REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL on Member States' efforts during 2010 to achieve a sustainable balance between fishing capacity and fishing opportunities
Date: 2012-07-06
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, State aid, common fisheries policy, disclosure of information, fishery management, fishing fleet, fishing statistics, sustainable development

EUROPEAN 
COMMISSION 

Brussels, 3.12.2012  
COM(2012) 368 final/2 

CORRIGENDUM 
Annule et remplace le document COM(2012) 368 final du 6.7. 2012. 
Pas de modifications dans le texte, seulement la page de couverture a été modifiée. 
Concerne toutes les versions linguistiques. 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND 
THE COUNCIL 

on Member States' efforts during 2010 to achieve a sustainable balance between fishing 
capacity and fishing opportunities 

{SWD(2012) 395 final} 
{SWD(2012) 396 final}

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
  
 
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND 
THE COUNCIL 

on Member States' efforts during 2010 to achieve a sustainable balance between fishing 
capacity and fishing opportunities 

1. 

INTRODUCTION 

Member States are required to submit to the Commission, before 1 May each year, a 
report  on  their  efforts  during  the  previous  year  to  achieve  a  sustainable  balance 
between  fleet  capacity  and  available  fishing  opportunities.  On  the  basis  of  these 
reports  and  the  data  in  the  EU  fishing  fleet  register,  the  Commission  produced  a 
summary  for  2010,  and  presented  it  to  the  Scientific,  Technical  and  Economic 
Committee  for  Fisheries  (STECF)  and  to  the  Committee  for  Fisheries  and 
Aquaculture.  This  report  from  the  Commission  now  presents  that  summary  of  the 
Member  States’  reports,  plus  a  technical  annex  and  the  opinions  of  the  above-
mentioned committees to the Council and the European Parliament. 

The  value  of  these  reports  for  assessing  the  capacity  in  Member  States  is 
unfortunately  still  limited.  The  Court  of  Auditors  concluded  that  the  rules  under 
which Member States report are inadequate and lack clarity and considers that this is 
one  of  the  reasons  for  the  incomplete  and  inadequate  reporting  by  most  Member 
States,  with  the  consequence  that  it  is  impossible  to  derive  conclusions  regarding 
fishing overcapacity. The Commission concurs with these conclusions and, pending 
the  reform  of  the  Common  Fisheries  Policy,  will  continue  work  with  STECF  and 
Member  States  to  further  develop  the  existing  Commission  Services  capacity 
guidelines  to  provide  greater  clarity  on  the  requested  information  and  reporting 
structure. 

2. 

SUMMARY OF MEMBER STATES' REPORTS 

The  summaries  that  follow  are  based  on  the  reports  submitted  by  Member  States1. 
They condensate the Member States' own assessment of the balance between the size 
of  their  fleet  and  the  resources  allocated  to  it.  The  Commission  proposed  Member 
States to use the Commission Services Guidelines for the assessment of the balance 
between  fishing  capacity  and  fishing  opportunities  prepared  on  the  basis  of  the 
advice from STECF. Whenever mentioned they are referred to as the ‘guidelines’ 

2.1. 

Belgium 

The  guidelines  were  applied  in  the  report  for  two  beam  trawler  segments.  The 
average  value  of  the  biological  indicator  for  both  plaice  and  sole  was  acceptable. 
Capacity utilisation was between 80% and 90%. The ROI2 for 2009 showed negative 

1 
2 

These reports are published in the Commission's website 
Return on investment 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
                                                 
values  but  this  might  be  due  to  a  new  calculation  method.  The  number  of  FTE3 
continues to decline while the wages improved slightly for the 24-40 m segment and 
decreased in the 12-24 m segment.  

Two vessels were partially decommissioned in 2010. The main achievement during 
the  year  was  the  implementation  of  an  on-board  investment  programme  under  the 
European  Fisheries  Fund,  including  investments  on  board  improving  energy 
efficiency.  

2.2. 

