COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL Action Plan for reducing incidental catches of seabirds in fishing gears
Date: 2012-11-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU action, bird, by-catch, fishing net, marine ecosystem

EUROPEAN 
COMMISSION 

Brussels, 16.11.2012  
COM(2012) 665 final 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL 

Action Plan for reducing incidental catches of seabirds in fishing gears 

{SWD(2012) 369 final} 
{SWD(2012) 370 final} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
  
 
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL 

Action Plan for reducing incidental catches of seabirds in fishing gears 

1. 

INTRODUCTION 

Interactions between fisheries and seabirds are frequent and  widespread leading to levels of 
incidental  seabird  mortality  which  pose  a  serious  threat  to  many  seabird  populations  and 
which have an adverse effect on fishing productivity and profitability.  

Current management measures to protect seabirds are contained in a wide range of fisheries 
and  environmental  legislation  as  well  as  a  number  of  international  Conventions  and 
Agreements.  These  measures,  however,  have  been  largely  ineffective  in  reducing  seabird 
bycatch except in some isolated cases in external waters.  

The Action Plan in this Communication (EU-PoA) seeks to provide a management framework 
to minimise seabird bycatch to as low levels as are practically possible. This is in line with the 
objectives  of  the  reformed  Common  Fisheries  Policy  (CFP)  of  moving  towards  ecosystem 
management  covering  all  components  of  the  ecosystem  including  seabirds.  It  is  also 
consistent  with  the  framework  of  an  International  Plan  of  Action  (IPOA)  for  Reducing  the 
Incidental Catches of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries1 adopted in  1999  by  the UN Food and 
Agriculture Organisation (FAO) Committee on Fisheries (COFI).  

2. 

BYCATCH AND ITS MITIGATION 

Advice  received  from  ICES  in  20082  (updated  in  2009  and  20103)  indicates  that  there  is  a 
paucity of data on the distribution of seabird species, threat vulnerability, overall conservation 
status  and  levels  of  incidental  catches.  This  presents  a  challenge  in  assessing  the  impact  of 
fisheries  on  these  species  and  reflects  the  lack  of  systematic  monitoring  and  reporting  of 
seabird  bycatch.  However,  the  available  data  indicates  seabird  mortality  is  substantial  in  a 
number of areas within EU fisheries. Recent estimates3 report bycatch by the EU fishing fleet 
at  c.a.  200,000  seabirds  annually  in  EU  waters,  while  a  report  by  Birdlife  International4 
estimates  global  seabird  bycatch  in  longline  fisheries  to  be  at  least  160,000  and  potentially 
320,000 seabirds per year. At least 49 species (25 in EU waters and 24 in non-EU waters) are 
classified as being of conservation concern either globally or at a local population level. The 

1 

2 

3 

4 

FAO.  1999.  International  Plan  of  Action  for  reducing  incidental  catches  of  seabirds  in  longline 
fisheries. Rome, FAO. 1999. pp 1-11.  
ICES Advice 2008, Book 1, 1.5.1.3 Interactions between fisheries and seabirds in EU waters 
ICES.  2008.  Report  of  the  Working  Group  on  Seabird  Ecology  (WGSE),  ICES  CM  2008/LRC:05. 
99pp. 
ICES. 2009. Report of the Working Group on Seabird Ecology (WGSE), 23-27 March 2009, Bruges, 
Belgium. ICES CM 2009/LRC:10.91 pp. 
ICES.  2010.  Report  of  the  Working  Group  on  Seabird  Ecology  (WGSE),  15-19  March  2010, 
Copenhagen, Denmark. ICES CM 2010/SSGEF:10.77pp. 
Anderson O.R.J., Small C.J., Croxall J.P., Dunn E.K., Sullivan B.J. Yates O. and Black A. 2011. Global 
seabird bycatch in longline fisheries. Endangered Species Research Vol. 14:91-106. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
                                                 
 
 
data  also  highlights  longlines5  and  static  nets6  as  the  gears  with  the  highest  seabird  bycatch 
although there are reports of incidental catches in trawl7 and purse seine8 fisheries.  

2.1. 

Longlines 

ICES reports that at least 20 species of seabirds interact with longline fisheries in EU waters, 
principally in the Mediterranean pelagic and demersal longline fisheries and the N.E. Atlantic 
(Gran Sol) demersal longline fishery, although ICES3 reports bycatch of seabirds in almost all 
EU  longline  fisheries.  Four  species  are  notable  for  their  high  conservation  status  with 
moderate  to  high  frequency  of  capture  in  longline  gear  relative  to  their  populations.  The 
Balearic  Shearwater  is  classed  by  the  IUCN  as  Critically  Endangered,  meaning  it  has  been 
evaluated  to  have  a  very  high  risk  of  extinction  in  the  wild.  Three  others,  the  Sooty 
shearwater,  Yelkouan  shearwater  and  Audouin's  gull  are  classified  as  Near  Threatened 
meaning the population is in moderately rapid decline globally.  

