackerel,  Horse  Mackerel,  Sardine  and  Anchovy  (WGMHSA),  ICES  doc.  CM 
2007/ACFM:31.  
More in particular, Ireland, Denmark, Scotland, England and Wales, France, Germany and the Netherlands 
have a directed trawl fishery and Norway a directed purse seine fishery for horse mackerel. See footnote 2, 
page 228. Also ICES WGMHS report 2007, CM 2007/ACFM:31. 
Towards  a  management  plan  for  western  horse  mackerel,  Pelagic  RAC  without  year  [2007],  page  2. 
Iversen/Skogen/Svendsen,  Availability  of  horse  mackerel  (trachurus  trachurus)  in  the  north-east  North 
Sea, predicted by transport of Atlantic water, Fisheries Oceanography 11 (2004), page 245. 
Report  2006  of  the  Republic  of  Lithuania  on  the  achievement  of  a  sustainable  balance  between  fishing 
capacity and fishing opportunities. 
Latest reference: Economic performance of selected EU fishing fleets, Summary document prepared by the 
economic unit of DG FISH, December 2007. 

EN 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Member 
State 

NL 

IE 

IE 

DE 

UK 

ES 

Sum 

Segment  Length 

Vessels

(GT) Days at sea 

Employment

Capacity 

PTS20 

>40m 

PTS 

>40m 

PTS 

24-40m 

PTS 

>40m 

PTS 

>40m 

14 

18 

13 

13 

33 

70150 

33460 

4500 

24420 

53220 

PTS 

12-24m 

546 

19580 

637 

205330 

3450 

1340 

1000 

1940 

3170 

n.a. 

465 

236 

112 

65 

178 

4997 

6053 

Source: DG MARE based on STECF evaluations of MS data collected under fisheries data collection regulation. 

Table  3  -  Economic  importance  of  horse  mackerel  for  the  fleet  segments  identified  (2006; 
HOM=horse mackerel) 

Member 
State 

Segm.  Length 

Total 
catch (t) 

HOM 
catch (t) 

Relative 
importance 
(%) 

HOM catch 
(€m) 

Income 
(€m) 

Relative 
importance 
(%) 

NL 

PTS 

>40m 

356730 

69970 

IE 

IE 

DE 

UK 

ES 

Sum 

PTS 

>40m 

121850 

18090 

PTS 

24-40m 

30550 

5800 

PTS 

>40m 

153480 

12120 

PTS 

>40m 

313680 

12380 

PTS 

12-24m 

19730 

1716 

996020 

120076 

20% 

15% 

19% 

8% 

4% 

9% 

26,45 

125,12 

21% 

4,52 

1,45 

5,46 

4,45 

1,53 

43,9 

44,55 

10% 

5% 

8% 

2% 

1% 

30,97 

64,26 

178,04 

123,6 

566,5 

Source: DG MARE based on STECF evaluations of MS data collected under fisheries data collection regulation. 

The fleets from Denmark, Portugal, France and Lithuania which recorded catches are excluded 
from  the  analysis  since  they  have  no  fleets  where  horse  mackerel  is  one  of  the  top  five  target 
species  in  their  catch  composition,  when  assessed  in  catch  value  terms.  For  Denmark,  it  is 
noteworthy that despite holding a share of 9% of the horse mackerel's western TAC, industrial 
species  of  herring,  mackerel,  sprat,  sandeel  and  blue  whiting  represent  95%  of  the  total  catch 
value of the PTS >40m segment. For France, the predominant pelagic catches in terms of value 
are  tuna,  herring,  mackerel,  blue  whiting  (92%  for  PTS  >40m),  and  anchovy,  pilchard,  hake, 
seabass, albacore (78% for PTS 24-40m). 

20 

Pelagic trawlers and seiners. 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
2.4.2.  Effect of the regulation 

Recent catches from this stock have been around 140,000t according to scientific estimates, with 
an average first-sale value of some €60 Million.  

The  fishing  vessels  in  this  sector  are  typically  very  mobile  and  have  access  to  a  number  of 
fisheries  resources,  including  North  Sea  herring,  mackerel,  blue  whiting  in  the  North-East 
Atlantic and also to some fisheries resources outside Community waters (e.g. sardinella off West 
Africa). Larger pelagic freezer trawlers are reported to target 14 and more different species21. It 
can be assumed that none of the vessels within the fleet segments concerned is targeting horse 
mackerel,  including  the  one  from  the  Western  stock,  exclusively.  The  relative  importance  of 
horse mackerel varies between 9 and 20% concerning the overall catch and between 1 and 21% 
concerning the value. The relative importance of the species for the sector is thus low or medium 
high. 

As examples, the following species can be shown per fleet segment by importance in weight in 
descending order: 

NL PTS > 40m: Herring, Horse Mackerel (not only Western stock), Mackerel, Blue Whiting. 

DE PTS > 40m: Herring, Mackerel, Horse Mackerel (ditto), Blue Whiting. 

UK PTS > 40m: Mackerel, Herring, Blue Whiting. 

ES PTS 12-24m: Sardine, Horse Mackerel (ditto). 

The stock represents a small part of the fishing opportunities available to Member States for the 
fleet  sector  concerned.  Furthermore,  the  stock  is  not  at  an  immediate  risk  of  collapse  and  any 
adjustments in catches corresponding to the application of the plan should be moderate. The new 
management should maintain yields and fishing mortality rates at approximately the same level 
as has been taken from the stock in the recent past. Moreover, the simulations of the mid-term 
economic effects, at the aggregated fleet level, on the profit margins of the two options retained 
(option  1  and  3)  showed  that  the  difference  was  marginal,  and  that  the  preferred  option  might 
even have a slightly more positive effect in relative terms (Table 8).  

On  both  accounts  therefore  the  effect  of  changing  the  current  regime  on  the  relevant  fisheries 
sectors is intended to help to ensure stability of a rather limited part of the sector's catches, and 
not to create important changes. However, as a consequence of applying the management plan 
over time, larger changes might occur with radical variations in the egg abundance, as identified 
in one of the future egg surveys. It cannot be predicted if and when such changes will occur, and 
applying  the  established  rule  would  continue  pursuing  the  objective  of  a  sustainable  fishing 
activity. 

2.4.3.  Magnitude of the effect on the sectors 

It  was  only  from  the  1970's  that  horse  mackerel  gradually  became  upgraded  from  feed  fish  to 
human  consumption.  Nowadays,  only  very  small  quantities  of  horse  mackerel  are  caught  in 
industrial fisheries by Irish and UK vessels. The species also used to have some significance for 

21 

Norway  cod,  Greenland  Halibut  stocks,  Norway  haddock,  Atlanto-Scandic  herring,  North  Sea  herring, 
Western  Scotland  herring,  Western  horse  mackerel,  North  Sea  mackerel,  Northeast  Atlantic  mackerel, 
Norway  saithe,  Norway  redfish,  Greenland  redfish  stocks.  See  Annex  to  the  report  2006  of  the  Federal 
Republic  of  Germany  on  the  achievement  of  a  sustainable  balance  between  fishing  capacity  and  fishing 
opportunities. 

EN 

   EN 

 
                                                 
a traditional Danish feed fish fishery operating in the English Channel, which nowadays catches 
for human consumption22. 

The  targeted  age  groups  are  variable,  as  the  fisheries  exploit  juvenile  fish  for  the  human 
consumption  market,  mid-aged  fish  mostly  for  the  Japanese  market,  and  older  fish  either  for 
human  consumption  purposes  (mostly  for  the  African  market)  or  for  industrial  purposes23. 
According to the Commission's trade statistics, key export markets for horse mackerel for human 
consumption24 are Tunisia, Japan, Nigeria, Ivory Coast and Ghana. 

All vessels involved in the fisheries at stake must comply with a ceiling, established each year, 
of  maximum  allowable  landings  of  horse  mackerel  harvested  from  defined  areas.  This  may  be 
achieved  indirectly  through  the  allocation  of  individual  or  collective  quotas  or  through  the 
closing of the fishery by the Member State once the overall quota allocated to that Member State 
has  been  consumed.  This  mechanism  results  from  the  annual  TAC  &  Quotas  Regulation.  A 
regulation that sets harvest rules with a view to long-term management of the stocks would affect 
the  sector  again  indirectly  in  the  way  that  the  discretion  by  which  the  annual  TAC  for  this 
particular stock can be established would be restricted. 

The intervention of the harvest control rule might entail an adjustment of the TAC for the next 
year  that  results  in  an  increase  or  decrease  of  the  TAC.  Either  way,  the  consequences  for  any 
given  vessel  are  not  an  automatic  and  corresponding  adjustment  in  individual  fishing 
opportunities,  since  allocations  to  them  depend  on  the  system  implemented  by  each  Member 
State  to  administer  its  overall  quota.  Business  opportunities  and economic  choices  available  to 
the vessel owner are also important in respect of the impact that TAC adjustments may have on 
individual operators. The intensity by which, for instance, a decrease in the TAC would have a 
restricting effect on the vessel owner's intention to catch Western horse mackerel would depend 
on, besides  the  Member  States'  management system, the level of quota exhaustion observed in 
the  fishery  concerned,  and  the  economic  importance  of  the  fishing  opportunity,  in  terms  of 
absolute value and relative to alternative harvest opportunities. 

The general importance of horse mackerel from the Western Atlantic stock can be described by 
looking at the available fishing opportunities in terms of total allowable catch. The TAC as well 
as  the  actual  catches  of  Western  horse  mackerel  are  the  most  important  among  the  TACs  for 
horse  mackerel.  The  following  table,  derived  from  the  Commission's  catch  reporting  system, 
illustrates this. It is to be noted that the statistics are based on a TAC area for the Western stock 
which is not fully in line with  the distribution of the stock, but about 10% smaller in terms of 
fishing opportunities25. The ongoing discussion of a reorganisation of TAC-areas is explained in 
Annex 2. 

Table 4 - In 1000 tonnes rounded, TAC excluding share of non-EU members 

22 

23 

24 
25 

European Parliament Working Paper FISH 113 EN 02-2004, The Fish Meal and Fish Oil Industry, its Role 
in the Common Fisheries Policy, page 8. 
ICES, 2004. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee on Fishery Management, Advisory Committee on the 
Marine Environment and Advisory Committee on Ecosystems, 2004, part 2, page 836. 
The Commission's trade statistics does not differentiate according to the different stocks. 
The existing Western TAC area is made up by ICES divisions VI, VII, VIIIab, VIIIde, Vb, XII, and XIV. 
The  Commission  considers  a  reallocation  of  division  VIIIc  (North  and  Northwest  Spain)  to  the  Western 
area, of division VIId (Eastern English Channel) to the Northern area and of divisions IIa as well as IVa to 
the  Western  area  to  be  necessary.  This  will  bring  the  TAC  areas  into  line  with  scientific  advice.  The 
resulting TAC might result in an increase of about 10% in the Western area, which might be reflected by a 
similar increase in catches attributable to such area. 

