REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL on the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No734/2008 on the protection of vulnerable marine ecosystems in the high seas from the adverse impacts of bottom fishing gears
Date: 2010-11-10
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: deep-sea fishing, environmental protection, fishery management, fishing permit, fishing regulations, fishing rights, marine ecosystem

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 10.11.2010 
COM(2010) 651 final 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND 
THE COUNCIL 

on the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No734/2008 on the protection of 
vulnerable marine ecosystems in the high seas from the adverse impacts of bottom 
fishing gears 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
  
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND 
THE COUNCIL  

on the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No734/2008 on the protection of 
vulnerable marine ecosystems in the high seas from the adverse impacts of bottom 
fishing gears 

Under the terms of Article 13 of Council Regulation (EC) No 734/2008, the Commission is to 
submit to the European Parliament and to the Council a report on the implementation of this 
Regulation before 30 June 2010, which may be accompanied by proposals for amendments if 
deemed necessary. 

1. 

1.1. 

Background 

Characteristics of vulnerable marine ecosystems 

Features of the deep seabed such as seamounts, coral reefs and hydrothermal vents 
are known to act as biodiversity hot spots and also to attract large numbers of fish. 
These  ecosystems  are  extremely  vulnerable  for  a  number  of  reasons  including  the 
low  growth  rates  associated  with  great  depths  as  well  as  the  fragility  of  the 
organisms,  such  as  corals  and  sponges,  which  provide  structural  support  to  the 
habitats.  Although  scientific  research  on  these  organisms  and  ecosystems  has 
increased in recent years, including through projects supported by the EU such as the 
Hermes, Hermione and Coralfish projects, more information is still required on their 
biology, location as well as the associated fisheries. These vulnerable ecosystems are 
threatened by natural causes such as climate change and ocean acidification, as well 
as  by  a  variety  of  anthropogenic  activities,  which  include  deep-sea  bottom  fishing, 
deep-sea  mining,  bio-prospection  and  deep-sea  tourism.  While  these  activities 
generate economic benefits, they contribute to the destruction of these habitats which 
results in a continuing loss of marine biodiversity 

1.2. 

International and EU action 

The impact of destructive fishing practices, including bottom trawling, on vulnerable 
marine  ecosystems  (VMEs)  on  the  high  seas  has  long  been  of  concern  to  the 
international  community.  Discussions  on  this  issue  have  been  taking  place  at  the 
United  Nation  General  Assembly  (UNGA)  since  2004.  This  process  culminated  in 
2006  with  the  adoption  of  UNGA  Resolution  61/105,  to  which  the  then  European 
Community brought a major contribution. 

In response, the EU adopted Council Regulation (EC) N° 734/2008 on the protection 
of  VMEs  in  the  high  seas  from  the  adverse  impacts  of  bottom  fishing  gears.  This 
transposed  the  measures  contained  in  UNGA  resolution  61/105  into  Union  law  but 
also went further than the UNGA Resolution in certain respects. The EU was the first 
Regional Organisation or State which has adopted such rules, for ships flying flags of 
its  Member  States,  for  those  areas  of  the  high  seas  where  no  RFMO  had  been 
established or where no interim measures were put in place during negotiations for 
the  establishment  of  an  RFMO.  This  Regulation  was  deemed  necessary  since  a 
considerable  number  of  EU  bottom  trawlers  are  active  in  areas  where  there  is  no 
established RFMO, particularly the South West Atlantic. 

The Proposal for a Council Regulation was accompanied by an Impact Assessment 
transposing  UNGA  Resolution  61/105, 
which  proposed 

three  options:  not 

EN 

2 

   EN 

implementing  a  unilateral  prohibition  of  deep-sea  bottom  fishing  activities  by  EU 
vessels  or  implementing  the  Resolution  through  a  Council  Regulation.  The  latter 
option was chosen as it would ensure the continuation of deep-sea fishing activities, 
if  they  were  environmentally  sound,  while  ensuring  the  protection  of  vulnerable 
marine ecosystems and thus following from the commitments taken by the EU at the 
UN. 