In  addition  to  these  species  a  further  five  are  listed  in  the  Birds  Directive9  as  having 
unfavourable conservation status requiring "special conservation measures" due to declines in 
localised  populations.  These  include  the  Corys  shearwater  and  Mediterranean  gull  in  the 
Mediterranean and the Black-legged kittiwake, Black guillemot and Manx shearwater in the 
NE Atlantic10. For all of these species significant levels of bycatch are reported2,10.  

Several other species - the Yellow-legged gull in the Mediterranean and the Northern fulmar, 
Great shearwater and Northern gannet in the N.E. Atlantic have high incidental catches and 
ICES  reports  that  the  sheer  scale  of  the  numbers  caught  in  longline  fisheries  is  cause  for 
concern even though the populations of these species are relatively stable2,3. 

2.2. 

Static nets 

Static  nets,  encompassing  gillnets,  entangling  nets  and  trammel  nets  are  widely  used  in  EU 
waters. Static net fisheries tend to be seasonal and a wide range of seabird species can interact 
but  most  likely  to  get  caught  in  nets  are  coastal  species  that  either  forage  on  the  bottom  or 
shallow  dive  to  pursue  prey  through  the  water  column.  Many  of  the  fishing  grounds  in  the 
Baltic  and  North  Sea  are  important  feeding,  resting,  moulting  and  overwintering  areas  for 
seabirds which are present only during the non-breeding period (winter time). This means the 
impact  of  incidental  catches  on  seabird  populations  is  directly  dependent  on  the  temporal 
overlap of static net fisheries with these species. 

The  information  available  on  incidental  catches  of  seabirds  in  static  nets  is  not  complete 
enough  for  a  comprehensive  understanding  of  the  magnitude  of  the  impacts  on  seabird 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

Longlines mean a number of connected lines, either set at the bottom or drifting bearing a large number 
of baited hooks. 
Static nets  mean nets for which the catch operation does not require an active  movement of the nets. 
Such nets consist of one or more separate nets which are rigged with top, bottom and connecting ropes, 
and may be equipped with anchoring, floating and navigational gear. 
Trawl means gear which is actively towed by one or more fishing vessels and consisting of a net having 
a cone or pyramid-shaped body closed by a bag or codend. 
Purse seine means encircling gear made up of a net where the bottom is drawn together by means of a 
purse  line  at  the  bottom  of  the  net,  which  passes  through  a  series  of  rings  along  the  groundrope, 
enabling the net to be closed. 
Directive  2009/147/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  30  November  2009  on  the 
conservation of wild birds 
http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/documentation/studies/indez_en.htm 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
populations at an EU-wide level. A recent review11
 of seabird bycatch in the Baltic Sea and 
(predominantly eastern) North Sea provided a cumulative annual bycatch estimate (made up 
mainly of divers, grebes, sea ducks, diving ducks, auks and cormorants) of between 90,000-
200,000 birds killed in static net fisheries in the region each year. Several of the species at risk 
are rare in the region and subject to international legal protection. Steller’s eider is listed as 
Vulnerable  by  IUCN  and  is  in  Annex  1  of  the  EU  Birds  Directive  as  are  the  red-throated 
diver, black-throated diver, Slavonian grebe and smew. A number of others are listed in the 
Birds Directive and assessed by Birdlife as being "species of European concern"10. 

In  other  areas  outside  the  Baltic  and  North  Sea  there  are  several  static  net  fisheries  where 
seabird mortality has been reported as being problematic. In northwest Spain in ICES Subarea 
IX, high mortality of European shags and Iberian guillemot3 has been observed, while in the 
Mediterranean available information suggests that static nets pose a threat to subspecies of the 
European shag and several species of shearwater3.  

2.3. 

Other Gears 

For gears such as trawls and purse seines, few reliable estimates of bycatch levels within EU 
waters are recorded. One study did estimate around 780 northern gannets to have been caught 
in pelagic trawl fisheries operating off the north and north-east coasts of Scotland3 while there 
are several other anecdotal reports of bycatch occuring in trawl fisheries. 

Evidence  is  emerging  that  purse  seines  can  take  significant  bycatch  of  species  such  as 
shearwaters.  A  questionnaire  survey  carried  out  in  2008/2009  in  Portuguese  ports  showed 
purse seines to have taken the highest proportion (45%) of Balearic shearwaters compared to 
any other fishing gears, including longlines and static nets in this region3. 

2.4. 

Bycatch in non-EU waters 

In external waters longlines and trawls are responsible for a high number of incidental catches 
of seabirds leading to widespread concern on the long-term ecological effects on populations. 
Currently  of  61  species  which  interact  with  fisheries,  it  is  estimated  that  nearly  half  are 
threatened  with  extinction,  including  17  species  of  albatrosses  worldwide  with  an  estimated 
100,000 albatrosses reportedly killed annually4. A further 7 species of petrels listed under the 
Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP) face similar threats12. 