Bulgaria 

The guidelines were applied in the report. Bulgaria concludes that fish stocks and the 
fleet  appear  to  be  in  balance..  For  vessels  with  a  length  under  12  meters  Bulgaria 
wants  to  improve  the  balance  by  means  of  scrapping  and  modernization  measures. 
The capacity of the Bulgarian fishing fleet increased during 2010 by 3.0% in tonnage 
and 5.1% in power. The number of vessels increased by 134 (6.1%). The number of 
fishing  days  also  increased  in  2010  compared  to  2009  as  a  result  of  an 
administration's decision to replace inactive vessels to provide an opportunity to new 
vessels owners. In 2010 a total of 1,311 vessels (56% of all vessels) were inactive. 

2.3. 

Denmark 

The  guidelines  were  applied  for  11  fleet  segments.  The  analysis  shows  a  stable 
situation  and  indicates  that  there  is  no  significant  long  term  physical  overcapacity. 
However, when passive vessels are included there is overcapacity in the segments of 
small vessels. Economic indicators show increasing overcapacity in economic terms. 
Transferability  of  quotas  has  resulted  in  a  decrease  in  the  number  of  commercial 
vessels.  

In 2010, the capacity of the Danish fishing fleet was reduced by 9.5 % in GT, 9.4 % 
in kW and 3.1 % in terms of the number of vessels. The main reduction was seen in 
the segment of vessels between 12 and 24m. The fleet is subject to the cod recovery 
plan for the North and Baltic seas. During 2009-2010, fishing effort was rather stable 
in the North Sea and decreased by 16% in the Baltic Sea. 

2.4. 

Germany 

The report commented on balance based on a qualitative biological approach and did 
not  reach  a  formal  conclusion  on  status.  The  balance  indicators  are  not  estimated. 
The  qualitative  approach  suggests  that  fleets  are  broadly  in  balance  with  fishing 
opportunities  but  makes  no  reference  to  effort  available  and  deployed.  There  were 
1,674  vessels,  67,219 GT, and 158,385 kW in the fleet register on 31/12/10. There 
was a net reduction of 93 vessels during the year. Most of the reduction was achieved 
by  vessel  removal  from  small  scale  coastal  fleets.  The  capacities  of  the  over  12m 
passive  gear  segment  and  the  beam  trawl  segment  (lists  I  and  II)  were  reduced 
mainly due to the poor condition of the herring stocks.  

3 

Full time employment 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
2.5. 

Estonia 

The  guidelines  were  applied  in the report. Capacity utilisation is low  for the Baltic 
Sea trawlers, although it has increased from 60 to 70% while the number of vessels 
involved decreased. For the high seas vessels, capacity utilisation has an acceptable 
value. The ROI is positive for Baltic trawlers and high seas  vessels  but is  negative 
for  small-scale  vessels  (those  with  length  less  than  12  meters).  According  to  the 
Estonian  Marine  Institute  the  capacity  of  the  Baltic  trawlers  segment  and  the  high 
seas vessels were below the optimum capacity. In both cases this refers to the active 
fleet only. 

During 2010, the capacity of the Baltic trawlers segment decreased 10% in kW and 
2%  in  GT;  five  vessels  left  the  fleet  with  public  aid.  The  capacity  of  the  high  seas 
segment increased by 7%. 

2.6. 

Greece 

The report did not include the calculation of indicators proposed in the guidelines. It 
was  not  possible  to  provide  the  technical  and  biological  indicators  in  the  report 
because  the  National  Fisheries  Data  Collection  Programme  was  not  carried  out. 
However, from data on catches and fishing effort collected under other programmes, 
the report concludes that fishing activities and the situation of biological stocks were 
unchanged  from  the  previous  year.  In  2010  no  fishing  vessels  left  the  fleet  with 
public  aid.  The  vessels  withdrawn  from  the  fleet  were  mainly  small-scale  coastal 
fishing  vessels.  During  2010,  the  fishing  fleet  was  reduced  by  100  vessels  (0.6%), 
and its fishing capacity decreased by 0.08% in kW but increased by 0.1% in GT.  

2.7. 

Spain 

The guidelines were partially applied to some fleet segments due to difficulties with 
data availability and the diverse nature of the Spanish fleet. The only indicator used 
was  cpue4.  No  conclusions  on  the  balance  between  fishing  capacity  and  fishing 
opportunities  were  included  in  the  report.  The  report  provides  a  description  of  the 
various  fleets  segment  and  special  fishing  permits  which  make  the  Spanish  fleet, 
categorized by their area of operation, the fishing gears used and the species targeted. 