On  the  international  front,  in  the  meantime,  the  European  Union  has  pushed  for 
similar  measures  to  be  adopted  in  the  context  of  the  relevant  RFMOs,  despite 
opposition  from  other  contracting  parties.  For  this  reason,  it  was  not  always 
successful  in  ensuring  that  all  measures  including  closure  of  areas  and  threshold 
levels were taken on board as proposed. 

1.3.  Main features of UNGA Resolution 61/105 

Paragraphs 80 to 91 of UNGA Resolution 61/105 establish that: 

a) 

b) 

c) 

States  and  RFMOs  should  sustainably  manage  deep-sea  fish  stocks  and  protect 
vulnerable marine ecosystems from destructive fishing practices, in accordance with 
the precautionary approach and ecosystem approaches. 

RFMOs  and  flag  States,  in  areas  beyond  national  jurisdiction  where  there  were  no 
RFMO/As  with  the  competence  to  regulate  bottom  fisheries  or  where  no  interim 
measures had been put in place had, by 31 December 2008, to assess the impacts of 
all types of bottom fishing on the high seas, and either ensure that significant adverse 
impacts on vulnerable marine ecosystems were prevented, or if not, had to prohibit 
these fisheries. 

RFMOs  and  flag  States,  in  areas  beyond  national  jurisdiction  where  there  were  no 
RFMO/As  with  the  competence  to  regulate  bottom  fisheries  or  where  no  interim 
measures had been put in place, had to close areas of the high seas where vulnerable 
marine  ecosystems  were  known  or  likely  to  occur,  to  all  bottom  fishing  activities, 
unless or until they were able to establish conservation and management measures to 
prevent significant adverse impacts on vulnerable marine ecosystems. 

1.4. 

Recent developments 

i) 

FAO Guidelines 

The FAO "International Guidelines for the management of deep-sea fisheries in the 
high seas" were developed at the request of the FAO Committee on Fisheries in order 
to  assist  States  and  RFMO/As  in  the  implementation  of  UNGA  Resolution  61/105, 
with regards to the protection of vulnerable marine ecosystems and to the long term 
management of deep-sea fisheries in the high seas. They were adopted in September 
2008.  

These  voluntary  Guidelines  provide  guidance  on  the  whole  spectrum  of  measures 
required for a proper management of deep-sea fisheries ranging from the appropriate 
regulatory  framework;  data  collection,  reporting  and  assessment;  identification  of 
VMEs  and  assessment  of  significant  adverse  impacts;  enforcement  and  compliance 
and measures necessary to ensure the conservation of target and non-target species, 
as well as affected habitats.  

ii) 

2009 UNGA Resolution on Sustainable Fisheries 64/72 

A  review  of  the  implementation  of  measures  taken  by  States  and  RFMO/As  in 
response  to  paragraphs  83  to  90  of  the  UNGA  Resolution  61/105  was  held  at  the 

EN 

3 

   EN 

2009 session of the UN General Assembly in accordance with Paragraph 91 of this 
Resolution.  

The final text of the 2009 Resolution reflected the concerns expressed by the EU and 
some other parties that the implementation of the measures in the UNGA Resolution 
61/105 concerning the protection of VMEs had been insufficient, particularly those 
regarding the conduction of assessments prior to the authorisation of bottom fishing 
activities and the protection of deep-sea fish stocks.  

The  new  UNGA  Resolution  64/72  called  upon  RFMO/As,  States  participating  in 
negotiations to establish RFMO/As and flag States to urgently adopt and implement 
measures with regards to: 

a) 

b) 

Prior  assessment  of  bottom-fishing  activities  before  authorisation  of  bottom-
fishing activities,  

Establishment  of  protocols  for  encounters  with  VMEs  based  on  the  best 
available scientific advice 

c)  Adoption  of  conservation  and  management  measures  for  deep-sea  stocks  to 

ensure their long-term sustainability.  