A  notable  exception  is  in  the  Antarctic,  where a  comprehensive  assessment  of  the  problem, 
carried out annually by CCAMLR13, has shown bycatch to have been reduced by over 99% 
since  measures  were  introduced.  In  other  longline  fisheries,  while  improvements  have  been 
noted  and  the  instances  of  IUU  fishing  reduced  considerably,  there  are  indications  that 
bycatch  still  remains  at  unsustainable 
longline  fisheries.  Recent 
recommendations  adopted  by  ICCAT14  and  IOTC15  which  strengthen  existing  mitigation 
measures  in  tuna  longline  fisheries  are  welcome  and  need  to  be  extended  to  other  Regional 
Fishery Management Organisations (RFMOs). 

in  some 

levels 

11 

12 
13 
14 
15 

Žydelis, R., Bellebaum, J., Österblom, H., Vetemaa, M., Schirmeister, B., Stipniece, A., Dagys, M., van 
Eerden,  M.  and  Garthe,  S.  2009.  Bycatch  in  gillnet  fisheries-  An  overlooked  threat  to  waterbird 
populations. Biological Conservation, 142: 1269-1281.  
ACAP 2009. Species Assessments. Available at www.acap.aq/acap-species. 
Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources 
International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas  
Indian Ocean Tuna Commission 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
In  trawl  fisheries,  seabird  mortality  has  been  increasingly  reported  in  the  Southern  and 
Northern  Hemispheres.  For  example,  data  collected  in  the  South  African  hake  fleet  from 
2004–2005,  indicated  an  annual  bycatch  of  around  18,000  birds3.  No  known  data  exists 
regarding the level of seabird bycatch in other gears such as purse seines in external waters.  

2.5.  Mitigation measures 

A  range  of  mitigation  measures  has  been  developed.  Some  of  these  have  been  shown  to  be 
highly  effective  at  reducing  seabird  bycatch.  These  measures  can  be  split  between  specific 
measures  by  fishing  method  and  measures  with  broad  applicability  across  multiple  fishing 
gears.  Most  have  been  developed  to  reduce  bycatch  in  longline  fisheries  and  these  can  be 
divided into four main categories: 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

(4) 

Avoidance  of  fishing  in  areas  and/or  at  times  when  seabird  interactions  are  most 
likely and intense (night setting, area and seasonal closures). 

Limiting bird access to baited hooks (weighted lines and side-setting). 

Deterring birds from taking baited hooks (streamer (bird-scaring) lines and acoustic 
deterrents). 

Reducing  the  attractiveness  or  visibility  of  the  baited  hooks  (dumping  of  offal  and 
artificial baits). 

Research16 has shown that benefits can accrue from using these measures in longline fisheries 
through reductions in direct costs from reduced bait loss to seabirds; damage to fish catches 
from  depredation  by  seabirds;  and  direct  gear  damage  caused  by  seabirds.  There  are  also 
indirect  cost  benefits  from  reducing  catches  foregone  from  seabirds  being  caught  on  baited 
hooks that could otherwise have yielded catch.  

Mitigation  measures  tested  in  static  net  fisheries  are  fewer  in  number.  Two  methods  have 
been  proposed  and  tested  to  alert  seabirds  to  the  presence  of  static  nets  and  thereby  avoid 
collision17.  One  method  is  to  increase  the  visibility  of  the  net  (visual  alerts),  and  the  other 
method is to attach acoustic deterrents (pingers) to nets. Encounters with static nets may also 
be reduced by setting nets deeper than the diving depth of seabirds. None of these methods are 
widely used currently. 

Streamer  lines,  adapted  from  longline  fisheries in  association  with  the  management  of  offal 
discharge  during  shooting  and  hauling,  have  been  demonstrated  to  be  effective  at  reducing 
seabird interactions and mortality in trawl fisheries. Reducing entanglements in trawls is more 
difficult, but in CCAMLR it has been demonstrated that seabird mortality from entanglement 
can be almost eliminated by simple measures such as net binding18.  

16 
17 

18 

http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/documentation/studies/index_en.htm 
Melvin, E.F., Parrish, J.K. and Conquest, L.L. 1999. Novel tools to reduce seabird bycatch in coastal 
gillnet fisheries. Cons. Biol. 13: 1386-1397. 
Sullivan, B. J., Clark, J. Reid, K, Reid E (2009). Development of effective mitigation to reduce seabird 
mortality  in  the  icefish  (Champsocephalus  gunnar)  trawl  fishery  in  Subarea  48.3.  WG-IMAF-09-15. 
CCAMLR, Hobart, Australia 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
2.6. 