Between  2009  and  2010  the  capacity  of  the  fleet  was  reduced  by  274  vessels 
(2.46%),  by  5.6  %  in  terms  of  tonnage  and  4.5  %  in  terms  of  power.  However,  a 
relation between this capacity reduction and the fishing effort adjustment plans that 
concern the Spanish fleet was insufficiently established. 

2.8. 

France 

The  guidelines  were  not  applied  in  the  French  report;  instead  France  preferred  to 
apply four alternative indicators. Based on the trend in fleet capacity and the rate of 
quota  consumption  the  report  concludes  that  most  French  fisheries  show  a  balance 
between  fishing  capacity  and  fishing  opportunities.  The  capacity  of  the  continental 
French fleet continues to decline and was reduced by approximately 20% in terms of 
power  and  number  of  vessels  between  31  December  2006  and  31  December  2010. 

4 

Catch per unit of effort 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Over the same period, the high seas fleet registered in the French outermost regions 
was reduced by 10% while the small scale fleets in these regions increased its size by 
30%.  The  report  provides  a  list  of  all  special  fishing  permit  regimes  and  the  main 
species  subject  to  quota  or  effort  restrictions,  but  insufficiently  established  the 
relation between these regimes and fishing capacity reductions. 

2.9. 

Ireland 

The guidelines were not applied in the Irish report and no assessment of the balance 
between  fleet  capacity  and  fishing  opportunities  was  included.  The  fleet  is  divided 
into  five  segments.  The  most  important  ones  are  the  pelagic  segment,  made  of  23 
pelagic trawlers, and the polyvalent segment which comprises the bulk of the fleet. 
The report states that many of the targeted stocks are outside safe biological limits, 
which is evidenced by the decline in quotas and landings. The Irish fleet is subject to 
the  fishing  effort  reduction  scheme  adopted  under  Annex  II  to  the  TAC  and  quota 
Regulation  and  to  the  Western  Waters  regime,  but  the  administration  has  found  it 
difficult to assess the effect of effort reduction schemes on fleet capacity. 

2.10. 

Italy 

The guidelines were applied in the Italian report. The indicators were calculated on 
the  basis  of  2010  data.  The  only  biological  indicator  used  was  cpue.  Its  value 
decreased slightly in 2010 with respect to 2009, mainly due to the trawler segment, 
but  still  improved  for  small-scale  vessels,  seiners  and  netters.  Capacity  utilisation 
was lower than in 2009. The average figure for the whole fleet is only 54%, although 
trawlers, beam trawlers and seiner have values above 70%. The economic indicators 
present  negative  values  for  the  bigger  trawlers  and  seiners.  Overall,  the  balance 
between the fleet and the fishing opportunities worsened during 2010. 

During  2010,  the  capacity  of  the  Italian  fleet  was  reduced  by  approximately  4%  in 
terms  of  both  tonnage  and  3.2  %  in  power  while  the  number  of  vessels  decreased 
only by 0.5 %. 

2.11.  Cyprus 

The guidelines were applied in the report. There are indications of overcapacity for 
the demersal trawlers. Their cpue and income decreased and although they are fully 
utilized, they are subject to a long closed fishery period. For the small-scale fleet, a 
relatively stable cpue combined with low utilisation and decreasing income suggest 
an  excess  of  capacity.  The  fleet  segment  of  polyvalent  passive  gears  (12-24  m) 
although  underutilized,  showed  an  increase  in  cpue  and  income;  the  withdrawal  of 
vessels  under  the  fleet  adaptation  scheme  suggests  that  as  from  2010  the  capacity 
may be in balance with the fishing opportunities.  

During the period 2009-2010 the fishing fleet was reduced by 21.4% in GT, 11.4% in 
kW and 13.4% in number of vessels. In 2010 the implementation of the multiannual 
recovery  plan  for  bluefin  tuna  resulted  in  the  reduction  of  the  longliner  fleet  that 
targets this species by 44% in GT and 58% in kW.  

