REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL on the implementation of Article 9.3 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1967/2006 concerning management measures for the sustainable exploitation of fishery resources in the Mediterranean Sea
Date: 2012-07-10
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Mediterranean Sea, catch of fish, fishery resources, fishing controls, fishing net

EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 10.7.2012  
COM(2012) 370 final 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND 
THE COUNCIL 

on the implementation of Article 9.3 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1967/2006 
concerning management measures for the sustainable exploitation of fishery resources 
in the Mediterranean Sea 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND 
THE COUNCIL 

on the implementation of Article 9.3 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1967/2006 
concerning management measures for the sustainable exploitation of fishery resources 
in the Mediterranean Sea 

INTRODUCTION 

This  report  is  submitted  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  Article  9.3  (3)  of  Council 
Regulation (EC) No 1967/2006 of 21 December 2006 concerning management measures for 
the sustainable exploitation of fishery resources in the Mediterranean Sea1.  

Article  9.3  lays  down  the  minimum  mesh  size  to  be  used  at  the  cod-end  of  towed  nets  (i.e. 
trawl nets; boat seines and shore seines). The main objective of setting a minimum mesh size 
for towed gears was to avoid further increase in mortality rates of juveniles. 

Article  9.3  stipulates  in  its  sub-paragraph  (3)  that  the  Commission  will  submit  by  30  June 
2012  a  report  on  the  implementation  of  this  provision  to  the  European  Parliament  and  the 
Council.  

Article  9.3(3)  specifies  that the  Commission  should  take  into  account  information  delivered 
by  Member  States  before  31  December  2011.  As  no  information  was  received  by  the 
Commission  by  that  date,  at  the  beginning  of  20122  the  Commission  services  asked  all 
Mediterranean  Member  States  to  provide  data  on  the  degree  of  implementation  of  the 
minimum mesh size requirements, the cost incurred by operators and the possible impact on 
selectivity. Replies were received from Cyprus, France, Spain, Italy, Malta and Slovenia, and 
were used in the report. 

The  Commission  also  used  the  information  collected  and  observations  made  during 
verification missions carried out by Commission officials from July 2010 to April 2012.  

PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 9 

The  relevant  provisions  regarding  minimum  mesh  size  are  contained  in  paragraphs  1-4  of 
Article 9 and read as follows: 

Article 9 

Minimum mesh sizes 

(1) 

The use for fishing and the keeping on board of a towed net, a surrounding net or a 
gillnet  shall  be  prohibited,  unless  the  mesh  size  in  that  part  of  the  net  having  the 
smallest meshes complies with paragraphs 3 to 6 of this Article. 

1 
2 

OJ L 409, 30.12.2006; Corrigendum OJ L 36, 8.2.2007, p.7. 
Letter of 10.02.2012 ref. Ares(2012)154023 

EN 

2 

   EN 

                                                 
(2) 

(3) 

The  mesh  size  shall  be  determined  by  the  procedures  specified  in  Commission 
Regulation (EC) No 129/20033. 

For towed nets, other than those referred to in paragraph 4, the minimum mesh size 
shall be: 

(1)  until 30 June 2008: 40 mm; 

(2) 

from 1 July 2008, the net referred to in point 1 shall be replaced by a square-
meshed net of 40 mm at the cod-end or, at the duly justified request of the ship-
owner, by a diamond meshed net of 50 mm. 

In relation to the previous subparagraph, fishing vessels shall be authorised to 
use and keep on board only one of the two types of net; 

(3)  The Commission shall submit a report on the implementation of this paragraph 
to the European Parliament and the Council by 30 June 2012, on the basis of 
which  as  well  as  on  the  basis  of  the  information  delivered  by  Member  States 
before 31 December 2011, it shall propose due adjustments where appropriate. 

(4) 

For  trawl  nets  targeting  sardine  and  anchovy,  where  these  species  account  for  at 
least 80 % of the catch in live weight after sorting, the minimum mesh size shall be 
20 mm.  

The  Regulation  provided  for  transitional  arrangements,  under  Article  14,  and  gave  EU 
operators using smaller mesh sizes up to 31 May 2010 to change their gear appropriately.  