EN 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Horse 
mackerel 

Western 
TAC 

Southern 
TAC 

Northern 
TAC 

2005 TAC  2005 EU 

2006 TAC  2006 EU 

2007 TAC  2007 EU 

catches 

catches 

catches 

133 

123 

135 

120 

136 

109 

55 

41 

46 

38 

55 

41 

48 

32 

55 

41 

44 

27 

Source: DG MARE catch reporting system 

The  fact  of  recently  decreasing  caches  has  been  mentioned  already  in  point  2.3.  Based  on  an 
internal survey among members of the pelagic RAC, the market could absorb double of the 2007 
catches. The industry has managed to develop over the years large markets in Africa and Asia, in 
addition to the existing traditional fresh-fish markets in Portugal and Spain. The relatively low 
and stable prices should also provide a buffer in economic downturns. The reason for a TAC not 
being  exhausted  might  therefore  be  found  in  more  attractive  alternative  fishing  opportunities. 
Important factors affecting the catches are: highly volatile fuel prices; opportunities in mackerel, 
herring  and  blue  whiting;  size  of  the  TAC  portion  that  is  traded  with  Norway  and  Faroes  in 
exchange for other fishing opportunities. 

The  first-sale  value  of  horse  mackerel  destined  for  human  consumption  has  fluctuated  around 
0.47  EUR  per  kg  in  recent  years  (for  comparison:  Mackerel:  0,68  EUR,  Herring:  0,24  EUR). 
Applying this to the catches registered only gives a very rough estimation, given the quality tiers 
and the fact that some parts of the catches will be utilised for industrial purposes, thus triggering 
a much lower income.  

Table  5  -  First-sale  price  in  EUR  of  one  kg  horse  mackerel  per  Member  State  which  fleet 
segments have been assessed 

Member 
State 

NL 

IE 

DE 

UK 

ES 

Average 

2003

0,31

0,13

0,19

0,71

0,34

2004

2005

2006 

0,31

0,18

0,35

0,18

0,77

0,36

0,30

0,25

0,44

0,28

0,78

0,41

0,38 

0,25 

0,45 

0,36 

0,89 

0,47 

Source: DG MARE based on STECF evaluations of MS data collected under fisheries data collection regulation. 

Applying the first-sale value to the catches delivers the overall importance of the stock. For this 
exercise, the catches in division VIIIc (2004: 24.000t, 2005: 22.300t, 2006: 23.700t) have been 
added to the catches in the Western TAC area, for the reason that catches in this area belong to 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
the Western stock, as confirmed by scientific studies on the boundaries of the stock. Any long-
term plan would apply to an area that comprises also area VIIIc26. 

Table 6 - Approximate first-sale value applying the average price to the catches 

Catch (including VIIIc)  

in Mio tonnes 

2005 

145,3 

2006 

143,7 

Value in Mio EUR 

59,6 

67,5 

Source: see tables 3 and 4. 

For those Member States holding quotas on this stock, the proportion of the fishing opportunities 
for horse mackerel in the Western TAC area to the total of horse mackerel TACs is as follows27. 
To  be  noted  that  after  TAC  area  reorganisation  the  Western  TAC  area  will  increase  by 
approximately 10%. 

Table 7 - Horse mackerel quota in Western TAC area 

Member State 

Horse  mackerel  quota  as  %  of  all  three  TACs 
established for Atlantic horse mackerel 

Combined  TAC&quotas,  all  three  areas 
in tonnes 

NL 

IE 

ES 

FR 

PT 

DE 

DK 

UK 

BE 

Sum 

93 

95 

35 

95 

6 

87 

0 

82 

0 

Not applicable 

62191 

41109 

47700 

8480 

27898 

14079 

25208 

20191 

58 

246914 

Source: DG MARE based on the annual TAC&quota Regulation 

The table shows that dependency on this TAC, as compared to all horse mackerel TACs, is very 
significant  among  Member  States,  except  for  those  which  do  not  have  a  share  in  the  Western 

26 

27 

This calculation is made for reason of simplification in line with ICES practice. The final TAC areas will 
incorporate further changes see Annex 2. 
Calculated  from  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  40/2008  of  16  January  2008  fixing  for  2008  the  fishing 
opportunities  and  associated  conditions  for  certain  fish  stocks,  applicable  in  Community  waters  and,  for 
Community vessels, in waters where catch limitations are required. OJ L 19/1, page 86. 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
TAC  (Denmark,  Belgium)  and  those  which  have  the  majority  share  in  the  likewise  important 
Southern TAC (Spain and Portugal). 

2.4.4.  Legal basis for Community action 

Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  2371/2002  of  20  December  2002  on  the  Conservation  and 
Sustainable Exploitation of Fisheries Resources under the Common Fisheries Policy28 provides 
for the establishment of management plans for fisheries exploiting stocks which are within safe 
biological  limits  (Article  6).  In  the  case  of  the  Western  stock  of  Atlantic  horse  mackerel,  the 
scientific advice available to the Commission qualifies the status of the stock as unknown. This 
means that fisheries scientists have not undertaken a full analytical stock assessment However, 
the 2001 year class of this stock has been stronger than those observed in previous years, having 
led to increased catches since 2002. The spawning stock size is estimated to be well above the 
level  of  1982,  which  produced  an  extraordinarily  large  amount  of  juveniles.  In  addition,  the 
positive trend of the latest egg survey suggest that the spawning stock biomass has increased in 
recent  years.  The  removal  from  the  stock  by  fishing  relative  to  the  total  mortality  (fishing 
mortality)  is  considered  to  be  relatively  low,  albeit  not  known.  This  suggests  that  the  stock's 
reproduction is probably not being adversely affected by fishing activities at present. Therefore, 
Article 6 may still be applied. However, the plan should also work once the stock size will have 
decreased  to  levels  that  affect  the  reproductive  capacity.  In  that  case,  Article  5  would  be  the 
provision on which to base the management plan. In view of this ambivalent nature of the plan, 
Article  37  of  the  Treaty  establishing  the  European  Community  would  form  the  general  legal 
basis for the Community to act in this case. 

2.4.5.  Necessity and subsidiarity 

Fisheries  management  is  an  exclusive  Community  competence;  hence  measures  concerning 
fisheries of trans-national importance must be adopted at Community level and the principle of 
subsidiarity  does  not  apply.  In  order  to  make  explicit  the  rationale  underlying  this,  it  can  be 
recalled  that  the  initiative  concerns  the  annual  setting  of  a  TAC  for  a  fish  stock  that  is  shared 
between  several  Member  States,  currently  the  following  ones:  Denmark,  Germany,  Spain, 
France, Ireland, the Netherlands, Portugal and the United Kingdom. A Member State would not 
be able to regulate the TAC on its own, as it would have to anticipate parallel legislation by other 
Member  States  having  an  interest  in  the  stock,  and  also  the  share  of  non-EU  countries  that 
traditionally harvest this stock following annual agreements with the Community. Neither would 
a Member State be able to effectively regulate the variation in TACs as a conservation measure, 
given  that  the  stock  can  only  be  managed  effectively  as  a  common  concern,  so  that  Member 
States  exploiting  the  stocks  have  to  follow  the  same  management  rules  at  the  same  time. 
Therefore,  it  is  necessary  that  the  measure  of  setting  TACs  and  formalising  rules  according  to 
which this should happen be taken at the Community level. 

3. 

OBJECTIVES 

3.1. 

General objectives 

The general policy objective of the long-term management plan is to ensure the exploitation of 
the stock consistently with a high sustainable yield.  

Policy  coherence  concerning  sustainability  objectives  should  be  maintained.  The  plan  should 
conform to the objectives of the Common Fisheries Policy, as set out in Article 2 of Regulation 

28 

OJ L 358, 21.12.2002, pp. 59-80. 

EN 

   EN 

 
                                                 
(EC) No 2371/2002. In addition, such plans should contribute to the aims of the Implementation 
Plan  agreed  by  the  World  Summit  on  Sustainable  Development  at  Johannesburg  in  2002, 
especially  in  respect  of  exploiting  stocks  compatibly  with  maximum  sustainable  yield29.  This 
political objective has been the subject of a separate Commission Communication (Implementing 
sustainability  in  EU  fisheries  through  maximum  sustainable  yield  (COM  (2006)  final)  and 
accompanying  working  document  (SEC(2006)  868)30.  However,  this  objective  is  only 
operational in a small number of cases, namely where the scientific knowledge about the stock 
allows  drawing  conclusions  on  what  the  biomass  and  fishing  levels  would  be  that  ensure  the 
maximum sustainable yield (MSY) in the long term. The case of the Western horse mackerel is a 
typical  example  of  a  stock  where  the  MSY  approach  is  not  operational  in  the  foreseeable 
future31,  so  that  subsidiary  objectives  must  be  defined  that  would  contribute  to  the  overall 
objective  but  for  which  the  precise  relation  between  attaining  the  subsidiary  objective  and 
attaining the overall objective is not known.  

3.2. 

Operational objectives 

Contributing to the general objective will be achieved by ensuring that the decision-making on 
fishing opportunities corresponds to biological indicators on the development of the stock which 
the most renowned scientific bodies have confirmed as being meaningful. 

As an ancillary objective, the proposal aims to establish, for the sector concerned, predictability 
for the annual legislative decisions on total allowable catch for the stock, and to provide stability 
to such decision-making. This ancillary objective is linked to the general objective of economic 
and social sustainability. 

Another  ancillary  objective  is  to  attract  fisheries  managers',  the  sector's,  and  scientists'  interest 
towards  better  understanding  of  this  stock,  so  that  the  data  base  and  analysis  for  both 
management and scientific advice are steadily improved. 

Attaining  these  operational  objectives  will  represent  steps  towards  attaining  the  general 
objective.  

The  operational  objectives  are  consistent  with  the  PelRACs  initiative  outlined  above,  and  are 
considered  realistic.  As  the  sub-objectives  meet  current  harvesting  conditions,  timely 
implementation  of  the  initiative  in  practice  will  be  feasible  without  the  need  to  resort  to 
transitory measures. 

4. 

POLICY OPTIONS 

The Commission has considered the following options: 

Option  1  implies  that  the  current  system  of  managing  the  stock  by  setting  annual  Total 
Allowable  Catch  (TAC)  according  to  available  scientific  information  on  the  stock  and  ad  hoc 
political considerations remains unchanged.  

Under  current  regime,  the  stock  is  managed  by  means  of  a  precautionary  TAC  that  in  recent 
years  has  been  set  at  around  150,000t,  according  to  historical  data.  This  TAC  is  not  based  on 
recent analytical assessment or long-term forecast.  

29 
30 
31 

www.un.org/esa/sustdev/documents/WSSD_POI_PD/English/POIToc.htm 
www.cc.cec/home/dgserv/sg/sgvista/i/sgv 
See Roel/Oliveira, Harvest control rules for the Western horse mackerel (Trachurus trachurus) stock given 
paucity of fishery-independent data, ICES Journal of Marine Science, 661, 667. 

EN 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Option 2 is based on the consideration that, given the absence of conclusive information on the 
status of the stock, freezing or gradually reducing the directed fishery on Western horse mackerel 
might  be  a  good  way  to  protect  the  stock  against  decline.  This  could  be  achieved  by  either  a 
yearly  TAC-setting  following  a  specific  understanding  of  precautionary  approach  or  by 
introducing a legal instrument for the stock (management plan). 

Option 3 is about proposing a legal management instrument for the stock, according to available 
conservation reference points and longer-term sustainability considerations. Several sub-options 
of  a  management  plan  relating  to  different  biological  indicators  and  other  implementation 
elements were evaluated. 

4.1. 