Furthermore,  the  Resolution  also  established  that  a  further  review  of  the 
implementation of these measures will take place in 2011.  

In addition, the Resolution also called upon States to implement the FAO Deep-sea 
Fisheries Guidelines and to ensure that the implementation of the measures included 
in the Resolution were consistent with the Guidelines. 

1.5.  Member States' reports 

According  to  the  provisions  of  Article  12  paragraph  1  of  Council  Regulation  (EC) 
No  734/2008,  Member  States  are  required  to  communicate  to  the  Commission  for 
each half calendar year within three months of the expiry of that period, a report on:  

a) 

Catches; 

b)  Compliance by fishing vessels; 

c)  Measures  taken  to  remedy  and  sanction  instances  of  non-compliance  and 

serious infringements; 

d) 

Their implementation of area closures. 

Member States were also required to submit all impact assessments carried out prior 
to issuing the special fishing permits pursuant to Article 4 paragraph 2. 

Less than half of the Member States responded within the stipulated deadline (10 for 
the  period  January  to  June  2009  and  11  for  the  period  July  to  December  2009). 
However,  the  required  information  was  finally  provided  after  repeated  reminders 
from  the  Commission.  From  the  information  received,  only  vessels  from  one 
Member State fell under the scope of this Regulation. 

2. 

Assessment  of  the  implementation  of  the  measures  contained  in  Council 
Regulation (EC) No 734/2008 

2.1. 

Information received 

The assessment of the implementation of these measures is based on the information 
provided by the authorities from the concerned Member State in line with article 13 
of the Regulation. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

a)  Vessels were obliged to comply with the rules of Council Regulation (EC) No 
734/2008 and had to be in possession of a special fishing permit as required by 
the Regulation for the duration of their activities. 

b) 

c) 

The special fishing permit was of limited duration, specified the zones where 
bottom  fishing  activities  could  be  carried  out,  the  authorised  species,  the 
fishing gear and the depths at which it could be deployed. 

The concerned Member State restricted the area where bottom fishing activities 
could be carried out by their vessels to two specified areas in the South West 
Atlantic where such activities had been carried out for at least two years.  

d)  Due to the fact that the fishing footprint was restricted to areas where bottom 
fishing had been carried out for at least two years, the concerned Member State 
did not carry out any specific impact assessment as it considered that it would 
be improbable that these areas contained vulnerable benthic ecosystems which 
could be damaged by bottom trawling gears. 

e)  No instances of non-compliance with the fishing plans were registered. 

f) 

Fishing  vessels  were  not  authorised  to  carry  out  bottom  fishing  activities  in 
unassessed areas. 

g)  No fishing activities were registered in closed areas. 

h) 

i) 

j) 

The  indicators  used  to  signal  unforeseen  encounters  with  vulnerable  marine 
ecosystems  were  those  established  by  NEAFC  i.e.100  kg  of  live  Corals  and 
1000 kg of live sponges per fishing haul. 

No unforeseen encounters with vulnerable marine ecosystems were registered 
and thus, no remedial measures were implemented. 

No  serious  infringements  were  detected  and  consequently  no  sanctions  were 
implemented. 

k)  An observer scheme was obligatory for all vessels. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

2.2. 

Discussion  

Article  4  paragraph  1  of  the  Regulation  specifies  that  fishing  operators,  when 
applying for a special fishing permit need to submit detailed fishing plans specifying 
their  intended  location  of  activities.  This  requirement  was  introduced  in  the 
Regulation to ensure the implementation of the principle of prior impact assessments 
with a view to allow "ex-ante" evaluation of the potential impact of these fisheries as 
requested in UNGA Resolution 61/105. This was not implemented by the concerned 
Member State.  