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
2.12.  Latvia 

The  guidelines  were  applied  in  the  report.  The  biological  indicators  calculated 
suggest  that  fishing  is  on  sustainable  or  close  to  sustainable  levels.  The  economic 
indicator  (CR/BER5)  shows  a  profitable  activity  for  all  segments  in  2009  and  the 
social  indicators  illustrate  the  economic  importance  of  the  fisheries  sector  for  the 
population. Capacity utilization has low values, less than 70% for all segments, but 
this  is  not  considered  a  sign  of  structural  imbalance.  On  this  basis,  the  report 
concludes  that  further  capacity  reductions  would  result  in  a  better  balance  between 
fishing capacity and fishing opportunities. 

During  2010,  the  capacity  of  the  fleet  decreased  by  424  GT  (1.0%),  by  1  002  kW 
(1.6%) and by 8 vessels (1.0%). 

2.13.  Lithuania 

The  guidelines  were  not  applied  in  the  report  and  no  assessment  of  the  balance 
between fleet capacity and fishing opportunities  was included. Lithuania  states that 
while  achieving  such  a  balance  the  fishing  fleet  must  retain  sufficient  overall 
capacity to be able to use the  quotas allocated  to it. For  the small-scale vessels the 
quota utilisation was relatively low.  

The  capacity  of  the  Lithuanian  fishing  fleet  was  reduced  in  2010  by  3  325  GT 
(6.75%),  by  1  990  kW  (3.53%)  and  by  22  vessels  (11.4%),  most  of  this  capacity 
having  come  out  of  the  long  distance  fleet.  Lithuania’s  fishing  fleet  was  reduced 
before  the  multiannual  cod  management  plan  for  the  Baltic  came  into  force  and 
therefore this plan did not have any impact on the reduction of the fleet.  

2.14.  Malta 

The guidelines were applied in the report. It concludes that the status of the resources 
exploited by the Maltese fishing fleet is such that a reduction in fishing capacity is 
not  required.  The  technical  indicator  shows  a  low  utilisation  of  the  fleet,  less  than 
half  of  the  Maltese  current  fleet  is  being  used.  The  biological  indicator  has  a  high 
value for the trawler fleet. The report states that the overall significance of this result 
is  low  because  there  is  insufficient  data  available  to  carry  out  analytical  stock 
assessments.  For  the  social  indicator  only  one  segment  is  considered  to  be 
sustainable in 2009.  

During 2010, 8 fishing vessels stopped their fishing activities through the permanent 
cessation  aid  scheme.  No  fishing  effort  adjustment  scheme  was  applied  to  the 
Maltese fleet. 

2.15.  The Netherlands 

The  guidelines  were  applied  to  the  beam  trawl  segment  and  to  the  pelagic  freezer 
trawler segment. The value of the technical indicator increased substantially for the 
beam trawl sector, from 0.67 in 2009 to 0.89 in 2010. The value would be 0.7 if the 
theoretical  maximum  number  of  days  is  calculated,  indicating  overcapacity  in  the 

5 

Current revenue divided by break-even revenue 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
fleet,  because  the  quota  could  be  harvested  with  fewer  vessels.  The  biological 
indicators is still greater than 1, but is expected to improve in 2011.  

The  flat  fish  sector  achieved  better  economic  results  in  2009  due  to  reduced  oil 
prices. For the pelagic fleet, the gross value added indicator shows a strong decrease 
caused by high fuel prices, reduced quota and decreased fish prices.  

In 2010 the number of vessels increased by 1.8%, but capacity decreased by 2% in 
kW and 5% in GT.  

2.16. 

Poland 

The  guidelines  were  applied  in  the  report.  The  report  concludes  that  the  level  of 
fishing capacity is safe for vessels under 10 metres and for vessels between 12 and 
18  metres  using  bottom  trawls.  For  other  segments,  there  is  a  risk  of  unbalanced 
fishing  capacity.  In  sub-areas  22–24  the  fishing  mortality  for  these  stocks  in  2008 
was  higher  than  target  mortality.  None  of  the  fleet  segments  achieved  good  results 
for  the  economic  capacity  indicators  used.  For  most  vessel  segments,  except  the 
pelagic  vessel  segment,  salaries  are  below  the  average  level  of  remuneration  in  the 
national economy. Added value generated by the Baltic fishing industry in 2008 was 
5.3 ‰ of GNI.  

In the course of 2010, 18 vessels were decommissioned with public aid, resulting in a 
permanent decrease in the Polish fleet's fishing capacity of 1 528 GT and 4 379 kW. 