Description of the options 

4.1.1.  Option 1 - No policy change 

Under  present  conditions,  there  is  no  quantitative  legal  basis  establishing  guidelines  or 
restrictions on the annual setting of fishing opportunities concerning the stock of Western horse 
mackerel. 
Currently,  the  Total  Allowable  Catch  (TAC)  for  a  species  is  adjusted  every  year  according  to 
analytical  scientific  assessment  based  on  traditionally  used  conservation  reference  points,  like 
stock  spawning  biomass  (SSB)  levels  and  fishing  mortality  (F).  The  Western  horse  mackerel 
stock is one of the best studied horse mackerel stocks in the world, yet, due to the nature of the 
stock, there are large gaps in the information base. Because SSB, recruitment and F cannot be 
assessed so far, a reliable analytical assessment for the stock is not available. Because of that, a 
precautionary approach based on historical data rather than recent scientific evidence has been 
applied. 

Retaining  this  process  would  mean  that  annual  TAC  decisions  are  taken  on  the  basis  of 
incomplete  stock  information  and  ad-hoc  considerations  of  economic  and  social  factors  at  the 
political  level.  Experience  has  shown  that  these  circumstances  often  lead  to  stock  overfishing 
and  ineffectual  or  late  harvest  restrictions.  The  case  of  the  Atlantic  horse  mackerel  shows  this 
pattern in rather drastic form up until the last couple of years (see chapter 2.3 on driving forces). 

In  the  last  decision  taken  on  this  species,  in  December  2008,  the  only  solution  that  could  be 
found  to  the  different  TAC-areas  of  horse  mackerel  was  a  "roll-over"  of  the  previous  TAC-
levels,  without  showing  due  regard  to  the  scientific  advice.  However,  Member  States  and 
Commission declared that they were seeking to agree on TAC areas in line with scientific advice 
on  the  stock  boundaries,  and  then  develop  the  TAC  according  to  the  management  plan  that 
Commission has committed to present. 

4.1.2.  Option 2 - Freezing or gradually reducing the directed fishery 

Traditionally,  a  scientific  assessment  has  been  based  on  the  conservation  reference  points  for 
biomass and fishing mortality rate. In the absence of a reference point for fishing mortality rate, 
no analytical assessment is available for the Western horse mackerel, and scientists consider the 
state of the stock as unknown. 

Given  the  absence  of  conclusive  information  on  the  state  of  the  stock,  one  option  might  be  to 
freeze  or  gradually  reduce  the  directed  fishery  of  Western  horse  mackerel.  However, 
traditionally  used  reference  points  are  not  the  only  way  to  evaluate  the  state  of  the  stock. 
Regulation  2371/2002  (Article  3  (k))  describes  'conservation  reference  points'  according  to 
which current scientific assessment is made as "values of fish stock population parameters (such 
as biomass or fishing mortality rate) used in fisheries management, for example with respect to 
an acceptable level of biological risk or a desired level of yield." In case of the horse mackerel, 

EN 

   EN 

 
the egg surveys have been carried out for decades, and the results of such surveys produce useful 
and  reliable  information  about  the  stock.  Among  other  things  they  are  useful  for  estimating 
spawning stock biomass and trends over time and therefore can be used to assess one important 
biological parameter for the stock.  

The Commission follows the policy line that where there are biological indicators available that 
hint  on  the  stock  development,  a  management  measure  should  take  this  into  account,  and 
provide, if circumstances as a whole are conducive, for adequate catch adjustments. These would 
be possible catch increases in times of positive trends and catch decreases in times of negative 
trends.  Such  a  path  is  more  closely  linked  to  sustainable  use  of  resources  than  freezing  or 
decreasing the  fishing pressure while waiting for a  stock  assessment.  In  other  words,  the  mere 
fact of data poor situations should not prevent the Commission from presenting a management 
plan  that  qualifies  as  serving  a  more  sustainable  stock  exploitation,  based  on  information  that 
feeds  into  stock  assessment  but  was  not  suitable  so  far  to  provide  a  reliable  and  conclusive 
assessment based on standard reference points. 

In  light  of  the  above,  freezing  or  gradually  reducing  the  directed  fishery  on  Western  horse 
mackerel  as  a  precautionary  approach  in  the  absence  of  analytical  assessment  based  on  F  and 
SSB  and  without  taking  into  account  other  available  sources  of  information  about  the  stock, 
would result not only in lowering the TACs without clear gain for the state of the stock but also 
in purposely limiting our knowledge about the stock. 

Due  to  the  lack  of  predictive  power  in  current  assessment,  it  is  necessary  to  seek  and  apply 
alternative ways to effectively manage the stock. This is why option 2 has been rejected by DG 
MARE and will not be further pursued.  

4.1.3.  Option 3 – Management plan 

The multi-annual approach to fisheries management is one of the key pillars of the current CFP, 
as  it  supports  sustainable  exploitation32.  For  the  stock  of  Western  horse  mackerel,  the  sector 
representatives have argued for such an approach, given that biological indicators are available 
and given the economic importance of this stock. Therefore, the lack of a full stock assessment 
should not prevent the Community from taking action to ensure the sustainable exploitation of 
horse mackerel. 

4.1.3.1.  Sub-option 1- Effort Regulation 

One  possible  management  tool  would  be  effort  administration,  which  is  the  limitation  of  the 
activity  (production  "input")  of  the  vessels  concerned  by  the  fishery.  Effort  regulation  has  its 
strength in mixed and seasonally stretched fisheries, where the management by output regulation 
(TAC&Quota)  cannot  prevent  high  discards  or  black  landings.  In  addition,  effort  reduction  is 
used  in  order  to  promote  capacity  reduction  over  time,  being  a  tool  that  can  lead  to  spare 
capacity. The characteristics of the horse mackerel fishery are such that effort management is not 
the  preferable  instrument:  The  fishery  is  clean  in  the  sense  that  schools  of  the  one  species  are 
being detected and targeted. This does not mean that there are no discards, but those are mostly 
due  to  highgrading  rather  than  giving  away  unwanted  or  undersized  parts  of  the  catch 
composition (see below). Large parts of the fishery are controlled by very big vessels, which are 
extremely  versatile  during  the  year  and  during  the  fishing  trip  and  do  not  have  technical 
restrictions in their range of operation. Trying to restrict the activity of those vessels with a view 
to  influence  on  a  minor  component  of  their  landings'  profile,  would  produce  major  practical 
problems, and might not be effective at all. In addition, landings' control targeting the discharge 

32 

Council Regulation 2371/2002 recital 6. 

EN 

   EN 

 
                                                 
of these large vessels is more efficient than landings control in a mixed fishery characterised by a 
multitude of small vessels (see control part below). Furthermore, the small pelagic fish sector has 
so  far  not  been  among  the  sectors  that  show  particularly  worrying  shortcomings  in  terms  of 
coping  with  overcapacity.  Finally,  the  sector  itself,  represented  in  the  pelagic  RAC,  does  not 
favour effort restrictions. 

Therefore, effort regulation is not considered the right tool for long term management. 

4.1.3.2.  Sub-option 2 – Regulation by technical measures 

Fishing for horse mackerel is technically regulated by Regulation 850/98. A minimum  landing 
size  is  set  at  15  cm.  Grading  equipment  on  board  is  only  allowed  under  specific  processing 
circumstances.  These  technical  provisions  have  been  maintained  in  the  Commission's  proposal 
for a successor regulation.33 A specific question has arisen in recent years whether the increasing 
fishery on juvenile fish (years 1 to 3) should be restricted, e.g. by prohibited areas. Since 2005, 
however, the portion of juvenile fish from the total fish caught has decreased to former levels. In 
view  of  this  stabilisation,  no  specific  measures  seem  necessary  at  the  start  of  long-term 
management.  Such  measures  might  however  be  added  to  the  long-term  management  once  the 
fishing patterns change. 

4.1.3.3.  Sub-option 3 – Regulation by assigning a proportion of the Spawning stock to harvest 

One  strategy  for  setting  TACs  could  consist  in  earmarking  a  proportion  of  the  estimated 
spawning stock size as annual fishing opportunity. Such an approach has been developed as one 
harvest  strategy  among  the  scientific  options  presented  to  the  pelagic  RAC34.  The  major 
shortcoming  of  this  approach  is  the  poor  estimation  of  the  size  of  the  spawning  stock.  In  case 
that  larger  variation  would  occur  to  this  estimate,  due  to  an  increased  provision  or  improved 
analysis  of  data,  the  implicit  aim  of  this  strategy  -  having  a  rather  constant  development  of 
fishing opportunities - would be adversely affected. 

4.1.3.4.  Sub-option 4 - Regulation by fixing the fishing opportunities following the result trend 

of egg surveys 

The main fishery-independent biological information on the Western horse mackerel is the egg 
abundance according to the triennial international egg survey on mackerel and horse mackerel. 
Egg  survey  results  are  used  by  scientists  for  estimating  the  size  of  spawning  stocks.  This  is 
particularly the case for mackerel, but also for example for anchovy in the Bay of Biscay and for 
some stocks of cod and plaice. Like in the case of anchovy, there exists for horse mackerel no 
direct  calculation  link  between  the  seasonal  egg  production  per  female  and  the  perceived  total 
egg production. However, models based on daily egg production have been developed in order to 
provide  and  estimate  of  the  spawning  size  in  such  cases,  and  in  any  case  the  trend  in  the  egg 
abundance  serves  as  an  indicator  of  the  development  of  the  stock  size,  assuming  that  a  larger 
stock  would  on  average  produce  more  eggs  than  a  smaller  stock.  Therefore,  scientific  advice 
suggests that the biological information from egg surveys can be used, in the absence of a full 
stock  assessment,  as  biological  indicator  for  the  stock  health  and  serve  thus  as  a  reference  for 
stock management. 

The surveys from the last twenty years provided the following results (index egg production): 

1983: 513,1; 

33 

34 

Art.  4  and  11  of  the  Commission  proposal  for  a  Council  Regulation  for  the  conservation  of  fisheries 
resources through technical measures, COM/2008/324 final. 
Roel/Oliveira., op.cit., 664 

EN 

   EN 

 
                                                 
1989: 1762,1;  

1992: 1712,1;  

1995: 1264,5;  

1998: 1135,7;  

2001: 820,8;  

2004; 889;  

2007: 1427. 

The approach is, in summary, innovative in the sense that management rules would be based on 
a biological indicator short of a full stock assessment, while it would be a classical approach in 
the sense that it tries to steer away decision on fishing opportunities from ad hoc considerations 
to  a  science-based  planning.  The  long-term  management  will  be  based  on  the  grounds  of  a 
specific biological parameter, egg abundance, which becomes a conservation reference point for 
the stock.  

Using this approach, attaining the objectives discussed before can be ensured by the following 
orientations:  

(a) 

(b) 

(c) 

In  the  absence  of  positive  biomass  trends  indicated  by  increased  egg  production,  the 
overall catch limit should be kept within a limit that used to be defined as the maximum 
in  the  absence  ob  strong  recruitment  to  the  stock.  This  level  has  been  scientifically 
established  by  the  scientific  agencies  by  a  yield  per  recruit  analysis  that  excluded  the 
extraordinary strong year class of the year 198235; 

If there are positive biomass trends indicated by increased egg production, the overall 
catch limit should be increased in function of this indicator; 

Such  increase  in  the  overall  catch  limit  should  be  capped  in  order  to  cater  for  the 
uncertainty  of  the  indicator,  in  particular  for  the  fact  that  the  underlying  scientific 
surveys are only undertaken every three years, and for the fact that the relation between 
increased egg production and increased recruitment is not well known. 