The policy framework 

2.6.1.  The CFP 

The EU-PoA is aligned with the overarching objective of the CFP19, which points to the need 
to  minimise  the  impacts  of  fishing  activities  on  marine  ecosystems  (including  seabirds)  and 
progressively  implement  an  ecosystem  based  approach  to  fisheries  management.  Under  the 
reform  of  the  CFP20,  currently  being  undertaken,  the  Commission  has  re-affirmed  this 
commitment  and  aims  to  achieve  this  objective  measures  through  several  elements  of  the 
reform package: 

•  A  new  regionalised  approach  to  technical  measures  to  allow  mitigation  measures  to  be 
tailored  to  specific  fisheries.  This  approach will  take  time  to  be  developed  and  the  final 
content is dependent on the outcome of the reform but should be in place by 2016. In the 
meantime,  where  appropriate  and  urgently  required,  already  available  and  proven 
mitigation measures may be incorporated into multiannual management plans. 

•  The  new  EU  Multiannual  Programme  for  Data  Collection  (DCMAP)  planned  to  be 
introduced in 2014. Discussions are currently on-going regarding whether to include the 
monitoring of other ecosystem components including seabirds.  Input from experts and a 
costing  of  such  an  extension  of  the  current  Data  Collection  Framework  are  still  needed. 
Nevertheless,  systematic  collection  and  reporting  of  data  on  seabird  bycatch  remains 
essential to tackling seabird bycatch.  

•  Financial support for new measures provided under the current European Fisheries Fund 
(EFF) and the new European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF)21. The new EMFF is 
scheduled to be introduced in 2014 and would provide aid for the development and use of 
mitigation measures, pilot projects and the testing of alternative monitoring technologies 
such as CCTV.  

•  The commitment given by the Commission in the recent Communication on the External 
Dimension of the CFP22 to take a more pro-active role in the RFMOs and try to remedy 
the current situation of poor compliance with conservation and management measures.  

2.6.2.  Environmental Legislation 

The EU-PoA depends on parts of the EU environmental acquis, in particular the Birds9 and 
Habitats  Directives23  and  the  Marine  Strategy  Framework  Directive  (MSFD)24.  The  full 
implementation of these Directives is part of the EU’s response to its commitments under the 
UN Convention on Biological Diversity25, and is reinforced by the commitment made by EU 
Heads of State "to halt the loss of biodiversity [in the EU] by 2010"; it is further reiterated in 
the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 202026. 

19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 

OJ L 358, 31.12.2002, p.59. 
COM(2011)425. 
COM(2011)804.  
COM(2011)424. 
OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, P. 7-50 
OJ L 164, 25.6.2008, p.19-40 
OJ L 309, 13.12.1993, p. 1. 
COM(2011) 244.  

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
The key measure established by the Birds Directive is a general scheme of protection for all 
wild birds prohibiting various acts including, most relevant to fisheries, deliberate killing or 
capture  by  any  method27.  The  Birds  and  Habitats  Directives  also  establish  the  Natura  2000 
network  of  protected  areas,  which  embraces  sites  designated  under  any  of  the  Directives 
concerned  –  Special  Protection  Areas  (SPAs)  established  under  the  Birds  Directive  and 
Special  Areas  of  Conservation  (SACs)  established  under  the  Habitats  Directive.  As  of 
February 2011, under the Birds Directive, a total of 936 SPAs covering an area of 122,000km² 
have been established in marine areas.  

The  MFSD  aims  to  bring  coherence  between  different  policies  and  foster  the  integration  of 
environmental concerns into other policies, such as the CFP. Under the MSFD protection of 
seabirds is recognised as a requirement that will contribute towards the achievement of Good 
Environmental Status (GES). Its implementation is a legal requirement under the TFEU and 
dedicated  measures  to  protect  seabirds  are  implicitly  required  in  compliance  with  the 
Directive. In the context of the MFSD and also the EU-PoA, the issue of seabird bycatch is 
also covered within the framework of Regional Sea Conventions on marine environment, in 
particular OSPAR28, HELCOM29 and the Barcelona Convention30.  

2.6.2.1.  External Policy 

In external waters the RFMOs remain key for conservation and mangement of seabirds with 
RFMOs  having  been  given  explicit  responsibilities  under  the  UN  Fish  Stocks  Agreement 
(UNFSA)31 for minimising bycatch in their fisheries. To date, the majority  of RFMOs have 
adopted  some  form  of  mitigation  measures  aimed  at  avoiding  seabird  mortality  in  longline 
fisheries.  As  a  contracting  party  to  many  RFMOs,  the  EU  is  bound  to  implement  those 
measures. 

The  EU  has  also  made  a  number  of  commitments  related  to  the  principles  of  sustainable 
development  and  others  more  specifically  related  to  the  management  of  the  shared  ocean 
resources,  including  species  at  conservation  risk  which  are  relevant  to  the  EU-PoA.  These 
include: 

– 

– 

– 

United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)32  

The United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)33  

The  Convention  on  the  Conservation  of  Migratory  Species  of  Wild  Animals  (also 
known as CMS or Bonn Convention)34 

Under  the  auspices  of  CMS  there  is  an  Agreement  on  the  Conservation  of  Albatrosses  and 
Petrels (ACAP)35. This is a legally binding international treaty whose objective is to achieve 

27 
28 
29 
30 
31 
32 
33 
34 
35 

In the light of case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, C-221/04, paragraph 71. 
http://www.ospar.org/ 
http://www.helcom.fi/ 
http://www.unepmap.org/index.php?module=content2&catid=001001004 
http://www.tuna-org.org/Documents/TRFMO2/19%20ANNEX%205.11%20ENG.pdf 
OJ L 179, 23.6.1998, p. 3-134 
OJ L 309, 13.12.1993, p. 1. 
http://www.cms.int/about/intro.htm 
https://www.acap.aq/ 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
                                                 
and maintain a favourable conservation status for albatrosses and petrels by addressing threats 
on land and at-sea, bycatch is arguably the primary threat for this group of species.  