2.17. 

Portugal 

The guidelines were applied in the report, which concludes that the fleet can operate 
on  a  sustainable  way,  from  both  a  biological  and  an  economic  point  of  view.  The 
indicators  show  a  low  capacity  utilisation  for  the  small  scale  fleet  and  low 
profitability  for  the  trawlers  with  length  over  24  m.  The  ratio  between  catches  and 
biomass was used as biological indicator for two species, sardines and hake. 

During 2010, the total fleet capacity decreased by 2.4 % and 2% in terms of tonnage 
and power respectively. The capacity of the coastal trawlers segment was reduced by 
more  than  8%,  while  in  Madeira  there  was  an  increase  in  capacity.  Portugal 
implemented seven fishing effort adjustment schemes, as a result of which 35 fishing 
vessels stopped their fishing activities with public aid during 2010.  

2.18.  Romania 

The  guidelines  were  not  applied  in  the  Romanian  report,  although  economic  data 
were provided. Of the 522 vessels in the fleet register only 380 vessels were active in 
2010.  Sprat  catches  (28.4  tons)  remain  far  below  the  quota  allocated  (12  750  tons) 
and the fleet is old and in poor technical condition. Therefore, the report concludes 
there is no imbalance between capacity and fish stocks. Moreover, the prohibition to 
use  bottom  trawling  supports  the  view  that  the  fleet  is  operating  in  a  sustainable 
manner from the biological point of view. 

During  2010  the  capacity  of  the  fleet  was  reduced  by  35.4%  in  terms  of  GT. 
Romania  registered  46  vessels  (396  GT  and  2  979  kW)  on  the  basis  of  an 
administrative decision taken before accession, and 9 vessels left the fleet with public 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
aid  with  a  total  capacity  of  565  GT  and  1  500  kW.  Romania  wishes  to  maintain  a 
minimum  level  of  its  fishing  fleet  ("minimum  vitalis"),  estimated  at  12-13  modern 
fishing vessels.  

2.19. 

Slovenia 

The guidelines were used in the report. cpue for anchovy shows a downward trend, 
while cpue for sardine shows an upward trend. A negative trend of catch per unit of 
effort  for  the  majority  of  the  target  species  has  been  established  for  the  fishing 
vessels using set gill nets and bottom otter trawls. 

The overcapacity of the Slovenian fishing fleet is evident from the technical indicator 
with values under 70%. In addition, analysis revealed that the fishing effort for gill 
nets, trammel nets and bottom otter trawls is too high.  

In  2010,  there  were  no  changes  in  the  Slovenian  fishing  fleet.  Slovenia  intends  to 
implement  measures  for  the  limitations  of  fishing  effort,  the  opportunity  to  reduce 
the  number  of  vessels  by  providing  public  aid  for  scrapping  and  the  possibility  for 
permanent or temporary withdrawal from the fishing fleet. 

2.20. 

Finland 

The report did not use the guidelines but it concluded that the fleet can be considered 
to  be  in  an  acceptable  balance  with  the  fishing  opportunities.  Quota  utilisation  is 
somewhat  low  for  all  species,  except  for  sprat  and  cod.  The  pelagic  fishery  is 
considered  to  be  fully  exploited  so  no  increase  in  capacity  has  been  allowed  for 
vessels over 12 meters.  

During 2010 there was a slight increase in the total fleet capacity of 143 GT and 440 
kW. This increase took place in the small scale coastal fisheries, while at the same 
time the capacity of the pelagic trawler fleet decreased. In 2010 the effort increased 
by 8.8% in relation to 2009, most of this increase in the pelagic fisheries.  

2.21. 

Sweden 

The  guidelines  were  applied  in  the  report.  The  indicators  reveal  overcapacity  in 
several segments of the fleet. The gross value added shows that fishing contributes to 
the economy, although is considered low per FTE or per vessel. Fishing mortality is 
still  too  high  in  three  segments.  Capacity  utilisation  varies  between  30  and  72% 
(calculated for kW-days). The fleet is subject to the cod recovery plan in Skagerrak, 
Kattegat and the North Sea. A scrapping scheme targeting bottom trawlers affected 
by these measures reduced the capacity by 1 426 GT and 6 284 kW.  