The following themes were identified, during the science/stakeholder consultations, as potential 
points for the effective management plan: 

•  TAC to encompass the entire spatial distribution of the stock; 

•  Consideration of measures to regulate fishing mortality separately for juveniles and adults; 

•  Optimal harvesting of most profitable size grades or other product types; 

•  Ability to adjust management to take advantage of periods of elevated productivity; 

•  Stability in TAC vs. large increases/decreases; 

•  Ability to carryover unused quota to the following year. 

Initially, three alternative strategies for managing the Western horse mackerel stock with a TAC 
with the objective of long-term stable yields, and with a low risk to driving the SSB below the 
level  estimated  for  the  stock  in  1982  were  evaluated  by  STECF  (2006).  Final  simulations 

35 

ICES. Report of the working group on the assessment of mackerel, horse mackerel, sardine and anchovy, 
CM 2007/ACFM:31, p. 23. 

EN 

   EN 

 
                                                 
included only two HCR scenarios, which were then further evaluated with 1000 iterations over a 
range of test values. Summary statistics on size and variability of yield and risk were calculated 
for each simulation before the informed decision on the most viable option was made. ICES has 
endorsed the approach originating from scientific advice to the PelRAC. 

4.1.3.5.  What provision should be made if the stock falls below the minimum level 

Scientific advice indicates a risk to reproduction of the stock if the spawning stock size should 
fall below the size estimated for 1982. This size no longer is a formal reference point Blim used 
by ICES or STECF, due to the method used at the time being based on false assumptions on the 
spawning behaviour36, but can be considered as a proxy, and has lead to ICES recalculating in 
2008 the series of SSB based on more recent knowledge37. 

The  long-term  plan  should  not  aspire  to  offer  a  mathematically  exact  solution  for  this  risk, 
because the evolution of the biomass is not known with full certainty38. Three mechanisms are 
being considered appropriate to deal with this risk:  

•  First, the very low risk, as shown by scientific modelling, of this case happening during the 

first three-year term of the plan, and beyond.  

•  Then, the obligation to seek a scientific evaluation of the plan's effectiveness after six years of 

application39. 

•  Finally, the recurrent legislative option of adapting the biological reference point to improved 
scientific knowledge indicating that following the method no longer provides for sustainable 
exploitation. 

4.1.3.6.  Additional provisions concerning control and discard accounting 

Recurrent  problems  of  long-term  management  are  the  knowledge  about  and  significance  of 
discards of fish, and the enforcement of the harvest rules established. 

4.1.3.6.1 Discards 

W1ile it has been scientifically confirmed that discards of younger fish has decreased over time 
due  to  the  sector  having  developed  a  market  for  young  fish,  discards  of  horse  mackerel  might 
still be high from time to time, particularly in view of its low value compared to other species. 

36 
37 

38 

39 

See ICES, WGMHSA 2007, loc.cit., p. 283. 
See  Roel/Oliveira,  loc.cit.,  p.  664.  The  1982  stock  size  has  always  been  difficult  to  establish,  but  an 
approximation has been made. The stock is characterised by infrequent, extremely large recruitments. As 
only a short time series of data are available, it is not possible to quantify stock-recruit relationships, but 
one  may  make  the  precautionary  assumption  that  the  likelihood  of  a  strong  year  class  appearing  would 
decline if stock size were to fall lower than the stock size at which the only such event has been observed. 
The basis for the level of Bpa is the stock size in 1983 (as estimated by an egg survey and an assessment), 
which is used as a proxy for the stock size present in 1982; that which produced the strong 1982 year class. 
The egg survey biomass estimate was 530,000 t, another model estimated an SSB in 1982 of 930,000t, and 
a model retained estimated 500,000t. The most recent scientific advice estimates 1,4 million tonnes as SSB 
1982. 
See the different estimates according to different models ranging from 1,9 to 3,4 million tonnes for 2007. 
ICES, WGMHSA 2007, loc.cit., p. 281. 
ICES' assessment assumes an unacceptable risk after 40 years, based on the scientific model presented by 
an expert group that advised the pelagic RAC. 

EN 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Scientific survey data confirms, for example, that horse mackerel is on place three of the most 
discarded species in the Dutch pelagic freezer trawler fleet40. 

In the context of yearly agreements with Northern coastal states, an international working group 
of control experts for international pelagic fisheries has discussed avenues of discard reduction 
since 2005. Understanding was reached that any regulatory attempt would need to entail a large 
amount  of  observer  coverage  in  order  to  be  meaningful.  A  voluntary  arrangement  with  the 
industry has not come to light, while some evidence suggests that large pelagic vessels having 
observers on board fish less days and land more fish than those without observers. 

The Commission has proposed a general monitoring obligation concerning discards with its new 
proposal  for  a  Control  Regulation  (Articles  41  and  42  of  he  proposal,  COM(2008)721  final). 
With  regard  to  specific  fisheries,  the  Commission  decided  not  to  pursue  the  monitoring  and 
reduction of discards with a regulatory fishery-by-fishery approach, but rather to come up with a 
general policy on this issue. For this reason, a focussed discard-prevention policy covering horse 
mackerel would not be an appropriate legislative measure at this stage. 

Nevertheless,  the  harvest  rule  to  be  applied  to  the  Western  horse  mackerel  should  cover  all 
catches  from  the  fishery,  including  discards.  Scientists  have  warned  that  their  models  on 
calculating  risk  probabilities  for  stock  decline  are  based  on  all  catches  being  accounted  for.  In 
order to cater for this, as was the case in the recent Commission proposal for amending the cod 
recovery plan41, the TAC resulting from the method as established in the long-term plan should 
be reduced by the fishing mortality estimated to be attributable to discarding. 

4.1.3.6.2 Control 

Unaccounted TAC overshooting has been considered substantial during the presence of the very 
large year class 1982. Since its disappearance, the problem is less important, but still a threat to 
the good functioning of any management plan. 

The  major  landings  of  pelagic  species  coming  from  international  fisheries,  including  horse 
mackerel,  are  the  subject  of  regular  controls  and  expert  discussion  with  neighbouring  states. 
Indeed,  yearly  agreements  with  the  Coastal  states  (e.g.  Annex  XII  of  the  Agreed  Record  of 
Conclusions of Fisheries Consultations between Norway and the European Community for 2009) 
contain  standards  for  fish  weighing  and  landings'  inspection,  concerning  any  landing  of  more 
than  10  tonnes.  Yearly  progress  reports  give  account  of  inspection  experience,  the  number  of 
infringements detected, avenues for better regulation etc. 

Estimates  of  Inspection  costs  have  been  made  through  a  study  commissioned  by  the  European 
Commission  at  the  occasion  of  assessing  the  impact  of  a  general  reform  of  the  control 
legislation.  Average  data  from  2004  to  2006  suggest  that  an  inspection  on  land  in  the  Atlantic 
region might cost about 515 EUR, while an inspection at sea 8.976 EUR42. 

With a view to translate the agreements found with Coastal States into Community legislation, 
Regulation (EC) No. 1542/200743 establishes procedures for weighing and labelling procedures 
for  herring,  mackerel  and  horse  mackerel,  and  sets  inspection  benchmarks  for  landings 

40 

41 
42 

43 

See  Borges  et.al., What  do  pelagic  freezer-trawlers  discard?,  ICES  Journal  of  Marine Science  (65), page 
605.  
COM(2008)162 final of April 4, 2008. 
MRAG et.al., study for the Impact Assessment of a proposal to reform and modernise the control system 
applicable to the Common Fisheries Policy; related tender FISH/2006/09. 
This  Commission  Regulation  was  preceded  by  similar  technical  regulations  in  the  annual  TAC&Quota 
Regulation, see Council Regulation (EC) No 13/2005. 

EN 

   EN 

 
                                                 
exceeding 10 tonnes, notably an obligation o cover 10% of landing and 15% of fish quantity with 
extensive inspections. 

With  the  envisaged  management  plan,  the  Commission  would  want  to  build  on  the  tighter 
control framework achieved  with this Regulation concerning  the monitoring  of  landings.  More 
rigorous  control  benchmarks  or  landing  rules  should  not  be  introduced  before  results  of  this 
control  framework  have  been  confirmed  and  analysed  covering  some  years  of  experience. 
However, this specific control framework should be expanded in spatial scope so that all areas 
where Atlantic horse mackerel is caught would be covered. 

As  an  easily  accessible  complementary  control  instrument,  special  fishing  permits  are  being 
considered in order to ensure the plan's working in practice. 

With  regard  to  the  compliance  commitment,  the  sector  has  proposed  to  participate  in  observer 
schemes  and  wants  the  TAC  to  take  account  of  overshooting.  An  indirect  incentive  for  good 
observer coverage would be a harvest rule that integrates the occurrence of discards even when 
an estimation of discards could not be made by scientist, e.g. due to insufficient fleet sampling.  

4.1.3.7.  Possible limits on TAC variations 

For reasons of business planning in the context of supply and demand, the catching industry has 
a  strong  interest  in  predictability  and  stability  in  the  determination  of  their  annual  fishing 
possibilities.  Accordingly,  it  was  analysed  whether  a  constraint  of  +/-15%  on  annual  TAC 
fluctuation should apply.  

5. 

5.1. 

ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS 

Economic and social impact 

It  is  not  possible  to  forecast  economic  impacts  in  absolute  terms.  Market  prices  for  horse 
mackerel can fluctuate widely in response to variations in demand. However, the plan should, by 
contributing  to  the  stability  of  horse  mackerel  supplies,  also  contribute  to  the  stability  of  the 
horse mackerel fishing industry and its markets. 

Most  of  the  catches  of  Western  horse  mackerel  are  taken  by  vessels  engaging  in  a  variety  of 
fishing activities on various stocks and whose dependence on this stock is limited. Therefore the 
direct  impact  of  improved  long-term  management  of  this  stock  will  cover  only  a  part  of  the 
economic activity of these vessels. 

One  significant  impact  of  option  3  would  be  the  absolute  stability  in  expectations  concerning 
fishing opportunities. Predictability of fishing opportunities is a key demand of the sector. With a 
TAC-setting that applies a method to the identical data for three consecutive years (period from 
one egg survey to the next), the TAC can be expected to be stable during that period. 

A basic simulation of the economic impact of options 1 and 3 has been calculated by DG MARE 
as  follows,  based  on  economic  data  provided  regularly  by  Member  States.  The  simulation 
concerns the profit of the fleet segments identified above.  

The assumptions for option 1 (status quo scenario) are built on continuous TACs at 167,920t, as 
is currently the case. The assumptions for option 3 are built on a TAC increase in 2009 towards 
179,730t,  afterwards  stable,  based  on  a  simple  calculation  following  the  management  plan's 
harvest control rules and including catch area VIIIc. The assumptions for the Spanish fleets here 
are kept steady, given that they mostly catch in area VIIIc and would thus not experience a major 
effect from the reorganisation of TAC areas. 