In  2011,  in  the  framework  of  the  implementation  of  a  recommendation  by  the  General 
Fisheries  Commission  for  the  Mediterranean,  the  European  Parliament  and  the  Council 
adopted the following amendment replacing Article 9.3:  

(1)  For towed nets, other than those referred to in paragraph 4, the minimum mesh 

size shall be at least: 

(a)  a square-meshed net of 40 mm at the cod-end; or 

(b)  at the duly justified request of the ship owner, a diamond-meshed net of 
50 mm of an acknowledged size selectivity that is equivalent to or higher 
than that of nets referred to under point (a). 

Fishing vessels shall be authorised to use and keep on board only one of the 
two types of nets. 

The Commission shall submit a report on the implementation of this paragraph 
to the European Parliament and the Council by 30 June 2012, on the basis of 
which,  as  well  as  on  the  basis  of  the  information  supplied  by  Member  States 
it  shall  propose  due  amendments  where 
before  31  December  2011, 
appropriate.’; 

3 

Replaced since by Commission Regulation (EC) No 517/2008, OJ L 151 of 11.6.2008 

EN 

3 

   EN 

                                                 
COD-END OF TOWED NETS 

The cod-end, or bag, is the rearmost part of a towed net. Annex 1(f) of Regulation 1967/2006 
provides,  in  particular,  a  definition  for  the  cod-end  of  trawl  nets  as  the  rearmost  part  of  the 
trawl,  consisting  of  meshes  of  the  same  size  and  having  either  a  cylindrical  or  a  tapering 
shape. The cod-end may be rigged directly to the trawl net body or connected with it through 
an untapered extension piece. The cod-end in trawl nets may sometime be distinguished in the 
cod-end sensu stricto and the extension piece.  

Article 9.3 fixes the minimum mesh size specifically for the cod-end because this is the part 
of the towed nets that has the smallest meshes, where the fish is conveyed and accumulates. 
This means that the meshes in the rest of the net should be greater than those of the cod-end.  

INTERPRETATION  

Inspections  carried  out  by  the  Commission  and  contacts  with  national  administrations 
revealed that Member States did not correctly interpret Article 9.3, in particular regarding the 
allowable  mesh  size  in  the  parts  of  the  net  outside  the  cod-end.  In  order  to  ensure  coherent 
and correct application of the Article, the Commission has provided the Member States with 
detailed guidance.  

Since  2007,  the  Commission  has  regularly  underlined  at  the  Committee  for  Fisheries  and 
Aquaculture and in high-level meetings4 that Article 9.3 defines the cod-end as the part of the 
net  with  the  smallest  mesh  size  and  that  the  meshes  in  the  other  parts  should  be  bigger. 
Further clarifications were provided by explanatory notes dated 18 April 2011 and 22 March 
2012. In these notes the Commissioner underlined that: 

(a) 

(b) 

where  the  cod-end  is  made  of  a  square-meshed  net  of  40mm,  the  mesh  size  in  the 
extension  piece  shall  exceed  40mm  regardless of  the  shape  (square  or  diamond)  of 
the mesh; 

where,  at  the  duly  justified  request  of  the  ship-owner,  the  cod-end  is  made  of 
diamond-meshed  net  of  50mm,  the  extension  piece  shall  have  a  mesh  size  greater 
than 50mm regardless of the shape of the mesh (square or diamond).  

IMPLEMENTATION BY MEMBER STATES 

Information provided by Member States 

By letter of 10 February 2012, Member States were requested to provide information on the 
way  Article  9.3  was  implemented.  The  Commission  analysed  the  information  provided  by 
Member  States,  which  gives  an  overview  of  the  various  aspects  of  implementation.  This 
analysis excludes Greece who had not provided the information requested at the time of the 
drafting of this report  

4 

Committee meetings of 11 July 2007, 2 October 2007, 30 October 2007 and 4 December 2007; high-
level meetings of 23 January 2008 and 15 July 2009 

EN 

4 

   EN 

                                                 
1. Number of vessels concerned by the change 

In total, in the six Member States change of cod-ends concerned 2 525 vessels. A particular 
problem was signalled by France regarding gangui trawlers, which account for more than half 
of  the  French  trawlers  in  the  Mediterranean.  Gangui  trawlers  carry  out  traditional  fishery 
targeting  a  mix  of  demersal  species  and  use  a  cod-end  of  20mm  mesh  size.  The  French 
authorities indicated that this mesh is necessary for gangui-trawls to maintain their traditional 
activity. No other Member States have signalled similar issues in their report.  