Overall the capacity decreased by 3.6% in number of vessels, by 12.4% in GT and by 
7.8% in kW. The entry-exit system, scrapping schemes and the transferable fishing 
rights for the pelagic fishery have played a part in adapting fishing capacity. 

2.22.  United Kingdom 

The UK had not submitted its report. 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
3. 

COMPLIANCE WITH FISHING CAPACITY MANAGEMENT RULES 

All Member States have complied with these rules, including the specific limitations 
for  the  fleets  registered  in  the  outermost  regions.  But  it  should  be  noted  that  the 
capacity  ceilings  were  not  restrictive  anymore  and  by  that  did  not  contribute  at  the 
moment  to  the  objective  of  reducing  overcapacity.  Overall,  the  fishing  capacity  of 
the  EU  fleet  was  12  %  below  the  capacity  ceilings  for  tonnage  and  9%  below  the 
power  ceilings, with these margins varying from 2% to 63% (tables 1 and 2 of the 
technical annex to this report). 

According to the EU fishing fleet register, on 31 December 2010 the EU fishing fleet 
was made of 78 831 vessels with a total fishing capacity of 1 674 320 GT and 6 058 
017  kW.  During  2010,  the  number  of  vessels  decreased  by  0.96  %,  while  tonnage 
and  power  decreased  by  3.8  %  and  2.5  %  respectively.  These  figures  include  the 
vessels  registered  in  the  outermost  regions.  This  limited  decrease  in  capacity  is 
hardly sufficient to compensate an estimated technical progress of 3% per year. 

During  the  eight  year  period  from  2003  to  2010,  approximately  338  000  GT  and 
1058  000  kW were withdrawn from the EU  fleet (including the outermost regions) 
with public aid, of which 32 672 GT and 87 645 kW were withdrawn in 2010. 

4. 

QUALITY OF MEMBER STATES' REPORTS 

Of the twenty-two Member States concerned, fifteen Member States were judged to 
have given an overall opinion concerning the balance between fishing capacity and 
fishing opportunities. The UK has not submitted its fleet report.  

Of those fifteen Member States eight Member States received from STECF a quality 
score  of  equal  to or  more than two points (out of three points), and  seven Member 
States  had  a  quality  score  of  equal  to  or  less  than  one  and  a  half  points.  Only  four 
Member States achieved the maximum score of three points. 

This outcome means that although a growing number of Member States are applying 
in  full  or  in  part  the  Commission  Services  guidelines  and  submitting  their  reports 
within the deadline, improvements are still necessary in order to achieve the quality 
needed to be able to draw a comprehensive overview of the balance between fishing 
capacity and fishing opportunities.  

In  some  cases  the  claim  of  having  a  balance  between  fleet  capacity  and  fishing 
opportunities  is  not  underpinned  by  any  capacity  indicator  of  the  guidelines,  or  a 
substitute  thereof.  More  work  needs  to  be  done  to  better  justify  these  assessments 
based on the results of the indicators.  

In order to be able to monitor the balance, Member States are strongly recommended 
to  use  the  Commission  Services  guidelines  and  give  reasoned  conclusions  on  the 
state of that balance. STECF concludes in the plenary report of November 2011 that 
balance or imbalance itself cannot be measured or given a quantitative value, given 
the  complexity  of  the  factors  to  be  taken  into  account  (biological,  economic  and 
social).  Therefore  qualitative  descriptive  assessments  of  the  degree  of  balance  or 
imbalance between fleet capacity and fishing opportunity are useful when based on 
evidence. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
In addition to reliable data, the knowledge and experience of the Member State about 
the  situation  of  its  fleets  is  of  utmost  importance  and  enables  a  Member  State  to 
present a responsible and well underpinned analysis on the balance between fishing 
capacity and fishing opportunities.  

Nevertheless, Member States still encounter problems when applying the guidelines. 
The Court of Auditors concluded that the rules under which Member States report on 
their efforts to balance fishing capacity with fishing opportunities are inadequate and 
lack  clarity.  The  Court  states  that  this  is  one  of  the  reasons  for  the  incomplete  and 
inadequate  reporting  by  most  Member  States,  with  the  consequence  that  it  is 
impossible  to  derive  conclusions  regarding  fishing  overcapacity.  The  biological 
indicators are still the most problematic. The mortality ratios or the catch to biomass 
ratios  are  of  limited  applicability  due  to  its  complexity  or  lack  of  data.  The 
Commission  will  work  with  STECF  and  Member  States  to  further  develop  the 
existing  Commission  Services  guidelines  for  the  Member  States  on  how  to  assess 
overcapacity  and  introduce  reporting  templates,  designed  by  STECF,  to  provide 
greater clarity on the requested information and reporting structure. 