The following qualifications are to be made concerning the use of this table: 

EN 

   EN 

 
–  Economic  impacts  were  assesses  using  a  bio-economic  model  approved  and  used  by  the 
STECF to assess TAC/quota proposals (annual) and long term management plans. The model 
builds on a historic baseline of economic and catch data and makes predictions of economic 
performance  based  on  future  catch  opportunities  and  subsequent  changes  in  costs  and 
earnings of fleet segments; 

–  While the baseline for comparison is the year 2006, it should be noted that years prior to 2006 
have been taken into account in the simulation of the options, thus resulting in lower values 
for the coming years, as compared to the well-performing year 2006; 

–  profits will likely have declined during the first half of 2008 due to the extraordinary rise in 

fuel price no built into the calculation model; 

–  The profits for the German fleet appear high compared to figures extracted for similar fleets in 
other  Member  States.  A  verification  of  data  correctness  for  the  purpose  of  this  Impact 
Assessment is not possible, because the Commission does not have continuous access to the 
data  pool  that  serves  as  bases  for  running  economic  analysis.  However,  while  the  absolute 
figures might be misleading, the calculation might still be useful in relative terms, that means 
comparing the outcomes of options 1 and 3. 

Table 8 - Simulation of effects on the profit for selected fleet segments 

€ million 
Profit 
Profit 
Profit 
Profit 
Profit 
Profit 

NL >40m 
IRE >40m 
IRE 24-40m 
GER >40m 
UK >40m 
ESP 

Source: EC/STECF 

Baseline

OPTION 1

OPTION 3 

Profit 2006

Average (2007-09)

Average (2007-09)

6.42
3.66
4.1
57.76
44.34
1.5

7.61
1.55
9.17
53.59
31.98
1.10

7.77
1.69
9.23
53.72
31.98
1.10

In  overall  terms,  the  options  compared  do  not  show  significantly  different  impacts.  The  lower 
future performance  compared to 2006  is due to 2006 being a high-performing year in the data 
series. Option 3 (management plan) shows a very modest profit increase for some fleet segments, 
compared to option 1 (baseline scenario). 

Given  the  data  available,  social  effects  of  options  1  and  3  cannot  be  decoupled  from  their 
economic impacts and are likely to go in line with them, showing that impacts in both cases do 
not differ significantly. 

Since  the  management  plan  would  not  introduce  new  procedures,  no  significant  impact  on 
administrative  burden  would  take  place  either  (see  for  the  control  special  chapter  below). 
Moreover, adoption of a long-term plan with clear sustainability criteria may allow the fishery to 
qualify for certification under independent "eco-label" criteria. This could be helpful in product 
marketing terms, and in improving the perception of the sector as a responsible industry. 

5.2. 

Environmental impacts 

It  is  not  normally  possible  to  predict  long-term  trends  in  fisheries  productivity.  Changes  in 
oceanic climate including global warming,  and  currently unexplained medium-term changes in 
recruitment  can  lead  to  significant  trends  in  productivity.  However,  it  is  known  that  keeping 
fisheries impacts at levels no higher than those needed to take high yields improves the stability 
of the stock and improves the robustness of the fishery to adverse environmental effects. In fact, 
there is no possibility to achieve good status of marine waters unless commercial stocks are in 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
good shape. The conservation of commercial stocks therefore is also an environmental concern. 
Avoiding  that  stocks  become  overfished  is  relevant  for  the  goals  of  the  Marine  Strategy 
Framework Directive 2008/56/EC which entered into force in summer 2008. 

However,  the  current  management  system  as  it  applies  in  the  EU  is  not  adequate  to  the  horse 
mackerel stock. The lack of an analytical assessment or forecast precludes the implementation of 
the implicit EU management strategy, which is to set TAC one year ahead, based on forecasted 
population size in an intermediate year, from an assessment from the same year. Given that egg 
surveys for horse mackerel are carried out every third year, setting TACs should reflect that and 
also  happen  in  3-yearly  intervals.  Implementing  a  plan  which  will  lead  to  catch  limitations 
according  to  biological  indicators  on  the  stock  abundance  based  on  thorough  scientific 
assessment will improve the state of the stock and ensure sustainability of the fishery. 

The main arguments against the current regime (Option 1) are as follows:  

•  no full scientific assessment being available for the stock;  

•  TACs  set  annually  based  on  ad-hoc  considerations  of  economic  and  social  factors  at  the 

political level rather than environmental indicators and parameters; 

•  Risk of stock overfishing and even collapse.  

Moreover, retaining current management of the stock means that: 

•  conditions for sustainable long term yield for the stock are not provided for; 

•  TAC  is  being  limited  every  year  without  any  gain  or  long-term  sustainable  benefit  for  the 

stock; 

•  possible additional catches to those covered by the TAC are taking place; 

•  target  fisheries  will  not  proceed  with  minimum  ecological  impact  (with  the  industry  being 

against the current regime for not reflecting the actual state of the stock).  

The main arguments in favour of multi-annual management based on egg survey results (Option 
3) are as follows:  
•  tuning data are restricted to one point estimate of SSB every third year;  
•  noise  (error)  in  the  SSB  data  carried  over  to  the  assessments  made  between  survey  years  is 

reduced; and  

•  low  recruitment  variability  (besides  the  infrequent  occurrence  of  exceptionally  large  year 
classes) and the absence of clear indication of changes in weight and/or maturity over time. 

Moreover, such long-term management of the stock would include the provisions to ensure that: 

•  conditions for sustainable long term yield for the stock are provided for; 

•  acceptable year to year stability in the TAC is achieved; unified management regime across 

all areas where the stock is distributed is achieved; 

•  there  are  not  additional  catches  to  those  covered  by  the  TAC,  achieved  by  control 

programmes having to focus on long-term management plans; 

•  target fisheries will proceed with minimum ecological impact (with the industry agreeing to 
partake  in  studies  to  demonstrate  that  there  are  no  additional  catches  above  the  level  of  the 
TAC as well as in studies to quantify the levels of non-target by-catch). 

EN 

   EN 

 
5.3. 

Impacts on international relations 

The  stock  is  distributed  almost  wholly  within  EC  waters  and  is  not  subject  to  unregulated 
exploitation by third-country vessels. Catches and fish stock management will not be affected by 
such third-country activities. 

The  Faroese  and  Norway  participate  in  the  exploitation  of  this  stock  by  exchanging  fishing 
opportunities  with  the  Union  within  the  yearly  TAC.  A  better  management  of  the  TAC  will 
possibly be taken up in the negotiations with Norway, which has an interest in the stock in its 
own waters, with a view to manage the stock jointly according to criteria that support sustainable 
exploitation.  

In  addition,  in  the  recent  past,  some  transfers  of  quota  have  been  made  from  the  EC-managed 
TAC to the Faroe Islands as part of the annual bilateral exchange of fishing possibilities. Setting 
the TAC in a multi-annual framework will allow more predictability in the fishing opportunities 
available for exchange with third countries. In general, it can be assumed that the importance of 
this stock increases when the importance of other stocks which are used to carry out exchanges 
of  fishing  opportunities  with  Northern  States  decreases,  like  it  is  currently  the  case  with  bleu 
whiting. 

5.4. 

Impact summary 

Option 1: continue current 
management 

Option 3: implement management 
plan 

Positive 
impacts 

No change, current rules allow 
fishing at unchanged levels. 

Negative 
impacts 

Management of stock keeps being 
based on poor scientific assessment 
and ad hoc decisions leading to long-
term sustainability not assured as an 
objective. 

Direct impacts  Management plan based on current 

poor assessment and ad hoc 
decisions not efficient enough to 
achieve long-term stock 
sustainability. A risk of stock going 
back to unsafe levels. 

Negative economic, social and 
environmental impacts due to the 
possible stock reduction to unsafe 
levels and greatly reduced fishing 
opportunities in the long-term. 

Indirect 
impacts 

Management of stock based on 
improved scientific assessment, stock 
long-term sustainability achieved as 
objective. Possible short-term 
increase or decrease in TAC. 

Rules are changed leading to possible 
short-term reduction in direct Western 
horse mackerel fishing. 

Improved assessment and well 
informed decisions likely to result in 
a sustainable and stable fishery in the 
long term. 

Positive economic, social and 
environmental impacts due to 
improved efficiency of management 
plan leading to long-term 
sustainability of the stock and 
improved fishing opportunities. 

Economic 

Short-term: No change in catches 

Short-term: Possible small increase or 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
impacts 

and profits due to lack of assessment.

Social  

impacts 

Environmental 
impacts 

Long-term: Possible negative 
impacts due to increased risk of 
fishing above safe levels. This would 
result in loss of profitability of the 
fishing industry. 

Short-term: No change. 

Long-term: Possible stock collapse 
following TAC allocations based on 
inadequate stock assessment 
resulting in possible decline of 
employment in the sector. 

Short-term: Possible negative impact 
on the conservation of species due to 
insufficient scientific assessment and 
applying ad hoc decisions leading to 
fishing at unsafe levels.  

Long-term: Greater risk of possible 
decrease in stock biomass to unsafe 
levels, thus adverse effect on 
biodiversity. 

decrease in catches resulting in small 
changes in sector's profitability. 

Long-term: Positive impacts due to 
achieving long-term stock stability 
based on better scientific assessment. 
Improved profitability of the industry. 

Short-term: No negative impact on 
employment. 

Long-term: Improved scientific 
assessment of the stock leads to better 
management of resources, a stable 
stock and maintained employment in 
the sector. 

Short-term: Gradual improvement in 
stock management reducing risk of 
fishing above safe levels.  

Long-term: Improvement in the stock 
assessment leading to better 
management of stocks resulting in 
less negative impact of fishing on the 
biodiversity. 

6. 

6.1. 

COMPARING THE OPTIONS 

Should a long-term plan be implemented? 

Various options  have been  considered internally by scientific agencies.  The resulting scientific 
advice,  previous  experience  with  the  mackerel  stocks,  and  stakeholder  contributions  agree  that 
introducing a long-term management to the stock of Western horse mackerel, based on TAC set 
every  3  years  according  to  results  of  egg  survey  is  appropriate  and  beneficial.  DG  MARE 
services  agree,  and  further  consider  that  this  is  consistent  with  the  objectives  of  the  Common 
Fisheries  Policy  and  the  Johannesburg  World  Summit  on  Sustainable  Development.  The 
proposal includes provision to revise fishing mortality rates if scientific advice indicates that this 
is needed, and at intervals of no less than three years. 

The choice to implement such a plan can be compared with continuing under present conditions. 

Option 1 : Annual ad-hoc decision making 

Qualitative description 

Quantitative description 

Economic impact 

Short-term costs to relevant 
enterprises 

Unknown, not predictable. Likely 
pressure to set fishing 
opportunities above sustainable 

Ad hoc decisions affecting entire 
catches from the stock. 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
Ad hoc decisions affecting long-
term productivity of the whole 
stock, i.e. up to ca. 60M€/yr. 

Long-term costs to relevant 
enterprises 

Social impact 

Environmental impact 

levels.  

Unknown, not predictable. Likely 
that pressure to set fishing 
opportunities above sustainable 
levels can result in stock depletion 
below maximum sustainable yield 
levels.  

Unknown, not predictable. 
Flexibility is retained at a decision-
making level. 

Unknown, not predictable. 
Pressures to increase catches in the 
short term tend to lead to stock 
depletions. 

TAC decisions under the CFP 
have been taken on average at 
about 40% above sustainable 
levels.  

Option 3 : Implementation of long-term plan 

Qualitative description 

Quantitative description 

Economic impact 

Short-term costs to relevant 
enterprises 

Long-term costs to relevant 
enterprises 

Social impact 

Environmental impact 

Short-term impacts can be 
mitigated by a limit on changes to 
TACs so long as stock levels 
remain good.  