Instead,  the  concerned  Member  State  utilised  a  system  in  which  authorised  fishing 
vessels  were  limited  to  fishing  zones  established  by  the  competent  authorities, 
thereby restricting its fishing footprint for bottom fishing activities in the South West 
Atlantic to previously fished areas. This was based on the assumption that it would 
be improbable that these areas contained vulnerable benthic ecosystems which could 
be  damaged  by  bottom  trawling  gears  and  thus,  only  a  very  limited  impact 
assessment  was  produced.  However,  no  distinction  was  made  between  areas  where 
bottom  fisheries  were  well  established  and  areas  where  such  activities  had  been 
carried  out  over  a  shorter  period.  Such  a  distinction  is  requested  in  Article  4 
paragraph  4  of  the  Regulation,  similarly  to  paragraph  48  of  the  FAO  Guidelines, 
since  areas  which  have  experienced  lighter  trawling  episodes  could  still  possibly 
contain  VMEs,  which  if  protected,  even  though  damaged,  could  recover  or 
regenerate. A more stringent application of the precautionary approach should have 
been implemented. The Commission will continue consultations with the concerned 
Member State to remedy this situation and to ensure compliance with the obligation 
by its vessels to provide a fishing plan when applying for the fishing permit in order 
to be able to carry out a correct ex ante evaluation of the impact of these fisheries. 

A comprehensive mapping exercise was carried out by the concerned Member State, 
to  map  the  international  waters  of  the  Southwest  Atlantic  with  depths  of  less 
than 1 500 m  with  the  aim  of  establishing  the  location  of  VMEs  in  those  areas,  as 
required  by  the  UNGA  Resolutions.  However,  the  results  of  this  mapping  exercise 
were still not available in June 2010. The Commission would like to encourage the 
dissemination  of  such  studies  as  this  will  ensure  that  the  greatest  possible  benefits 
can be obtained since this will lead to the adoption of better management measures to 
protect the VMEs. 

In  conclusion,  it  is  the  Commission's  opinion  that  more  stringent  and  accurate 
implementation  of  Regulation  (EC)  No  734/2008  is  required  to  ensure  that  the 
measures prescribed in UNGA Resolutions 61/105 and 64/72 are fully implemented 
by EU Member States flagged vessels fishing under the scope of the Regulation. 

3. 

Way forward 

In  light  of  developments  since  the  adoption  of  the  Regulation,  particularly  the  2008  FAO 
Guidelines for the management  of  deep-sea fisheries in the high seas and the 2009 UN GA 
Resolution  on  Sustainable  Fisheries  64/72,  but  also  the  advice  given  by  the  International 
Council  for  the  Exploration  of  the  Seas  (ICES)  with  regards  to  the  management  of  these 
fisheries, the following amendments to the Regulation should be considered: 

3.1. 

Scope 

The current scope of the Regulation does not extend to areas under the responsibility 
of an RFMO or where interim measures have been established by participants in the 
negotiations on a new RFMO. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

Some  RFMOs  have  been  criticised  for  not  having  implemented  adequate  measures 
for the protection of vulnerable marine ecosystems, ignoring scientific advice and the 
precautionary approach. In some cases, measures (for example lower threshold levels 
for indicator species) requested by the European Union have been rejected by other 
parties to the organisation.  

Consequently, the scope of this Regulation could be extended to allow the adoption 
of  unilateral  measures  applicable  to  EU  fishing  vessels  fishing  within  RFMO 
regulatory areas, and going further than those adopted by the RFMO, in cases where 
the  EU  considers  that  measures  adopted  by  an  RFMO  do  no  fully  implement  the 
measures  in  the  UN  Resolutions.  Such  a  move  would  allow  the  EU  to  meet  more 
fully the commitments undertaken in the context of UNGA Resolutions 61/105 and 
64/72. Although, this could be perceived as resulting in the lack of equal treatment 
between EU vessels and third country vessels operating in the same area, this would 
ensure that a level playing field is established among EU vessels undertaking bottom 
fishing  activities  in  different  areas.  In  addition,  once  the  EU  considers  that  certain 
measures  should  be  adopted  by  an  RFMO,  and  consequently  proposes  these 
measures  but  which  are  rejected  by  the  other  parties,  unilateral  adoption  of  the 
measures  would  demonstrate  that  the  EU  acts  consistently  with  its  own  advice. 
Furthermore, this would allow the EU to continue leading by example, as has been 
done in the past by the adoption of the current Regulation. 