The assessment of STECF was summarized as follows: 

Overall  there  is  once  again  substantial  variation  in  the  completeness  and  quality  of 
MS reports for 2010 but there is a further general improvement in completeness and 
quality  compared  to  the  reports  for  2009.  Balance  indicators  were  presented  to  an 
overall higher standard than in the 2009 reports. 

Key points of note are: 

There has been some further overall improvement in providing the required elements 
of the MS reports compared to the 2009 reports. 

Five  MS  (Cyprus,  Malta,  Portugal,  Slovenia  and  Sweden)  achieved  full  marks  for 
including required elements, compared to only two MS for their 2009 reports, despite 
stricter judging on inclusion of required elements this year. 

The  required  element  presented  by  the  least  number  of  MS  is,  once  again,  element 
1.d.ii, plan for improvements in the fleet management system, which was presented 
by only eight MS. 

15 MS  were judged to have given an  overall opinion on whether their fleet was or 
was  not  in  balance  with  its  fishing  opportunity  in  2010  (compared  to  13  in  2009 
reports and 7 in the 2008 reports).  

Sweden made the biggest improvement in quality score, moving from 16.5 for their 
2009 report to 30 out of 33 possible marks for their 2010 report. 

Table  1  shows  STECF's  scoreboard  for  inclusion  of  required  elements  in  the  MS 
reports. 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
Q 

Required element of report 

1A 

i) Description of fleets 

ii) Link with fisheries 

iii) Development in fleets 

i) statement of effort reduction schemes 

1B 

ii)  impact  on  fishing  capacity  of  effort 
reduction schemes 

1C 

Statement  of  compliance  with  entry  /  exit 
scheme and with level of reference 

i)  Summary  of  weaknesses  &  strengths  of 
fleet management system 

1D 

1E 

2 

O 

ii)  plan 
management system 

for 

improvements 

in 

fleet 

information  on  general 

iii) 
compliance with fleet policy instruments 

level  of 

Information on changes of the 
administrative procedures relevant to fleet 
management 

Report 10 pages or less?  

Overall: does report assess balance between 
capacity & opportunity? 

Max 
scores 

2 

3 

3 

2 

3 

2 

1 

2 

1 

1 

1 

3 

E
B

G
B

Y
C

K
D

E
E

I
F

R
F

E
D

L
E

E
I

T
I

V
L

T
L

T
M

L
N

L
P

T
P

O
R

I
S

S
E

E
S

2 

3 

3 

2 

3 

2 

3 

3 

2 

3 

2 

3 

3 

2 

3 

2 

3 

3 

2 

3 

2 

3 

3 

2 

3 

2 

3 

3 

2 

3 

2 

3 

3 

2 

3 

2 

3 

3 

0 

3 

2 

3 

3 

2 

3 

2 

3 

0 

2 

3 

2 

3 

3 

2 

3 

2 

3 

3 

2 

3 

2 

3 

3 

2 

3 

2 

3 

3 

2 

3 

2 

3 

3 

2 

3 

2 

3 

3 

2 

3 

2 

3 

3 

2 

3 

2 

3 

3 

2 

3 

2 

3 

3 

2 

3 

2 

3 

3 

2 

3 

2 

3 

3 

2 

3 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

0 

1 

1 

1 

0 

1 

0 

1 

0 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

0 

1 

0 

2 

2 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

2 

0 

0 

0 

0 

2 

0 

2 

2 

0 

2 

0 

2 

0 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

0 

0 

0 

1 

1 

0 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

3 

0 

1 

3 

1 

1 

3 

1 

1 

3 

0 

1 

0 

1 

1 

3 

0 

0 

3 

1 

1 

3 

1 

1 

3 

0 

1 

0 

1 

0 

3 

1 

1 

0 

1 

1 

0 

1 

1 

3 

1 

1 

3 

1 

1 

0 

1 

1 

3 

1 

1 

3 

1 

1 

3 

1 

0 

0 

1 

1 

3 

Total scores:  

24 

20 

23 

24 

22 

17 

22 

19 

19 

22 

14 

21 

19 

18 

24 

22 

21 

24 

22 

24 

17 

24 

Table 1: Scores by Member State for inclusion of required elements in annual reports Table 1: Scores by Member State for quality of required elements in 
annual reports

EN 

11 

EN 

 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
5. 

