REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL on Member States' efforts during 2011 to achieve a sustainable balance between fishing capacity and fishing opportunities
Date: 2013-02-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, catch quota, disclosure of information, fishing fleet, fishing rights

EUROPEAN 
COMMISSION 

Brussels, 18.2.2013  
COM(2013) 85 final 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND 
THE COUNCIL 

on Member States' efforts during 2011 to achieve a sustainable balance between fishing 
capacity and fishing opportunities 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
  
 
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND 
THE COUNCIL 

on Member States' efforts during 2011 to achieve a sustainable balance between fishing 
capacity and fishing opportunities 

1. 

INTRODUCTION AND MAIN FINDINGS 

Member States are responsible for a stable and enduring balance between their fleets and the 
fishing  opportunities  allocated  to  them1.  Sustainable  management  of  fisheries  implies  an 
economically  viable  fleet  exploiting  natural  resources  below  maximum  sustainable  yield 
(MSY) levels. This is one of the key principles of the reform of the Common Fisheries Policy 
proposed by the European Commission. 

This report provides an overview of the EU fishing fleets. The information used is that sent by 
Member States in their 2011 annual reports2, in the EU Fleet Register3, or as data collected 
under the Data Collection Framework4, see Annex 1. An assessment of these data was made 
by the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF)5.  

The  main  finding  is  that  significant  improvement  is  needed  over  the  next  years  in  the  way 
Member  States  evaluate  the  balance  and  manage  their  fleets.  As  fisheries  management 
develops  to  include  the  MSY  objective,  it  is  no  longer  satisfactory  to  rely  on  ceilings 
expressed  in  static  parameters.  Economic  viability  and  broader  sustainability  indicators  are 
needed to manage the EU fleets to attain an economically viable fleet exploiting a resource at 
its full biological potential. Improvements in stock assessment are crucial, as well as in data 
collection and provision, analysis and methodology. 

2. 

CAPACITY CEILINGS … 

Each  Member  State  must  ensure  that  its  fishing  capacity  in  tonnage  (in  GT)  and  power  (in 
kW)  is  always  equal  to  or  less  than  the  nominal  levels  as  determined  in  Regulation 
1013/20106.  Current  entries  in  the  fleet  register  indicate  that  all  Member  States  except 
Romania  complied  with  these  nominal  levels  (see  Annex  2).  The  Union  fleet  was  14.1% 
below the GT ceilings and 9.9% below the kW ceilings, with these margins varying from 2% 

1 
2 
3 

4 

5 

6 

Article 11 of Council Regulation (EC) No. 2371/2002 
As obliged under Article 14 of Council Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 
According  to  Article  15  of  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  2371/2002  and  Article  11  of  Commission 
Regulation (EU) No. 1013/2010 laying down implementing rules on the Union Fleet Policy as defined 
in Chapter III of Council Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 
In  accordance  with  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  199/2008  concerning  the  establishment  of  a 
Community  framework  for  the  collection,  management  and  use  of  data  in  the  fisheries  sector  and 
support for scientific advice regarding the Common Fisheries Policy 
Review  of  national  reports  on  Member  States'  efforts  to  achieve  balance  between  fleet  capacity  and 
fishing opportunities (STECF-12-18). In press 2012, JRC Scientific and Policy Reports. 
Article 7 and 8 of Commission Regulation 1013/2010 of 10 November 2010 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
                                                 
to 62%7. In 2011 the number of vessels decreased by 2%, while tonnage and power decreased 
by 3.7% and 3.1% respectively. Reductions both in tonnage and in power were similar among 
Member States, with some variations (see Annex 3). 

To  ensure  accuracy  of  the  measurements  in  the  fleet  register,  Member  States  are  obliged  to 
certify systematically new engines, and replacement and technically modified engines of more 
than  120  kW  for  vessels  subject  to  an  fishing  effort  regime  as  from  January  2012  and  all 
vessels  as  from  January  2013.  Member  States  must  also  undertake  data  verification  on  the 
basis of sampling plans. When information indicates that the engine power is greater than the 
power stated on the vessel's fishing licence, they have to undertake physical verifications. 

A number of Member States have not met the deadlines for the measurement and monitoring. 
Some Member States are not complying at all with these monitoring obligations. Only a few 
Member  States  have  adopted  the  required  sampling  plans  for  data  verification.  As  of  end 
November 2012 eleven Member States adopted a sampling plan for the verification of engine 
power, while nine Member States announced adoption in the near future. Two Member States 
have not yet done so. 