Long-term costs should be kept at 
a low level by maintaining stocks 
and catches at high and stable 
levels. 

Not quantified, but should be 
low. 

By exploiting the stock at 
maximum sustainable yield, 
costs should be low and the 
economic resource rent kept at a 
high level, close to or higher 
than current values. 

The long-term plan should 
minimise short-term disruptions 
and ensure high and stable incomes 
and employment for the long-term. 

Maintenance of employment and 
incomes at close to current levels 
(in proportion to Western stock). 

The plan should lead to safe and 
near-optimal exploitation of the 
stock, with a small risk of stock 
collapse and including 
precautionary elements. 

Exploitation of the stock in 
conformity with the 
precautionary approach and 
MSY objectives in the 
Johannesburg Implementation 
Plan. 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
DG  MARE  considers  that  retaining  an  annual  decision-making  system  unconstrained  by 
considerations of sustainability would be a high-risk approach for the sector in the longer term. 
While  the  stock  has  not  yet  been  depleted  in  the  absence  of  a  long-term  plan,  conditions  may 
change rapidly (in this fish stock, or in others nearby) and it is consistent with the precautionary 
approach  to  implement  a  sound  management  practice  in  advance.  Moreover,  the  short-tem 
economic  impact  of  both  options  (1  and  3)  is  marginal  according  to  the  simulation.  Option  3 
(long-term  plan)  might  even  have  a  slightly  more  positive  effect  on  the  sector.  Given  that  the 
sector  concerned  is  favouring  a  long-term  approach,  DG  MARE  considers  the  stock  to  be  an 
ideal candidate for implementation of a management plan.  

6.2. 

Alternatives concerning the biological indicators to be retained 

Two  sets  of  biological  data  are  available  for  the  stock:  catch-at-age  data  supplied  by  some 
Member States and the results of the egg surveys carried out every three years. Taking the results 
of  the  egg  surveys  as  a  biological  indicator  that  guides  on  harvest  rules  has  been  considered 
useful  with  regard  to  sustainable  stock  management.  Catch  at  age  data  alone  do  not  easily 
translate  into  management  rules  without  a  stock  assessment.  The  estimates  of  SSB  are  very 
unsecure and have been subject to considerable change in the last ten years. The scientific bodies 
which  follow  the  stock  should  use  both,  catch  at  age  data  and  the  results  of  the  egg  survey  in 
order  to  better  understand  the  dynamics  of  the  stock.  Once  a  full  stock  assessment  will  be 
available, the management plan could easily step up to this higher level of scientific assurance. 

An  alternative  to  including  the  new  biological  indicator  would  be  to  perpetuate  the  current 
system to use just historical data as biological indicator for the stock. The TAC would be kept 
stable at a level that according to that data can be considered safe for the stock. This would not, 
however,  be  in  line  with  the  objective  of  establishing  a  management  approach  consistent  with 
MSY, since the latter requires the regime to be flexible and the adjustments being made as the 
status  or  trends  of  the  stock  indicate  being  appropriate.  Retaining  this  option  would  mean 
ignoring the possibility of a substantial increase of the stock thanks to a particularly strong year-
class, as seen in 1982. 

DG MARE favours the idea of incorporating the egg survey data into the stock assessment on 
the basis that this is the option most likely to help improve assessment of the stock and introduce 
management most appropriate to its optimal productive levels according to MSY and therefore is 
most  effective  in  environmental  and  long-term  economic  terms,  for  as  long  as  more  precise 
scientific assessments are not available.  

6.3.  What provision should be made if the stock should fall below the minimum level? 

As outlined in the descriptive part on option 3, the long-term plan involves a very low risk of the 
stock  falling  below  the  proxy  used  to  represent  a  minimum  stock  size.  The  very  fact  that  the 
management  will  be  based  on  indicators  rather  than  full  stock  knowledge  brings  with  it  the 
increased amount of uncertainty as to the reliability of this method and the future developments. 
As  the  risk  analysis  is  based  on  a  large  number  of  unknown  or  estimated  factors,  a  timely 
revision of the impact of the plan is foreseen, already after the second adaptation of the three-
year TAC.  

6.4.  What additional provisions should be included concerning control measures? 

The control environment and general direction on control policy has been described in chapter 
4.1.3.6.2.  Four  elements  of  an  enhanced  control  are  being  considered  for  legislative  action  in 
connection with the horse mackerel:  

•  The  specific  control  Regulation  mentioned  before  does  not  cover  the  stocks  off  the  Iberian 
Peninsula. However, the management plan would cover the full Western stock's distribution, 

EN 

   EN 

 
including the area North of Spain. With a view to have the same control standards applying to 
all  landing  sites  of  Western  horse  mackerel,  and  to  maintain  a  level  playing  field  in 
competitive terms, the Commission considers extending the scope of that Regulation towards 
the  areas  around  the  Iberian  Peninsula.  The  control  standards  are  already  established  in  the 
Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, Germany, the United Kingdom, France and Ireland, and the 
benchmarks are partly being already met. For Spain and Portugal, the extension of the control 
provisions would probably entail additional expenses. Those cannot be estimated, as it is not 
known  how  big  an  effort  would  be  necessary  in  order  to  arrive  at  the  agreed  control 
benchmarks. In particular, a large amount of landings in these Member States will be below 
the threshold of 10 tonnes; 

•  Special fishing permits, aiming at reducing area misreporting concerning the different stocks; 

•  Fixing a minimum amount of fish that would be deducted from the TAC in order to account 
for  discards  in  case  were  the  information  base is  not  sufficient  for  scientists  to  estimate  the 
discards  in  the  fishery.  Placed  within  the  harvest  rule,  such  a  provision  would  present  an 
incentive  for  better  observer  coverage  and  catch  reporting  to  scientific  bodies,  so  that  the 
amount of real discards can be deducted; 

•  A  provision  that  translates  into  the  horse  mackerel  fishery  and  accentuates  the  existing 
Member State obligations to carry out data cross-checks, without introducing new inspection 
benchmarks, as those are covered by the specific control regulation mentioned before. 

Detected  overshooting  of  the  TAC  and  subsequent  remedial  action  would  be  subject  to  the 
general  provisions  applicable  in  this  case,  including  deductions  from  next  year's  TAC  as  now 
proposed  by  the  new  Control  Regulation  (Chapter  III,  document  COM(2008)721  final).  The 
proposal would interlink with these provisions of the new Control Regulation.  

6.5. 

Should a limit be imposed on variations in TACs between years? 

The  Commission  is  committed  to  deliver  TACs  that  correspond  to  scientific  advice  but  at  the 
same  time  these  TACs  should  aim  at  stability  (not  too  large  a  variation  from  year  to  year)  in 
order to ensure stability in fisheries. Scientific advice allows for the possibility of limiting TAC 
variations  between  years  when  the  stock  biomass  is  above  Precautionary  Levels  (Bpa).  This 
limitation can be applied in an ad-hoc way, but its application could be formalised if the stock 
requires it. The question therefore arises whether a TAC limitation constraint should be built into 
option  3  on  developing  a  long-term  management  plan.  The  characteristics  of  such  a  constraint 
can be summarised as follows: 

Alternative (i) : Unlimited TAC variations 

Qualitative description 

Quantitative description 

Economic impact 

Unforeseen variations in survey 
efficiency can lead to large 
variations in scientific assessments 
and so to large variations in TAC. 
This leads to market instability. 

In the absence of constraints, 
unnecessary variations in TAC 
of up to 40% could be expected. 

Social impact 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
Environmental impact 

Large variations in TACs can 
cause large variations in earnings 
and hence in social instability and 
disruption. 

Stakeholders have strongly 
requested a constraint on TAC 
changes. 

Large changes in TACs can be 
necessary if stocks are depleted to 
minimum levels or are at risk of 
approaching them. However, if 
stocks are in good state such 
changes are not necessary for 
effective stock management. 

Not quantified. 

Scientific assessment indicates 
that large TAC changes are not 
needed when spawning stock 
size is above Bpa. 

Alternative (ii) : +/- 15% limit on TAC variations at high stock levels 

Qualitative description 

Quantitative description 

Economic impact 

Social impact 

Environmental impact 

Constraining TAC changes to 
small values can help stabilise 
markets and assist in the forward 
planning of enterprises catching 
and marketing fish. This leads to 
lower costs. 

The extent of cost reduction cannot 
be quantified. 

Scientific simulation studies 
have indicated that TAC changes 
can be limited to +/-15% so long 
as stocks are at a healthy level. 
However, a TAC variation 
constraint of +/- 15% generally 
reduces the long-term yield from 
the stock, as shown in scientific 
model calculations. 

Not quantified. 

Reduced variations in TACs can 
stabilise earnings and employment 
and hence avoid social instability 
and disruption. 

Stakeholders have strongly 
requested a constraint on TAC 
changes. 

Reduced changes in TACs can be 
consistent with good fish stock 
management so long as the 
possibility to make large changes if 
the stock falls below a warning 
level is retained. In such cases the 
stocks can still be exploited with 

Scientific assessment indicates 
that large TAC changes are not 
needed when spawning stock 
size is above Bpa.  

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
high and stable yields. 

As regards the management plan proposed by DG MARE, firstly, the harvest rule would provide 
a  TAC  which  is  constant  during  a  three-year-period,  thus  providing  highest  possible  stability 
within this period. Secondly, when egg survey data are available every three years, the variation 
in the TAC would be limited by two factors: Firstly, half of the TAC would be established by the 
baseline TAC of 150,000 tonnes considered as being sustainable in the short term by scientific 
agencies  since  several  years.  Secondly,  the  increase  and  decrease  in  the  TAC  coming  from  a 
variation of the other half of the TAC calculation formula, being based on the last recorded TAC, 
in function of the variation of the egg abundance would be limited as well in two ways: For the 
egg  abundance  indicator,  the  trend  would  be  taken  from  the  three  latest  egg  surveys,  thus 
covering a trend period of six years. And, the indicator would not fluctuate freely, but between 
the values 0 and 1.4, thus allowing the second half of the TAC calculation formula to fluctuate 
between 0 and 140% of the last recorded TAC. For instance, if the slope in the egg surveys is 
neither increasing nor decreasing, the factor to be applied will be 1, thus resulting in the second 
half of the TAC calculation being equal to the latest TAC reference. 

In  view  of  these  safeguards  ensuring  stability,  the  sector  has  not  asked  for  a  maximum  annual 
TAC fluctuation of 15%. Neither has it been retained within option 3. 

7. 

MONITORING AND EVALUATION 

The indicators of successful operation of this plan are that: 

1. 

biologically 

•  approximate spawning stock biomass has been maintained above its 1982 level and 
above a precautionary biomass level (about 130% of the 1982 spawning stock size). 

2. 

socio-economically 

•  catch levels have increased together with the biological indication of increased stock 

abundance, and vice versa; 

•  discarding and misreporting do not increase in a period of increased stock abundance 

and could be taken into account in the TAC-setting process. 

3. 

Further evaluation criteria are that:  

•  knowledge about the stock increases due to cooperation with the sector; 

•  uncertainties and bias in the fishery and biological system remain within the bounds 

of those tested; and 

•  assumptions made in the simulation testing phase are still valid. 

A harvest control rule designed in such a way and applied rigorously should safeguard against 
stock  depletion.  However,  as  simulations  are  based  on  past  stock  dynamics,  and  cannot 
guarantee future developments, it is a normal condition of most management plans with HCRs, 
that such HCRs be re-evaluated on a regular basis. 