The Regulation does  not however  give any possibility  to  derogate  from  the  minimum  mesh 
size set in Article 9.3 for the trawl nets.  

2. Type of mesh used 

Vessels  overwhelmingly  use  a  diamond  shaped  mesh.  Only  95  out  of  2  525  use  a  square 
mesh, while 2 430 use a diamond one.  

According to Article 9.3 the use of diamond meshes at the cod-end has to be duly justified by 
ship-owners.  The  Commission  therefore  sought  to  know  what  justifications  ship-owners 
presented  in  this  respect.  The  following  categories  could  be  identified  on  the  basis  of 
information provided by Member States: 

–  Diamond meshes come at a lower cost as they are more widely available on local markets. 
The material used to make square meshes requires a particular expertise which most local 
manufacturers do not have. 

–  Square meshes are more difficult to repair. 

–  The  rigging  of  the  nets  was  incompatible  with  a  square  mesh,  as  the  rest  of  the  net  was 

composed of diamond meshes. 

–  In some cases, fishermen had their own reserves of diamond mesh nets and did not wish to 

undergo the expense of buying new ones. 

–  Diamond meshes are more resistant than square meshes.  

–  Diamond mesh causes less damage to the fish caught. 

It  should  be  noted  that  the  amendment  of  2011,  transposing  the  GFCM  recommendation 
33/2009/2 adopted on May 2009, expresses in a clearer manner a further requirement for the 
justification  of  a  50  mm  diamond  mesh  at  the  cod-end.  The  mesh  has  to  be  of  ‘an 
acknowledged selectivity that is equivalent to or higher than’ that of a square mesh of 40 mm. 
The  justifications  reported  by  Member  States  do  not  reflect  such  elements,  despite  the  fact 
that the GFCM recommendation was already binding for the Member States and the EU after 
its entry into force, in December 2009. For the Commission, due justification should under all 
circumstances include also considerations of selectivity, not only cost and resistance.  

3. Cost incurred 

Information on cost related to the change of cod-ends was provided by five Member States. 
Cost varied greatly, depending on the length of the cod-end and whether other parts of the net 
had also to be changed.  

EN 

5 

   EN 

The  reported  length  of  cod-ends  concerned  by  the  change  varied  between  1  and  14  metres, 
mostly ranging between 2.5 and 12 metres.  

For the vast majority (97%) of vessels for which cost information was given, the cost incurred 
was  between  500  and  1000  Euro.  This  cost  however  was  considerably  higher  when  further 
parts of the net had to be changed. In a few cases where the whole net had to be changed, the 
cost could reach 24,000 Euro. 

4. Timing 

Most  Member  States  declared  that  the  changes  in  the  nets  had  been  completed  by  31  May 
2010,  which  was  the  end  of  the  transitional  period  for  compliance.  In  some  cases,  Member 
States  allowed  flexibility  in  the  implementation  of  the  minimum  mesh  size  until  the  doubts 
over the interpretation of Article 9.3 could be dispelled. In addition, as mentioned above, not 
all Member States have confirmed their agreement on the interpretation of the allowable mesh 
size in the parts of the net outside the cod-end. As a consequence, the minimum mesh size is 
not always applied in the same way in the Mediterranean area and Article 9.3 cannot therefore 
be considered as fully implemented yet.  