3.2. 

Limitation of capacity or effort 

In  order  to  ensure  that  capacity  or  effort  is  not  transferred  to  deep-sea  fisheries, 
covered by the scope of the Regulation, from other fisheries, a provision should be 
included limiting fishing capacity and effort in deep-sea bottom fishing activities to 
the average level established for a determined period for the different areas. 

3.3. 

Impact assessments 

The carrying out of impact assessments prior to the authorisation of bottom fishing 
activities  was  one  of  the  main  issues  during  the  negotiations  on  the  review  of  the 
measures  contained  in  UNGA  Resolution  61/105  and  was  considered  a  radically 
innovative  principle  in  fisheries  management  at  the  time.  However,  from  the 
information  published  prior  to  the  negotiations  on  the  2009  UNGA  Resolution,  it 
emerged that very few such assessments had been carried out; and that the quality of 
performed assessments was not satisfactory.  

Clear  criteria  have  been  provided  on  the  use  of  impact  assessments  in  the  FAO 
Guidelines, particularly in paragraphs 17 – 20, 42, 47 and 48. Paragraph 119 of the 
UNGA  Resolution  64/72  exhorts  flag  States  and  RFMOs  that  impact  assessments 
conducted prior to the authorisation of bottom fishing activities should be consistent 
with  these  Guidelines.  Specific  reference  could  be  made  to  the  above-mentioned 
paragraphs of the Guidelines  within the Regulation, while full incorporation within 
the  Regulation  of  the  text  of  paragraph  47  of  the  Guidelines  (reproduced  below) 
could be used to ensure improvement of the quality of impact assessments carried out 
by the Member States. 

47.  Flag  States  and  RFMO/As  should  conduct  assessments  to  establish  if  deep-sea 
fishing  activities  are  likely  to  produce  significant  adverse  impacts  in  a  given  area. 
Such an impact assessment should address, inter alia: 

EN 

7 

   EN 

i.  type(s)  of  fishing  conducted  or  contemplated,  including  vessels  and  gear  types, 
fishing areas, target and potential by-catch species, fishing effort levels and duration 
of fishing (harvesting plan); 

ii. best available scientific and technical information on the current state of fishery 
resources and baseline information on the ecosystems, habitats and communities in 
the fishing area, against which future changes are to be compared; 

iii. identification, description and mapping of VMEs known or likely to occur in the 
fishing area; 

iv. data and methods used to identify, describe and assess the impacts of the activity, 
the  identification  of  gaps  in  knowledge,  and  an  evaluation  of  uncertainties  in  the 
information presented in the assessment; 

v. identification, description and evaluation of the occurrence, scale and duration of 
likely impacts, including cumulative impacts of activities covered by the assessment 
on VMEs and low-productivity fishery resources in the fishing area; 

vi.  risk  assessment  of  likely  impacts  by  the  fishing  operations  to  determine  which 
impacts  are  likely  to  be  significant  adverse  impacts,  particularly  impacts  on  VMEs 
and low-productivity fishery resources; and 

vii.  the  proposed  mitigation  and  management  measures  to  be  used  to  prevent 
significant  adverse  impacts  on  VMEs  and  ensure  long-term  conservation  and 
sustainable utilization of low-productivity fishery resources, and the measures to be 
used to monitor effects of the fishing operations. 
The  current  Data  Collection  Regulation  199/20081  as  well  as  the  accompanying 
Commission Decision (2008/949/EC)2 establishing a Community framework for the 
collection,  management  and  use  of  data  in  the  fisheries sector  and  support  for 
scientific  advice  regarding  the  common  fisheries  policy  stipulate  the  obligations  to 
collect data referring to indicators of the effects of the fisheries sector on the marine 
ecosystem. This data should be therefore a substantial part of the impact assessments.  