The plan will be reviewed and re-evaluated on six yearly intervals to ensure that: 

1. 

SSB  has  been  maintained  above  SSB1982  and  above  a  precautionary  biomass  level 
(about 130% of the 1982 spawning stock size);  

EN 

   EN 

 
2. 

assumptions made in the simulation testing phase are still valid, and the impact of the 
rule  will  be  tested  again  using  a  model  that  takes  account  of  all  factors  known  and 
relevant at the time of evaluation. 

Should  advice  from  STECF  and  ICES  indicate  that  the  plan  is  not  reaching  its  objectives,  a 
review process will be initiated by DG MARE. 

Concerning  specific  control  issues,  cross-national  coordination  of  inspection  activities  is  to  be 
established by the new CFC agency. Additionally, the inspectors of DG MARE will follow-up 
and  review  the  implementation  of  fisheries  control  measures  by  Member  States  which 
obligatorily need to have a focus on the implementation of long-term plans. 

EN 

   EN 

 
ANNEX 1: DISTRIBUTION OF HORSE MACKEREL IN THE NORTHEAST-ATLANTIC. 

Stock definitions as used by the 2004 ICES WGMHSA (Anon., 2004). Note that the “Juvenile 
Area” is currently only defined for the Western Stock distribution area – juveniles do also occur 
in other areas (like in Div. VIId). Map source: GEBCO, polar projection, 200 m depth contour 
drawn. 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
ANNEX  2:  DRAFT  LONG-TERM  PLAN  FOR  THE  WESTERN  STOCK  OF  ATLANTIC  HORSE 

MACKEREL – CALCULATING A SLOPE FOR YEARS 1, 2 AND 3. 

The proposed Regulation would govern the setting of total allowable catches (TAC) according to 
a harvest control rule (HCR) that would allow high and stable catches over the long term.  

The TAC would be set according to the following rules: 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

The TAC would be set for 3 years following the year of the most recent survey; 

The TAC would be fixed at the set level for a period of 3 years; 

In the event of the TAC being overshot in any year in the fixed period, the overshoot (as 
estimated by ICES) would be subtracted from the following years TAC (this needs to be 
tested by simulation); 

In the event of a survey result not being available, ICES would be asked to advise on 
the state of the stock and on exploitation boundaries consistent with the Precautionary 
Approach. 

5. 

The TAC will be set according to the following rule: 

Where  TACref=150,000  t  and  sl  is  a  function  of  the  slope  of  the  most  recent  egg  abundance  estimates  from 
surveys 

The factor representing the slope (sl) would be calculated as shown in the following picture: 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
ANNEX  3:  REORGANISATION  OF  TAC  AREAS  AS  A  CONDITION  PRECEDENT  TO  A  LONG-TERM 

PLAN FOR THE WESTERN STOCK OF ATLANTIC HORSE MACKEREL. 

Existing management areas for TAC-setting 
Horse mackerel is being caught in coastal EU waters under three different annual TAC-rules44 
(three further TACs concern the Spanish and Portuguese Atlantic Islands): 

–  the EC-waters of the Norwegian Sea (division IIa) and the North Sea (sub-area IV): Northern 

area, 

–  the EC-waters West of Scotland and Ireland (VI and VIIbc), the Irish Sea (VIIa), the Celtic 
Sea (VIIf-k), the English Channel (VIIde), the Biscay (VIIIab and VIIIde), and international 
waters of the North Atlantic up to Greenland (Vb, XII and XIV): Western area, and 

–  Atlantic waters off Portugal and Spain (divisions IXa and VIIIc): Southern area. 

The TACs and catches are highest in the Western area, followed by the Southern area.  

The need for a review of the TAC-areas 

Advice  areas  do  not  coincide  with  TAC-areas:  ICES  advice  is  given  for  the  biological  stocks, 
which  are  the  discrete  sub-populations  of  the  species  concerned  that  show  a  degree  of 
reproductive  isolation  from  each  other  in  space  or  time  or  both.  The  distribution  of  biological 
stock is being described using ICES sub-areas and divisions. These areas do not coincide with 
the current TAC-areas (see Table below). 

The  biological  basis  for  the  new  stock  areas  has  been  developed  from  various  biological 
examinations  undertaken  in  the  last  decades45,  in  particular  by  a  large  EC-funded  project  in 
200346. The mismatch of areas con be summarised as shown in table 1: 

44 

45 

46 

Total  Allowable  Catch  in  weight  is  being  decided  by  the  Council  on  a  yearly  basis.  See  for  the  latest 
decisions the Council Regulation (EC) No 41/2008 of December 21, 2007. 
For  an  overview,  see:  ICES  report  2002  of  the  study  group  on  stock  identity  of  mackerel  and  horse 
mackerel, CM/H:4; ICES WGMHSA report 2003, CM 2003/ACFM:07; ICES WGMHSA report 2004, CM 
2004/ACFM:08; ICES WGMHSA report 2007, CM 2007/ACFM:31; Zimmermann, Biologie des Stöckers 
in  Nordsee  und  Nordostatlantik,  Inf.  Fischwirtsch.  Fischereiforsch.  46(4),  1999.  Abaunza  et  al.,  Horse 
mackerel: Identification of stocks, Fisheries Research 89(2008) 2, 101; idem et al, Stock identity of horse 
mackerel  (Trachurus  trachurus)  in  the  Northeast  Atlantic  and  Mediterranean  Sea:  Integrating  the  results 
from different stock identificaqtion approaches, Fisheries Research 89 (2008) 2, 196. 
HOMSIR  project  2000-2003,  A  multidisciplinary  approach  using  genetic  markers  and  biological  tags  in 
horse mackerel (trachurus trachurus) stock structure analysis, project no° QLK5-Ct1999-01438. 

EN 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Table 1 

ICES-division 
concerned 

Allocation to 
existing TAC-
area 

observation 

Biological 
as 
reviewed  by  ICES  and  ICES 
working groups 

Allocation  in  the  ICES-
advice 

VIIIc North and 
Northwest 
Spain 

Southern area 
(VIIIc, IXa)  

Inhabited  by  the  Western  stock, 
exchange  between  stocks  not 
specified 

Western  stock  (IIa,  IVa, 
Vb,  VI,  VIIa-c,  VIIe-k, 
VIIIa-e) 

VIId Eastern 
English 
Channel 

IIa Norwegian 
Sea and IVa 
Northern North 
Sea 

Western area 
(VI, VII, 
VIIIab, VIIIde, 
Vb, XII, XIV) 

Northern area 
(IIa, IV) 

IIIa Skagerrak 
and Kattegat 

none 

Inhabited  by  the  Northern  stock 
for  overwintering,  overlap  with 
the Western stock possible 

Northern 
(IIIa 
Eastern part, IVbc, VIId) 

stock 

Inhabited by the Western stock in 
autumn, 
first  and  second 
quarter  presence  of  Northern 
stock possible 

in 

Western  stock  (IIa,  IVa, 
Vb,  VIa,  VIIa-c,  VIIe-k, 
VIIIa-e) 

Presence  of  the  Western  stock  in 
autumn;  catches  in  winter/  spring 
in the Western part and catches in 
the Eastern part likely attributable 
to the Northern stock 

Eastern 
the 
part 
Northern  stock,  Western 
part to the Western stock 

to 

The problem of a mismatch between TAC-area and advice-area 

The inconvenience caused by the area mismatch has several facets: 

The  TAC-setting  shall  be  science-based.  If  scientific  advice  is  given  for  a  stock  area  that  is 
covered  by  various  TAC-areas,  the  TAC-setting  as  a  management  tool  is  not  able  to  correlate 
directly with the scientific advice. 

This fact is of particular importance in the context of management plans that set harvest control 
rules based on a scientific method. Such a management plan is envisaged for the Western stock 
of horse mackerel, and it cannot be implemented without an alignment of the TAC-areas.  

Proposed modifications to the TAC-areas 

The Commission considers a reallocation of division VIIIc (North and Northwest Spain) to the 
Western area, of division VIId (Eastern English Channel) to the Northern area and of divisions 
IIa as well as IVa to the Western area to be necessary. This will bring the TAC areas into line 
with scientific advice and allow the implementation of a long-term plan for the Western Stock. 

Division IIIa would not be included in this reallocation exercise at this stage, but will be subject 
to future work especially in the context of EC-Norway bilateral relations.  

Neither does the Commission at this stage intend to extend this exercise to Norwegian waters in 
general. Further work will be needed before harvest rules can be established that cover the whole 
area of stock distribution. 

The  following  table  illustrates  the  reorganisation  of  the  TAC  areas  based  on  a  method  that  is 
being  discussion  with  Member  States  in  the  context  of  frontloading  the  2009  TAC&Quota 

EN 

   EN 

 
Regulation. It contains averages TACs from the last ten years and a simulation based on the 2008 
TAC figures. 

Table 2 

Modified average TACs and projected TACs under the new system (based on 2008 TAC), 
in tons: 

In tonnes 

Old average 

New average 

2008 
fishing 
possibilities  as 
currently 
applied 
(excluding 
countries 
not 
participating  in 
the quota key) 

Simulated  2008 
fishing 
possibilities  for 
new 
areas 
(excluding 
countries 
not 
participating  in 
the quota key) 

Western TAC 

204900 

233546 

167920 

185247 

Northern TAC 

52599 

Southern TAC 

73000 

44467 

52486 

36480 

57750 

35271 

41632 

Sum 

330499 

330499 

262150 

262150 

EN 

   EN 

 
GLOSSARY 

B 

biomass–  the  total  weight  of  living  matter,  either  by  species  or  all  species  combined.  Also 
referred to as the standing stock. 

Blim – see limit reference points. 

Bmsy – the spawning stock biomass (SSB) necessary to support a fishery that would produce the 
maximum sustainable yield (MSY). 

Bottom trawling - trawling (towing a trawl, which is a fishing net) along the sea floor. 

Bpa – see limit reference points. 

by-catch – the catch of non-target species and undersized fish of the target species. By-catch of 
commercial species may be retained or discarded along with non-commercial by-catch. 

C 

catch (C) – the total quantity of fish that is retained by fishing gear and brought onto the deck or 
fishing station, ie landings plus discards. 

CFP – the Common Fisheries Policy of the European Union (as revised in: Council Regulation 
3760/92). It provides the framework for the management of the EU fishery sector, including all 
marine fisheries within 200 miles of member states’baselines. 

collapsed  stock  –  the  decline  in  spawning  stock  biomass  (SSB),  through  sustained  fishing 
pressure or natural causes, to the point where it no longer generates sufficient recruits to support 
a fishery. 