5. Impact on selectivity 

The Commission asked Member States to provide information on catch composition by size 
and  species  before  and  after  the  replacement  of  the  nets.  Data  on  catch  composition  were 
provided by three Member States and data on size by two only. They indicate that the change 
of  the  nets  affected  the  species  composition  to  a  small  extent,  but  had  a  clearer  impact  on 
sizes,  which  increased  over  10%  after  the  change  of  the  nets.  This  means  that  catch  of 
juveniles has to some extent decreased, which is already a good indicator that the increase in 
mesh size can be efficient 

These data should be considered as indicative only, as they are limited in space and time. One 
Member State raised the importance of implementing the increase in the trawl mesh sizes not 
only  at  EU  level  but  on  a  regional  basis  in  collaboration  with  the  General  Fisheries 
Commission for the Mediterranean. Full respect of GFCM recommendation 33/2009/2 should 
therefore be further promoted in the whole area.  

Enforcement 

Information provided by Member States 

Four Member States reported that, in total, they have carried out 3 182 inspections on mesh 
size  and  found  84  infringements.  The  level  of  fines  applied  were  reported  by  two  Member 
States and varied between 500 and 2000 Euro. In some cases, the illegal gear was seized or a 
warning was given to the vessel to change it. 

Observations by the Commission 

The Commission carried out verification missions under Title X of the Control Regulation5 to 
check, inter alia, how Article 9.3 was being enforced by Member States. These verifications 
found in many instances that gear was not in conformity with minimum mesh requirements, 

5 

Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  1224/2009  of  20  November  2009  establishing  a  Community  control 
system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy, OJ L 343, 23.12.2009 

EN 

6 

   EN 

                                                 
even after the transitional period had expired on 31 May 2010. Although some progress could 
be seen in some Member States in 2011, many trawler nets with illegal mesh sizes could still 
be observed. This clearly indicates that, in order to properly enforce the minimum mesh size, 
Member States will have to strengthen their control efforts and/or apply stricter sanctions. 

A further shortcoming in the controls carried out by Member States was the frequent absence 
of appropriate mesh measuring instruments. Since June 2008, in line with Council Regulation 
517/20086, the determination of mesh size has to be performed with specific EC-gauges, for 
which  this  regulation  sets  the  exact  specifications.  If  the  measurement  is  made  with  other 
types of instruments, it is not considered to be legal. Thus, even in the case where a mesh size 
is obviously less than the minimum allowed, no sanctions can be applied if the infringement is 
not established with the correct instruments. Member States’ inspectors do not always carry 
this  instrument  or  are  not  properly  trained  to  use  it,  although  most  Member  States  are  now 
equipped with it. One Member State is not in a position to enforce minimum mesh size, as it 
has no EC-gauges available at all.  

CONCLUSION 

There  are  still  significant  shortcomings  in  the  implementation  and  enforcement  of  the 
minimum  mesh  size  in  towed  nets  in  Member  States.  One  of  the  reasons  for  the  delay  in 
implementation involves the problem of interpretation Member States had with the provisions 
of  Article  9.3.  These  provisions  have  been  clarified  by  the  Commission  and  should  now  be 
understood and applied in the same way by all Member States.  

In  order  to  enforce  minimum  mesh  size,  the  Commission  expects  Member  States  to  apply 
more  rigorous  and  targeted  control,  using  the  appropriate  measuring  instruments,  and  make 
sure sanctions are sufficiently deterrent.  

In  view  of  the  explanations  provided,  the  Commission  has  asked  all  Member  States  to  take 
urgent  measures  to  ensure  full  and  correct  application  of  these  provisions  and  to  closely 
monitor the state of play to ensure that full implementation is reached. Where appropriate, the 
Commission  will  not  hesitate  to  make  use  of  the  means  available  to  it  under  the  Treaty  to 
ensure compliance with the concerned provisions.  

As  regards  the  impact  of  the  implementation  of  minimum  size  on  selectivity,  there  are 
indications that the average size increased. However, a full analysis can only be made once 
the remaining shortcomings have been addressed and on the basis of data to be provided by 
all Member States.  

6 

Commission  Regulation  (EC)  No  517/2008  of  10  June  2008  laying  down  detailed  rules  for  the 
implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 850/98 as regards the determination of the mesh size 
and assessing the thickness of twine of fishing nets, OJ L 151, 11.6.2008 

EN 

7 

   EN