3.4. 

Unforeseen encounters with vulnerable marine ecosystems 

No definition of what constitutes an encounter with vulnerable marine ecosystems is 
provided  in  the  current  Regulation.  This  has  permitted  the  use  of  very  high 
thresholds for VME indicator species by the concerned Member State (100 kg of live 
Corals and 1000 kg of live sponges per fishing haul). This is similar to the thresholds 
previously utilised by some RFMOs to establish encounters with VMEs, particularly 
NEAFC and NAFO, and which had been criticised by ICES as being too high.  

Retention  of  a  species  in  a  net  depends  on  its  size  and  fragility;  thus  small  sized 
species  or  one  that  could  easily  fragment  into  small  pieces  are  less  likely  to  be 
retained than a large resilient species. The retention efficiency of deep-water fishing 
nets in relation to corals and sponges is still unknown. Using current guidelines and a 

1 

2 

Council  Regulation  (EC)  No 199/2008  of  25  February  2008  concerning  the  establishment  of  a 
Community  framework  for  the  collection,  management  and  use  of  data  in  the  fisheries  sector  and 
support for scientific advice regarding the Common Fisheries Policy 
2008/949/EC:  Commission  Decision  of  6  November  2008  adopting  a  multiannual  Community 
programme  pursuant  to  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  199/2008  establishing  a  Community  framework 
for the collection, management and use of data in the fisheries sector and support for scientific advice 
regarding the common fisheries policy 

EN 

8 

   EN 

                                                 
hypothetical retention efficiency of 10%, at least 1000 kg of coral (or 10 000 kg of 
sponges) would need to be affected to trigger the encounter thresholds. 

In  its  advice  given  in  2009  to  NEAFC,  ICES  declared  that  it  was  unlikely  that  a 
single threshold level would be suitable for all species as an indicator of the presence 
of a VME, since this carried the assumption that all species indicating the presence of 
VMEs were equally likely to be retained in a fishing net. However, ICES also stated 
that the current thresholds were likely to be too high for both fragile and rare coral or 
sponge species and that more precautionary thresholds should be used.  

Thus,  while  the  inclusion  of  a  definition  of  what  constitutes  an  encounter  with  a 
VME,  based  on  the  currently  best  available  scientific  advice,  would  improve  the 
effectiveness of the Regulation to ensure the protection of these ecosystems, it should 
be  ensured  that  such  thresholds  can  be  amended  regularly  to  take  into  account  the 
latest scientific advice. Furthermore, in order to achieve greater accuracy, more than 
two sample taxa should be used as the indicators of structural habitat VMEs. 

In addition, once the set thresholds for VME indicator species are met and reports to 
the  authorities  as  required  by  Article  7  paragraph  3,  this  should  trigger  immediate 
(and at least temporary) closure of the site to allow any assessment of the area to be 
made.  Unless  such  a  closure  is  implemented  immediately,  subsequent  passes  by 
trawler nets could lead to the destruction of the VME.  

3.5.  Move-on rule 

Article  7  of  the  Regulation  establishes  that  if  a  vessel  encounters  a  VME,  it  has  to 
move  to  a  minimum  distance  of  5  nautical  miles  from  the  site  of  the  encounter.  In 
NEAFC  and  NAFO,  the  required  distance  is  only  2  nautical  miles,  which  were 
considered to be more appropriate in the areas concerned. 