The Commission attaches great importance to the respect of the Control Regulation. This is 
essential to ensure a level playing field across EU fisheries. 

The European Court of Auditors published a Special Report in 2011 on the management of 
fleet  capacity  in  the  EU.  The  existing  definitions  of  capacity  were  not  considered  reliable 
indicators of the ability of vessels to catch fish8. The Commission is aware of the inadequacy 
of parameters such as GT and kW to capture technical progress, in addition to the practical 
difficulties in measuring engine power.  

Decommissioning  has  been  the  most-used  management  tool  to  reduce  capacity.  The 
Commission  estimates  that  close  to 
€1.3  bi llion  of  EU  funds  will  be  used  for 
decommissioning in the period 2000-2015, see Annex 4.  

In  analysing  aid  for  decommissioning  the  European  Court  of  Auditors  concluded  that 
decommissioning schemes that used public funding were not well targeted, and lacked clear 
eligibility and selection criterions9. The Court concluded that scrapping of fishing vessels had 
little if any impact on the targeted fish stocks.  

3. 

… AND CAPACITY INDICATORS 

Describing capacity of fleets in terms of engine power and tonnage has shown its limitations 
over  time.  Keeping  these  parameters  within  ceilings  is  not,  in  itself,  evidence  that  fishing 
fleets are in balance with the state of the resources on which they depend. 

Rather, the assessment of imbalances requires an analysis of the performance of the fleets in 
terms  of the state of the resources  on  which  they  rely,  in economic  terms,  and  in  respect to 

7 
8 

9 

Romania not included. 
ECA  Special  Report  No  12/2011  –  Have  EU  measures  contributed  to  adopting  the  capacity  of  the 
fishing fleets to available fishing opportunities? – paragraph 21 of the Report 
ECA  Special  Report  No  12/2011  –  Have  EU  measures  contributed  to  adopting  the  capacity  of  the 
fishing fleets to available fishing opportunities? – paragraph 76 of the Report 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
vessel  utilisation.  This  analysis  seems  to  be  missing,  in  all  or  in  part,  in  a  number  of  the 
Member States' fleet reports. 

Does a fishing fleet exploit stocks beyond what is sustainable? Do the vessels in the fleet on 
average  earn  enough  to  at  least  cover  their  short-term  costs?  Will  vessel  profitability  be 
sufficient for replacement of ships and engines when needed? Are the vessels being used fully 
or are many often idle? These indicators can reveal an imbalance at fleet level. 

This  report  summarises  the  efforts  Member  States  are  making  to  redress  the  problems  and 
reviews what we know today beyond what Member States report. 

A fleet that is operating sustainably and is economically viable: 

•  exploits  stocks  sustainably  in  the  short  term  and  in  perspective  of  keeping  exploitation 

below maximum sustainable yield levels,  

• 

• 

• 

is profitable in both short-term and  

long-term perspectives; and 

is  fully  utilised,  taking  account  of  the  seasonal  nature  of  many  fisheries  in  that  vessels 
should normally be working actively. 

The Commission has asked STECF to review EU fleets using indicators corresponding to the 
issues above. So far, and for reasons of time and resources, STECF has addressed only the 92 
most important fleets in the 14 Member States with the biggest fisheries, but these cover 72% 
of  EU  income  from  landings,  and  are  therefore  indicative  of  the  most  important  European 
fishing  activities.  STECF  used  the  indicator  values  calculated  from  Member  States'  reports, 
DCF data, and fish stock assessments as appropriate.  

The indicators used are listed below (for full description, see Annex 5).  

Relied  on  stocks  fished  above  MSY  levels  means  that  on  average  a  fleet  was  fishing  above 
sustainable  levels  in  a  long-term  perspective.  In  the  light  of  the  CFP  reform  objectives, 
staying below MSY exploitation rates has been used as the standard. 

Breaking even means that the fleet was earning enough to cover its short-term expenditure. 

Economic underperformance means that in the long term the fleet was not earning enough to 
replace  its  large  capital  items  (vessels,  engines)  when  these  wear  out.  Negative  returns  on 
fixed  and  tangible  assets  can  be  an  indication  of  economic  overcapitalization  if  observed 
consistently over a longer period of time. 

Underutilised means that vessels were fishing, but were doing so 70% or less compared to the 
time they could have fished, taking account of the seasonal nature of the fisheries. 

Inactive vessels refers to vessels that did not fish at any time during the year. 