3. 

THE EU-POA 

The objective of  the EU-POA is to minimise and, where possible, eliminate the incidental 
catches  of  seabirds,  with  priority  action  focussing  on  individuals  belonging  to  at  least  49 
threatened seabird populations by EU vessels operating in EU and non-EU waters, as well 
as by non-EU vessels operating in EU waters. For other seabirds where the populations are 
stable but bycatch are at levels that are cause for concern, bycatch should be reduced as a 
first step towards bycatch elimination.  

Additional specific objectives are to: 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

(4) 

(5) 

Identify and rectify weaknesses and incoherencies in current management measures 
both in EU and non-EU waters. 

Consolidate  and  collect  data  critical  to  establish  the  extent  and  threat  posed  by 
seabird  bycatch  particularly  to  the  populations  of  species  identified  as  being  of 
conservation concern. 

Minimise bycatch of seabird species of conservation concern to levels that eliminate 
the  threat  to  the  populations  of  these  species  through  the  implementation  of 
appropriate mitigation measures. 

Address  the  lack  of  acceptance  by  fishermen  that  seabird  bycatch  is  a  problem  as 
well as the lack of incentive for fishermen to adopt mitigation measures. 

Resolve  outstanding  difficulties  with  existing  mitigation  used  in  longline  fisheries 
and  address  the  absence  of  effective  mitigation  measures  for  other  fishing  gears, 
particularly static net fisheries. 

3.1. 

Scope and Structure 

The EU-PoA will follow an adaptive management approach, recommending actions in areas 
and  fisheries  identified  as  having  incidental  catches  of  seabirds.  It  provides  a  framework  to 
develop  a  clear  and  comprehensive  picture  of  the  scale  of  incidental  seabird  bycatch  in  EU 
fisheries  and  identify  the  action  required  to  introduce  mitigation  and  management  measures 
that will achieve a coherent and effective approach to minimising the problem.  

The scope of the EU-PoA covers all EU vessels operating in Union waters and to EU flagged 
vessels in external waters. In EU waters actions under the EU-PoA will be supported by the 
increased  implementation  of  fishery  management  measures  in  Special  Protection  Areas 
created  under  the  Birds  Directive  (Article  4).  Member  States  will  be  encouraged  to  adopt 
similar  measures  within  the  network  of  Important  Bird  Areas  (IBA)36.  Demonstrable  use  of 
seabird  friendly  gear  should  be  a  pre-condition  for  access  to  fishing  opportunities  in  such 
areas  where  seabirds  are  a  qualifying  feature  and  where  bycatch  threatens  their  favourable 
conservation status. 

36 

Birdlife International (2011). Important Bird Areas factsheets. http://www.birdlife.org 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
                                                 
In order to ensure a coherent approach between the internal and external EU fisheries policy 
for seabirds, the Union will seek that the relevant international bodies enhance these measures 
by  facilitating  their  adoption  by  fishermen,  integrating  seabird  bycatch  monitoring  into 
observer programmes (where this has not already been achieved) and promoting best practice 
to non-EU fleets. The Long Distance Fleet Regional Advisory Council (LDRAC) has a clear 
role in assisting with this task. 

3.2. 

Defining the problem 

One  of  the  biggest  challenges  in  implementing  the  EU-PoA  is  to  define  the  existence  of  an 
incidental  seabird  bycatch  problem  in  the  first  place.  Current  information  such  as  IUCN 
listings  and  reporting  under  the  Birds  Directive  are  the  most  reliable  sources  to  identify 
fisheries where measures are needed urgently but are limited. They do not allow accurate and 
realistic assessments of seabird populations and the impact of bycatch on these populations. 
This means defining clear management targets is problematic in most fisheries.  

The  FAO  IPOA-Seabirds1  does  not  define  what  constitutes  a  seabird  bycatch  "problem" 
generically, but recommends undertaking an assessment based on the following components: 

(a) 

(b) 

(c) 

(d) 

the magnitude of seabird bycatch (rate or number);  

species that are incidentally caught, and their conservation status;  

spatial and temporal overlap of fishing effort with seabirds; and  

population trends of seabirds likely to be impacted by bycatch. 