CONCLUSIONS 

Fleet capacity remains one of the main obstacles to achieve sustainable fisheries and 
is  one  of  the  elements  that  the  Commission  proposes  to  address  with  the  proposed 
reform of the Common Fisheries Policy.  

The data form 2010 indicates that capacity reductions during 2010, 3.6 % in tonnage 
and  2%  in  power  are  in  line  with  those  of  previous  years  although  they  seemed  to 
indicate a slight acceleration of the capacity adjustment in terms to tonnage. 

The  amount  of  capacity  decommissioned  with  public  aid  in  2010  was  reduced  in 
relation  to  2009  and  was  concentrated  in  a  few  Member  States.  Spain,  Italy  and 
France  accounted  for  approximately  80%  of  the  total  tonnage.  This  tonnage 
decommissioned with public aid represented approximately 50% of the net tonnage 
reduction during the year.  

A  weakness  in  the  management  system,  mentioned  in  the  Danish  report,  is  the 
difficulty to verify whether the engine power is stated correctly. This is not a specific 
Danish problem, but concerns other Member States as well.  

Once more, the data on nominal fleet reduction tells us very little regarding the real 
question of overcapacity: the inability of fixed parameters (such as GT and kW) to 
capture technical progress, together with the difficulties related to the measurement 
of  engine  power  in  practice,  makes  the  formal  compliance  with  capacity  limits 
almost meaningless. 

The  2009  Annual  Economic  Report  revealed  that  a  significant  number  of  fishing 
vessels,  most  of  them  of  small  size,  had  no  fishing  activity.  Although  inactivity  of 
vessels  can  be  due  to  a  variety  of  technical,  economical  and  social  reasons,  a 
combination  of  low  activity  levels,  excessive  fishing  pressure  in  some  stocks  and 
poor economic performance indicate that excess of capacity remains one of the main 
obstacles in the way to sustainable fishing. A consistent  approach on how  to apply 
the capacity of inactive vessels in the assessment of overcapacity is necessary, as it 
might  lead  to  a  different  conclusion  on  the  existence  of  overcapacity.  As  many 
inactive vessels are more or less 'ready to fish', they should be taken into account in 
order to have a complete view on overcapacity.  

Some  fleet  segments  depend  on  the  availability  of  subsidies  in  order  to  survive.  A 
high dependency of subsidies in order to be able to deliver good economic and social 
results is another indication of possible economic overcapacity.  

Several Member States have concluded in their reports that a reduced capacity would 
contribute  to  improve  the  biological  and  economic  sustainability  of  certain  fishing 
activities. The reduction in fishing capacity, with or without the use of public funds, 
in order to achieve a balance between fishing capacity and fishing opportunities is a 
responsibility  of  the  Member  States  concerned.  Capacity  adjustments  depend  not 
only  on  the  measures  taken  by  Member  States’  administrations  but  also  on  the 
sector’s  willingness  to  reduce  fishing  capacity.  At  the  current  rate  of  capacity 
reductions,  which  are  at  least  partly  compensated  by  technological  progress,  it  will 
be difficult to eliminate overcapacity in the short term if no changes are made to the 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
current  policy.  These  observations  put  into  question  the  need  and  effectiveness  of 
publicly financed capacity reductions. Also the Court of Auditors concluded in their 
report  that  current  measures  have  failed  and  that  either  a  new  approach  to  tackling 
the  problem  needs  to  be  adopted  and,  or  existing  measures  have  to  be  better 
enforced. 

Despite  the  use  of  better  defined  indicators,  the  current  capacity  limitations  turned 
out  to  be  not  effective  in  dealing  with  the  overcapacity.  The  Commission  is 
addressing the shortcomings of the current system in its Reform proposals for a new 
Common Fisheries Policy.  

EN 

13 

   EN