The indicators are based on averages for each assessed fleet segment. For example, individual 
economic performance of each vessel in a segment varies; vessels will be performing better or 
worse than the average values. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
4. 

FLEET CAPACITY BY MEMBER STATE  

This overview of the fleet situation by Member State is based on the Member States' reports 
and findings of the STECF review for the period 2008-2011 where available.  

The fleets in Belgium have reduced substantially since 2003, by reduction of existing licences 
and reallocation of fishing opportunities among the remaining vessels. Detailed information at 
fleet  level  was  not  provided.  Belgium  concluded  that  its  fleets  are  in  balance  with  fishing 
opportunities.  

The  STECF  review  indicates  that  the  18-24m  beam  trawl  fleet  on  average  was  not  earning 
enough  to  be  able  to  replace  its  large  capital  items.  Both  this  fleet  and  the  24-40m  beam 
trawlers relied on stocks fished above MSY levels. 

Bulgaria concluded that there seems to be almost a balance between the fish stocks and the 
fleet size. Bulgaria intends to take measures to reduce the inactive vessels and is currently in 
the process of changing the legislative framework. 

In 2011 over 57 % of all vessels were inactive, most of them vessels smaller than 12m. All 
fleets above 12m appeared to show weak economic performance in the period reviewed due 
to  higher  fuel  consumption  and  high  fuel  prices,  even  though  they  are  breaking  even.  The 
vessels below 18m were underutilised, fishing at only 70% of the maximum possible fishing 
time.  

Cyprus intends to reduce over-capitalisation by scrapping around 100 small inshore vessels 
whose effort remains unrestricted, after a decade of increasing the number of smaller vessels 
subject to effort limitations while reducing capacity in GT and kW. 

Underutilisation has been reported in all fleets except for vessels with polyvalent passive gear 
12-24m as well as low or negative returns on investments for all fleets.  

There has been a substantial reduction in fleet capacity of Denmark (vessels, GT, kW) since 
2003, on the introduction of the ITQ system. Denmark considers the situation is rather stable 
and  that  there  is  no  significant  long-term  physical  overcapacity.  Denmark  does  identify 
overcapacity in the fleet using polyvalent passive gears 0-12 m and 12-24m, as well as in the 
fleets of smaller trawlers (the demersal trawlers and seiners 0-12 m fleet) and the dredgers 12-
24m.  

The  STECF  review  indicates  that  all  assessed  Danish  fleets  relied  on  stocks  fished  above 
MSY  levels.  Three  fleets  were  not  earning  enough  to  replace  their  large  capital  items 
(polyvalent  passive  gears  10-12  m  and  12-18  m,  mobile  and  passive  gears  12-18  m).  Two 
fleets (mobile and passive gear 18-24m, and demersal trawl and seine 18-24m) also showed 
underutilisation.  

The  report  of  Germany  is  not  based  on  the  existing  guidelines  and  indicators.  The  balance 
was  examined  only  qualitatively  by  fleet.  Germany’s  stated  objective  is  to  retain  sufficient 
overall capacity to use their quotas. Reductions of 5.6% in vessels, 4.4% in GT, 6.4% in kW 
took place in 2011. No exits from the fleet were publicly funded.  

The  STECF  review  identified  that  the  fleets  using  passive  gear  <10m,  demersal  trawls  12-
18m,  18-24m,  24-40m  and  beam  trawls  24-40m  relied  on  stocks  fished  above  MSY  levels 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
(but were economically sustainable). Vessels were underutilised and there was a large inactive 
fleet of smaller vessels (including 458 inactive vessels <10m). 

Estonia reported overcapacity, mainly in the trawlers >12 meters. The fleet was reduced by 7 
vessels in 2011 (eliminating 371 GT and 1056 kW). 

The STECF review indicates that the pelagic trawlers 24-40m relied on stocks fished above 
MSY levels and had underutilisation, but were economically sustainable. 

Greece has not presented an assessment of the balance, nor has it assessed its fleet policy or 
provided data under the DCF. Greece reported indications of overfishing for hake and shrimp 
in the Aegean Sea, but no details were provided. In 2011 the fleet reduced by 488 vessels (and 
decreased  by  3.6%  in  GT  and  4.0%  in  kW).  Management  plans  including  special  licensing 
have been drawn up for bottom trawlers and for purse seine fishing (anchovies and sardines). 

Due to lack of data (biological, economic, technical) it is impossible to assess the balance of 
the Greek fleets with the resources. 