Due to the lack of key information (patch size of corals and sponges and tow length 
of trawls), ICES has not been able to evaluate the scientific appropriateness of these 
provisions  in  the  NEAFC  Area.  However,  taking  a  mean  value  for  tow  time  of  4 
hours  and  a  mean  trawling  speed  of  3.5  knots,  this  would  result  in  the  trawl  net 
covering  a  distance  of  over  9  nautical  miles.  This  makes  it  impossible  to  establish 
where  the  encounter  with  the  VME  took  place,  as  this  could  have  happened 
anywhere  along  the  passage  of  the  net,  and  to  establish  from  which  point  the  5 
nautical mile move should apply. 

ICES  has  indicated  that  an  acceptable  alternative  would  be  to  establish  all  areas 
where fishing has already occurred (or has occurred in the period for which records 
are  available). It can  then be assumed  that all other areas still contained vulnerable 
marine  ecosystems  and  thus,  prohibition  or  restriction  of  fishing  activities  in  these 
areas  would  then  protect  these  ecosystems.  The  move-on  rule  would  be  limited  to 
areas  where  fishing  has  already  taken  place,  particularly  for  more  lightly  fished 
areas,  though  the  use  of  this  should  be  accompanied  by  lower  thresholds  for  VME 
encounters  and  larger  move-on  distances.  Better  implementation  of  this  rule  will 
necessitate  the  collection  of  the  information,  including  tow-lengths,  required  to 
model suitable distances for the move-on provisions 

3.6. 

Observer coverage 

Article  11  of  Regulation  (EC)  No  734/2008  established  100%  coverage  for  all 
vessels;  and  a  review  was  foreseen  by  30  July  2009.  However,  this  review  was 
postponed  in  order  to  obtain  Member  States'  experiences  with  the  scheme  in  the 
context of the information provided in accordance with the Regulation. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

A  workshop  on  Data  and  Knowledge  in  Deep-Sea  Fisheries  in  the  High  Seas  was 
held in Rome, Italy (5–7 November 2007) to discuss the current state of knowledge 
in  these  fisheries.  The  Recommendations  from  this  workshop  included  that  100 
percent  observer  coverage  should  be  required  in  these  fisheries.  Furthermore, 
paragraph 55 of the FAO Guidelines specifies that higher levels of observer coverage 
were required for fisheries taking place outside the regulatory area of a RFMO/A. In 
addition, SPRFMO has established in its interim measures that there should be 100% 
coverage  of  bottom-fisheries  by  trained  observers.  This  was  deemed  necessary  for 
the correct implementation of the move-on rules requiring a trigger as it allowed for 
real-time  observation  of  the  catch  from  each  individual  tow.  This  is  being 
implemented by New Zealand. 

In view of the above and in light of the fact that prior impact assessments meeting 
the  criteria  established  in  paragraph  47  of  the  FAO  Guidelines  have  not  yet  been 
carried out, 100% coverage by observers of deep-sea bottom fisheries covered by the 
scope of the Regulation should continue for the time being. This requirement could 
be reviewed every three years. 

4. 

Conclusions 

Over  the  past  years,  the  EU  has  been  on  the  forefront  of  the  fight  to  ensure  the  global 
protection of vulnerable marine ecosystems and associated deep-sea fisheries. The adoption of 
Regulation  (EC)  No  734/2008  transposing  the  measures  contained  in  UN  GA  Resolution 
61/105  of  2006  was  meant  to  ensure  that  vulnerable  marine  ecosystems  were  properly 
protected  from  bottom-fishing  trawling  activities.  In  view  of  the  new  recommendations 
included  in  UNGA  Resolution  64/72  of  2009  and  its  forthcoming  review  scheduled  for 
November 2011, the FAO "International Guidelines for the management of deep-sea fisheries 
in the high seas" and newly available scientific advice, the Commission is of the opinion that 
it  is  necessary  to  amend  the  Regulation,  and  intends  to  do  so  possibly  by  the  beginning  of 
2012, to bring it in line with these developments so that enhanced measures for the protection 
of  such  ecosystems,  based  on  the  most  up-to-date  scientific  advice,  can  be  put  in  place  in 
order to ensure their protection. 

EN 

10 

   EN