An  assessment  should  be  based  on  all  available  data  including  inter  alia,  bycatch  data 
collected by at-sea observers, seabird data and other anecdotal information which may be the 
first sign of a more generalised problem. Observer programmes are the best source of data but 
it  is  not  realistic  to  establish  specific  seabird  bycatch  programmes  for  EU  fisheries,  except 
perhaps  in  those  fisheries  in  external  waters  where  it  is  already  a  mandatory  requirement. 
Therefore  other  approaches  as  well  the  criteria  used  to  define  what  constitutes  a  ‘problem’ 
need  to  be  developed.  As  an  action  under  the  EU-PoA,  the  Commission  will  request  the 
relevant  scientific  body  to  update  existing  information  and  also  to  explore  the  criteria  and 
whether  biological  indicators  (e.g.  PBR37  or  BPUE38)  could  be  used  for  defining  a  problem 
and setting management targets. 

Research, Training, Education and Awareness-Raising 

3.3. 
In  their  Best  Practice  Technical  Guidelines39,  the  FAO  stress  the  importance  of  research, 
particularly into the development of mitigation measures, as part of any Plan of Action. Such 
research should encourage innovation through collaboration of the fishing industry, scientists, 
environmental NGOs and resource managers. It must be scientifically robust but also consider 
how most effectively to convert the results into uptake of mitigation measures. 

37 

38 
39 

PBR is a measure of the maximum number of animal/birds, not including natural mortalities, which can 
be  removed  from  a  population,  while  still  allowing  that  stock  to  reach  or  maintain  its  optimum 
sustainable population level.  
BPUE is the bird bycatch per unit effort. 
FAO 2008. Report of the Expert Consultation on Best Practice Technical Guidelines for IPOA/NPOA-
Seabirds. Bergen, Norway, 2-5 September 2008. 46pp.  

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
                                                 
The  FAO  also  highlight  the  need  to  establish  education  and  training  programmes  to  raise 
awareness among fishermen, fisheries representative organisations and other relevant groups 
about the need to address the problem of seabird bycatch. At EU level the RACs have a vital 
role play in developing these programmes, while at international level the EU will support the 
establishment  and  strengthening  of  outreach  and  education  programmes  to  fishermen  in 
priority seabird bycatch areas. Research, training, education and awareness-raising measures 
are all included as integral parts of the EU-PoA.  

3.4. 

Actions under the EU-PoA 

Annex I lists the actions under the PoA by specific objectives; the responsible parties for each 
action; and also the anticipated timeline for completing these actions.  

3.5. 

Reporting and evaluation 

Under  the  EU-PoA,  the  intention  is  that  Member  States  should  report  biennially  to  the 
Commission  on  the  level  of  seabird  bycatch  observed  by  fishery  and  gear  type,  the 
implementation  of  any  mitigation  measures  and  the  effectiveness  of  these  mitigation 
measures. The Commission working with the relevant scientific body will develop a standard 
reporting  format  to  facilitate  Member  States  to  submit  information  to  the  Commission  and 
which could also be used to facilitate data access to the wider public.  

On the basis of these reports, the Commission will carry out an interim assessment of the EU-
PoA after the second of these reports and then produce a Communication for the Parliament 
and Council on the implementation of the plan based on this information.  

The  relevant  scientific  body  as  appropriate  would  be  requested  to  input  into  this  review.  In 
particular ICES would be asked to supply population and bycatch estimates for the species of 
concern. Such population data is reviewed routinely by the ICES Working Group on Seabird 
Ecology  (WGSE).  This  would  provide  a  benchmark  of  populations  to  be  compared  against 
bycatch  levels  and  allow  evaluation  of  the  extent  of  the  problem  by  seabird  species  and 
fishery.  

The Commission would carry out a full review and evaluation of the EU-PoA after the fourth 
report  (eight  years)  of  implementation  and  update  the  EU-PoA  accordingly.  This  review 
would  be  timed  to  coincide  with  the  obligation  under  the  MSFD  to  reach  GES  for  marine 
ecosystems by 2020. 

Under Article 12 of the Birds Directive Member States must report every three years on the 
implementation  of  national  provisions  taken  under  the  Directive.  Where  relevant,  Member 
States could also use these reports as a data source (e.g. seabird population estimates) for use 
in evaluating the effectiveness of the PoA.  

4. 

CONCLUSIONS 

The EU-PoA entails a wide range of elements including recommended actions, strengthening 
existing  provisions  and  incorporation  of  certain  elements  into  future  Regulations.  Some  of 
these measures can be implemented at Union level while others need action by Member States 
or must be endorsed by RFMOs. Furthermore, the EU-PoA foresees both actions that can be 
implemented  immediately  while  others  that  need  a  longer  term  commitment  based  on 
available  evidence  and  scientific  advice.  The  timing  of  the  implementation  of  the  EU-PoA 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
will  therefore  depend  on  the  contributions  of  all  actors  involved.  The  Commission  presents 
this EU-PoA to the Council and Parliament and encourages them to endorse it fully. 