D 

demersal  –  species  of  fish  that  live  on,  or  in  close  proximity  to,  the  seabed,  eg  flatfish,  cod, 
haddock. The term also applies to fishing gear that is worked on the seabed. 

depleted stock – the decline in spawning stock biomass (SSB) to a level that is approaching, or is 
below, the lowest historic record but has not necessarily reached the point of collapse. (See also 
limit reference points and safe biological limits.) 

discards – any fish, or other living matter caught when fishing, that is not retained but returned to 
the sea – alive or dead. 

effort (f) – the total quantity of fishing gear in use for a specific period of time (Ricker 1975). 
Effort can be expressed in a multitude of ways: days away from port, hours trawling, length of 
drift  net,  number  of  hooks  used,  and  so  on.  At  its  most  basic,  it  is  the  total  number  of  boats 
engaged in a fishery and/or the number of days they were fishing. 

environmentally  sustainable  fisheries  –  fisheries  that  safeguard  the  requirements  of  all  animals 
and plants within an ecosystem or habitat and do not cause irreversible or other significant, long-
term change to the environment or the communities of species that live within that environment. 

exploitation  pattern  -  the  distribution  of  fishing  mortality  over  the  age  composition  of  the  fish 
population, determined by the type of fishing gear, area and seasonal distribution of fishing, and 
the  growth  and  migration  of  the  fish.  The  pattern  can  be  changed  by  modifications  to  fishing 

EN 

   EN 

 
gear,  for  example,  increasing  mesh  or  hook  size,  or  by  changing  the  ratio  of  harvest  by  gears 
exploiting the fish (e.g., gill net, trawl, hook and line, etc.).  

F 

F – formally, the instantaneous rate of fishing mortality (the natural logarithm of the change in 
abundance  due  to  fishing  per  unit  of  time),  but  more  simply,  the  proportion  of  the  population 

killed each year by fishing. 

Figure 8: A generalised yield-per-recruit (YPR) 
curve  showing  the  point  at  which  the  fishing 
mortality rate (F) is equivalent to the maximum 
sustainable yield (Fmsy) and the point at which 
the slope of the curve is approximately 10% the 
slope of F=0, ie F 0.1.  

fish  stock  –  scientifically,  a  population  of  a 
species of fish that is isolated from other stocks 
of the same species and does not interbreed with 
them 
therefore,  be  managed 
independently  of  other  stocks  (cf  gene  pool). 
However, in EU legislation the term ‘stock’ is used to mean a species of fish living in a defined 
sea area, the two are not always synonymous (Holden 1994). 

can, 

and 

fishery  conservation  –  the  conservation  and  sustainable  use  of  exploited  fish  stocks.  It  is  the 
principal  objective  of  UK  and  EU  fisheries  legislation;  fishery  management  is  the  primary 
method through which the objective is pursued. 

fishing effort – see effort. 

fishing mortality rate – see F.  

Flim – see limit reference points. 

FMSY  –  the  level  of  fishing  mortality  (F)  that corresponds  to  the  peak  value  on  a  dome-shaped 
yield-per-recruit  curve  and  the  value  that  will  produce  the  maximum  sustainable  yield  (MSY) 
from a fish stock (Fig. 8 & 10). 

Fpa – see limit reference points. 

I 

ICES – the International Council for encourages research into commercial the Exploration of the 
Sea,  an  fish  stocks,  their  biology  and  all  factors  independent  scientific  advisory  body  (natural 
and man made) that may founded in 1902. It is funded by 19 affect their abundance. It does not 
member  states’  governments  from  undertake  research  in  its  own  right  but  around  the  North 
Atlantic (including has a secretariat (in Copenhagen) to Canada and the USA) and Baltic Sea. It 
facilitate  and  co-ordinate  collaboration,  including  fishery  stockassessments,  between  member 
states. Work is carried out through numerous working groups convened under the remit of one or 
more standing committees: 

Advisory  Committee  of  Fisheries  Management  (ACFM),  Advisory  Committee  for  the  Marine 
Environment  (ACME),  Baltic  Committee,  Fisheries  Technology  Committee,  Living  Resources 
Committee,  Mariculture  Committee,  Marine  Habitat  Committee,  Oceanography  Committee, 
Resource Management Committee. 

J 

EN 

   EN 

 
juvenile– an immature fish, ie one that has not reached sexual maturity (but could still be larger 
than the minimum landing size – MLS). 

L 

landings – that part of the catch which is put ashore. Frequently, landings provide the only record 
of total catch; ie the landings plus discards. 

limit reference points – are biological or fishery management indicators that define the point at 
which  precautionary  action  must  be  taken  to  safeguard  a  fish  stock.  In  order  for  stocks  and 
fisheries exploiting  them to  be  within safe  biological  limits,  there should be a  high  probability 
that:  1  –  the  spawning  stock  biomass  (SSB  =  B)  is  above  the  threshold  where  recruitment  is 
impaired; 2 - the fishing mortality (F) is below that which will drive the spawning stock to the 
biomass threshold, a condition that must be avoided. Thus: Blim = minimum acceptable biomass 
Flim = maximum acceptable fishing mortality (lim stands for ‘limit’).The certainty with which 
these  points  can  be  identified  varies  with  the  quality  of  assessment  data  available.  Therefore, 
ICES has also identified precautionary reference points that identify higher biomass thresholds 
than Blim and lower fishing mortality thresholds than Flim: 

Bpa = precautionary minimum biomass  

Fpa = precautionary maximum fishing mortality (pa stands for precautionary approach). 

In many instances, the value for Bpa will be the same as the value previously identified 
as the minimum biologically acceptable limit – MBAL (ICES 1998a and ICES Current). 
In circumstances where the relationship between the exploited stock and the spawning 
stock  is  not  clear,  as  is  the  case  with  some  of  the  deep-water  species  of  fish,  limit 
reference points may be expressed with respect to the ‘unexploited stock’: 

M 

MSY  -  Maximum  Sustainable  Yield:  the  largest  average  catch  that  can  bet  taken  continuously 
from  a  stock  under  existing  environmental  conditions  (Fig.  8).  (For  species  with  fluctuating 
recruitment, the maximum might be obtained by taking fewer fish in some years than in others). 
Also known as maximum equilibrium catch (Ricker 1975). (see also Figure 8). 

misreporting  –  the  inaccurate  recording  of  catches  in  EU  fishing  log  books  or  comparable 
reporting  systems.  Among  the  more  common  practices are under-reporting  the  quantity  of  fish 
caught  or  reporting  the  catch  as  being  taken  in  a  different  area  from  the  one  in  which  it  was 
actually made. The latter example is most widespread when the quota for a species in one ICES 
Division  has  been  taken  but  quota  is  still  available  in  an  adjacent  Division.  (See  also  under-
reporting and black-fish.) 

mixed fishery – a fishery that takes multi-species catches. Pelagic fisheries tend to take relatively 
‘clean’single  species  catches  whereas  multi-species  catches  are  more  frequent  in  demersal 
fisheries.  

monitoring  –  the  regular  and  systematic  collection  of  environmental  and  biological  data  by 
agreed  methods  and  to  agreed  standards.  Monitoring  provides  information  on  current  status, 
trends and compliance with respect to declared standards and objectives. (See also surveillance.)  

mortality – the death of organisms through natural causes (M), eg predation, or fishing (F) etc. It 
is  usually  expressed  as  an  instantaneous  rate:  the  natural  logarithm  (with  sign  changed)  of  the 
ratio of number of animals surviving to the end of the year and the number at the start of the year 
(Ricker 1975). 

EN 

   EN 

 
O 

over-fishing  –  any  fishery  where  the  total  fishing  effort  is  greater  than  is  required  to  meet  or 
match a specific management objective, eg maximum sustainable yield (MSY). (See also growth 
overfishing and recruitment overfishing.) 

P 

pelagic  fish  -  fish  that  live  in  the  pelagic  zone,  i.e.  a  layer  in  the  sea/ocean  close  to  surface. 
Pelagic  stocks  can  be  contrasted  with  demersal  fish,  which  is  a  fish  that  feeds  on  or  near  the 
bottom of the ocean or a deep lake in the demersal zone. 

precautionary  approach  –  a  decision  to  take  avoiding  action  based  on  the  possibility  of 
significant  environmental  damage,  even  before  there  is  conclusive  evidence  that  damage  will 
occur  (DOE  1992).  This  approach  requires  fishery  managers  to  pay  due  regard  to  the 
uncertainties  of  stock  assessment  and  management.  They  must  implement  the  appropriate 
precautionary action if limit reference points are reached. 

purse seine – a  common type of  seine, named such because along the bottom are a number of 
rings. A rope passes through all the rings, and when pulled, draws the rings close to one another, 
preventing  the  fish  from  "sounding",  or  swimming  down  to  escape  the  net.  This  operation  is 
similar  to  a  traditional  style  purse,  which  has  a  drawstring.  It  is  a  preferred  technique  for 
capturing  fish  species  which  school,  or  aggregate,  close  to  the  surface:  such  as  sardines, 
mackerel, anchovies, herring, certain species of tuna (schooling); and salmon soon before they 
swim up rivers and streams to spawn (aggregation). Boats equipped with purse seines are called 
purse seiners. 

seine - a large fishing net that hangs vertically in the water by attaching weights along the bottom 
edge and floats along the top. Boats equipped for seine fishing are called seiners. Seine nets are 
usually long flat nets like a fence that are used to encircle a school of fish, with the boat driving 
around  the  fish  in  a  circle.  There  are  two  main  types  of  seine  nets:  purse  seines  and  Danish 
seines. 

precautionary  approach  –  a  decision  to  take  avoiding  action  based  on  the  possibility  of 
significant  environmental  damage,  even  before  there  is  conclusive  evidence  that  damage  will 
occur  (DOE  1992).  This  approach  requires  fishery  managers  to  pay  due  regard  to  the 
uncertainties  of  stock  assessment  and  management.  They  must  implement  the  appropriate 
precautionary action if limit reference points are reached. 

S 

Spawning Stock Biomass – see SSB. 

SSB–  spawning  stock  biomass:  the  total  weight  of  all  sexually  mature  fish  in  a  population  or 
stock. It is the sexually mature part of an exploited population upon which the future survival of 
the stock, and its fishery, depends. 

STECF  –  the  Scientific,  Technical  and  Economic  Committee  on  Fisheries  of  the  EC,  DG 
Fisheries (Fig. 2). Unlike ICES working groups and ACFM (Fig. 3) which only consider stock 
assessments and management from a scientific perspective, the STEFC is expected to consider 
the socio- economic implications of modifying or varying scientific, including ICES’ advice. 

stock biomass – the total weight of all fish of all ages in a given population or stock. 

EN 

   EN 

 
sustainability  –  meeting  the  needs  of  the  present  without  compromising  the  ability  of  future 
generations to meet their own needs (WCED 1987 – the Brundtland Report).  

sustainable fisheries – fisheries with an annual catch, including discards, that does not exceed the 
surplus  production  of  the  stock  (ie  annual  growth  plus  recruitment  less  the  annual  natural 
mortality – M). Fisheries can be sustainable at levels of stock significantly below the stock that 
would support MSY or MEY but only if managers pay full regard to limit reference points. (See 
also environmentally sustainable fisheries .) 

T 

TAC – total allowable catch, the quantity of fish that can be taken from each stock each year. 
The figure is agreed by the Fisheries Council of Ministers each December for the following year. 
EU member states are allocated a fixed proportion of the TAC as their national quota. (See also 
relative stability and track record.)  

target  species  –  the  primary  species  of  fish  that  a  fishing  vessel  aims  to  catch  during  a  given 
fishing operation. In pelagic fisheries this can be a single species, eg herring or mackerel, but it 
is usually a group of species in demersal fisheries, eg cod and whiting or plaice and sole. 

U 

under-reporting  –  failure  to  meet  the  legal  requirement  under  the  CFP  to  report  fully  and 
accurately all the fish that have been caught and landed. (MLS). It is an offence for anyone to 
(See also misreporting) retain or offer for sale undersize fish. 

EN 

   EN