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
Annex I 
List of actions in the EU-PoA 

Specific Objective 1: 

Identifying and addressing weaknesses and incoherencies in current management measures both in EU and 
non-EU waters. 

Action 

Responsible Party 

Timetable 

Explore the criteria that could be used to define a seabird bycatch 
problem 

COM in conjunction 
with scientific 
bodies 

1st Quarter 2013 

Progress designation of the SPA network, including by using IBAs 
to identify candidate SPAs 

MS, COM 

Continuous 

the  development  and 

Progress 
implementation  of  fisheries 
management  measures  to  protect  seabirds  in  designated  SPAs 
under  the  Birds  Directive,  in  other  MPAs,  including  those 
established in overseas countries and territories as well as in IBAs 
and extend these to the wider seas where required  

MS, COM 

Continuous 

Review  current  monitoring  and  mitigation  measures  to  protect 
seabirds  in  RFMO  and  assess  levels  of  compliance  with  current 
measures  

MS, COM, RFMOs, 
LDRAC 

Continuous 

Encourage RFMOs, both through direct request and via the FAO, 
to develop their own National/Regional Plans of Action, consistent 
with the FAO Best Practice Technical Guidelines 

COM, RFMOs 

Continuous 

Ensure, to the extent possible, that mitigation measures used by EU 
vessels fishing in external waters, are also used by vessels flagged 
to non-EU States but owned or controlled by owners and operators 
based in the MS 

COM, MS, RFMOs, 
LDRAC 

Continuous 

Propose  a  specific  recommendation(s)  in  the  Coastal  States 
agreement  for  non-EU  vessels  operating  in  EU  waters  to  adopt 
mitigation measures and report on seabird bycatch  

COM 

By  the  latest  end 
of 2013 

Specific Objective 2: 

Collecting data critical to establishing the extent of seabird bycatch, particularly in fisheries/areas in EU and 
no-EU waters where the information is limited, only anecdotal and/or not available.  

Action 

Responsible Party 

Timetable 

Review available bycatch data, validate sources of information and 
identify  fisheries  where  appropriate  follow  up  actions  with  more 
detailed investigations are required 

MS, COM in 
conjunction with 
scientific bodies  

By  the  latest  end 
of 2013 

Adopt  a  precautionary  approach  where  information  is  lacking  or 
uncertain  on  seabird  bycatch  and  undertake  more  extensive 
monitoring of fisheries falling into this category (A minimum 10% 
observer coverage in the short term should be aimed for) 

MS 

Following 
initial assessment 

from 

Ensure  that  observers  routinely  deployed  on  vessels  operating  in 
external waters accurately record seabird bycatch.  

MS, RFMOs 

Continuous 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
Ensure  that  observer data  is routinely  submitted  to  the Secretariat 
of the respective RFMO and the Commission to facilitate analysis 
of observer programme data 

MS, RFMOs, COM 

Continuous 

Establish a standard reporting format for recording seabird bycatch 
on a voluntary basis and to maintain a database of seabird bycatch 
in EU fisheries based on the information supplied by MS 

COM in conjunction 
with ICES 

End of 2012 

Consider the feasibility of incorporating the monitoring of seabirds 
under the new DCF 

COM 

Beginning of 2014 

Specific Objective 3: 

Implementation of mitigation measures where information indicates occurrence of seabird bycatch. 

Action 

Responsible Party 

Timetable 

Implement proven mitigation measures in longline fisheries in the 
Gran  Sol,  Mediterranean  and  non-EU  waters  (where  not  already 
required to do so). In these fisheries at least two of the following 
mitigation measures should be used: 

COM, MS, RFMOs 

By  the  latest  end 
of 2013 

– 

– 

– 

Night setting with minimum deck lighting 

Bird-scaring lines (Tori lines) 

Line weighting 

Mitigation  measures  should  comply  with  minimum  technical 
standards as set out in Birdlife and ACAP guidelines40 

Promote the adoption of mitigation measures at international level, 
where appropriate and not already applicable. 

COM 

Continuous 

Assess and implement mitigation measures applicable in static net 
fisheries in the Baltic, eastern North Sea and western waters where 
incidental catches of seabirds are well-documented 

MS 

By  the  latest  end 
of 2013 

Recommend  that  all  vessels  implement  on-board  management  of 
offal/discards according to best practice guidelines41 

MS 

By  the  latest  end 
of 2013 

On  the  basis  of  a  review  of  RFMOs  bring  forward  proposals  for 
additional  mitigation  measures  and  improved  monitoring  in 
RFMOs 

COM, MS, RFMOs, 
LDRAC 

Continuous 

Propose  the  incorporation  of  relevant  mitigation  measures  under 
the technical measures regulation being developed in the context of 
the  reform  of  the  CFP  and  also  ensure  the  inclusion  of  specific 
measures  under  multiannual  plans,  as  a  matter  of  priority  where 
appropriate and urgently required. 

COM 

2016 

From 
following 
adoption  of  a  new 
technical  measure 
regulation  and  the 
development 
of 
multiannual plans 

40 
41 

http://www.rspb.org.uk/ourwork/policy/marine/international/advocacy/mitigationfactsheets.aspx 
http://www.birdlife.org/seabirds/downloads/FS_13_Trawl_fisheries_warp_strike_final.pdf 

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Encourage  Member  States  to  transpose  the  EU-PoA  into  national 
legislation 

COM, MS 

Provide  sufficient  resources,  notably  supporting  funding  through 
the  EFF  and  the  new  EMFF  for  the  development,  testing  and 
implementation of mitigation measures 

MS 

By  the  latest  end 
of 2013 

Immediate  action 
for  the  EFF.  By 
the  latest  end  of 
2014 
the 
for 
EMFF. 

Specific Objective 4: 

Providing education and training to fishermen in the use and benefits of mitigation measures and accurate 
identification of seabirds for reporting purposes. 

Action 

Responsible Party 

Timetable 

Organise a workshop(s) to inform stakeholders on the EU-PoA  

COM 

1st quarter 2013 

Promote  the  adoption  of  mitigation  measures  to  reduce  seabird 
bycatch  and  assist  in  the  development  of  training  programs 
addressed to fishermen and fisheries observers, the preparation and 
distribution  of  seabird  identification  guides  and  other  relevant 
materials 

MS, NGOs, RACs 

Continuous 

Provide  sufficient  resources,  notably  supporting  funding  through 
the  EFF  and  the  new  EMFF  for  delivery  of  education  and 
awareness raising measures 

MS 

Continuous 

Continue  to  provide  training,  education  and  awareness-raising 
measures to vessels operating in external waters 

NGOs, RFMOs 

Continuous 

Extend  awareness-raising  measures  to  other  stakeholders  and  the 
general public  

COM, NGOs 

Continuous 

Specific Objective 5: 

Instigating  research  into  practical  and  effective  mitigation  measures  for  all  fishing  gears  which  impact  on 
seabirds.  

Action 

Responsible Party 

Timetable 

Instigate  research  through  EU  funding  programmes  (e.g.  FP7, 
LIFE)  into  the  development  of  practical  and  efficient  mitigation 
measures,  evaluation  of  the  effectiveness  of  those  measures  and 
evaluation and improvement of technologies and practices already 
in  place.  Emphasis  should  be  placed  on  developing  mitigation 
measures for static net fisheries in the short-term  

COM, MS, RACs, 
NGOs 

Continuous 

Continue  research  on  the  development  of  alternative  fishing  gear 
aiming  to  overcome  adverse  fishery-induced  impacts  on  SPAs  so 
as to facilitate access to fishing opportunities  

MS, RACs, NGOs 

Continuous 

If  monitoring  of  bycatch  of  seabirds  is  included  in  the  EU 
Multiannual  Programme  for  Data  Collection  2014-2020,  assess 
how  novel  electronic  monitoring  technologies  can  be  used  to 
monitor  seabird  bycatch  and,  as  appropriate,  ensure 
their 
implementation  

MS, RACs, NGOs 

2014 

EN 

14 

   EN 

 
Provide  sufficient  resources,  notably  supporting  funding  through 
the  EFF  and  the  new  EMFF  to  facilitate  uptake  and  testing  of 
mitigation  measures  and  also  additional  monitoring  of  fisheries 
with suspected bycatch issues 

MS 

Immediate  action 
for  the  EFF.  By 
the  latest  end  of 
2014 
the 
for 
EMFF. 

EN 

15 

   EN 

 
 
Annex II 
Latin Names of Seabird Species Mentioned  

Balearic shearwater 

Sooty shearwater 

Yelkouan shearwater 

Audouin's gull 

Corys shearwater 

Mediterranean gull 

Black-legged kittiwake 

Black guillemot 

Manx shearwater 

Yellow-legged gull 

Northern fulmar 

Great shearwater 

Northern gannet 

Divers 

Grebes 

Sea ducks 

Diving ducks 

Auks 

Cormorants 

Steller's eider 

Red-throated diver 

Black-throated diver 

Slavonian grebe 

Smew 

Iberian guillemot 

European shag 

Albatross spp. 

Petrel spp. 

Puffinus mauretanicus 

Puffinus griseus 

Puffinus yelkouan 

Larus audouinii 

Calonectris diomedea 

Larus melanocephalus 

Rissa tridactyla 

Cepphus grylle 

Puffinus puffinus 

Larus michahellis 

Fulmarus glacialis 

Puffinus gravis 

Morus bassanus 

Gaviidae spp. 

Podicipedidae spp. 

Merginae spp. 

Aythyinae spp. 

Alcidae spp. 

Phalacrocoracidae spp. 

Polysticta stelleri 

Gavia stellata 

Gavia arctica 

Podiceps auritus 

Mergellus albellus 

Uria aalge ibericus 

Phalacrocorax aristotelis 

Diomedeidae spp. 

Procellaria and Macronectes spp. 

EN 

16 

   EN