Spain  reported  that  the  capacity  of  the  fleet  still  exceeded  opportunities  somewhat  and  that 
the fleet was capable of catching more than its allocated quota. Spain makes continued efforts 
to reduce fleet capacity both with and without public aid, adding up to 4.6% in GT and 3.7% 
in kW during 2011. Regarding the technical indicator, Spain reported underutilisation for part 
of the fleet in both national fishing zones and international waters, but observed a decreasing 
trend  from  2008  to  2011.  Information  was  only  provided  on  current  revenue/break-even 
revenue  of  the  fleets.  This  is  due  in  part  to  disaggregated  data  on  catches  not  having  been 
supplied. The national Spanish report states that all fleets are operating profitably. Subsidies 
received by ship owners were included in the calculation of income.  

A  comparable  and  objective  evaluation  of  overfishing  and  of  economic  sustainability  is  not 
possible due to absence of data. The revenue calculated by STECF (which does not include 
revenue from  subsidies) indicate that fleets using mobile and passive gears <10m,  demersal 
trawls and seines 18-24 and 24-40m and hooks 24-40m and >40m did not break even.  

France  reported  on  mainland  vessels  together  and  concluded  that  most  fisheries  are  in 
balance.  Biological, 
indicators  were  not  provided.  France 
decommissioned 133 vessels, 7653 GT and 20408 kW with public aid in 2011. Specific fleet 
exit plans resulted in the withdrawal of almost 60 vessels in different categories of 'sensitive' 
fisheries.  

technical  and  economic 

The  STECF  review  reveals  a  range  of  different  situations.  Fleets  with  drift  and  fixed  nets 
<10m, 10-12m, 12-18m, 18-24m, 24-40m were relying on stocks fished above MSY levels - 
but appeared economically sustainable and breaking even in the period reviewed. The fleets 
with  hooks  24-40m  and  polyvalent  mobile  gears 24-40m  also  relied  on  stocks  fished  above 
MSY levels. The indicators suggest weak economic performance during the years analysed. 

Fleets using dredges 12-18m, pelagic trawlers 18-24m and >40m, demersal trawls and seines 
18-24m, 24-40 m and >40m and purse seines >40 m also appeared to show weak economic 
performance  in  the  period  assessed.  The  fleets  using  pots  and  traps  <10m,  hook  <10m, 
demersal trawl and seine 10-12m, demersal trawl and seine 12-18m on the other hand were 
economically  sustainable  but  the  state  of  the  resources  on  which  they  depend  is  poorly 
known.  

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
Ireland reported that some imbalances may remain in some fleets, but did not specify which. 
More work is needed on data availability. 

STECF  indicates  that  pelagic  trawlers  24-40m  were  relying  on  stocks  fished  above  MSY 
levels and were not earning enough to replace their large capital items. Pelagic trawlers >40m 
also relied on stocks fished above MSY levels and were underutilised, but they were breaking 
even  and  appeared  to  be  economically  sustainable.  The  fleets  using  dredges  10-12m  and 
demersal trawls and seines 18-24 m appeared to show economic over-capitalisation. The fleet 
using pots and traps <10m appeared to be economically sustainable but the state of the stocks 
is poorly known. 

Italy  identified  overcapacity  in  purse  seiners  and  in  bottom  trawlers  over  24  m  and  is 
planning a broad decommissioning scheme. 

The STECF review indicates that the fleets using demersal trawls, seines 24-40m and beam 
trawls 24-40m were not earning enough to replace their large capital items, and the latter fleet 
also had low capacity utilisation. The fleets with polyvalent passive gear 6-12m, dredges and 
demersal trawls and seines 12-18m and 18-24m fleets appeared economically sustainable.  

For most fleets knowledge on the biological situation of stocks is poor, making a review of 
reliance on stocks fished above MSY levels impossible.  

Latvia reported overcapacity in the trawlers 12-24 m and 24-40m and in the netter 24-40 m 
fleet. The Latvian fleet decreased by 14.9% in GT and 14.3% in kW. Latvia had a permanent 
cessation scheme available for 2011-2012. 

The STECF review indicates that the 24-40m pelagic trawlers were economically sustainable 
but relied on fish stocks that were fished slightly above MSY levels.  

Lithuania aims to retain sufficient overall capacity to be able to fish its quotas. In 2011 the 
number of vessels was significantly reduced (- 12 %), but fleet capacity reduced only slightly 
in  tonnage  (-  1.6%  GT),  and  hardly  at  all  in  engine  power.  Lithuania  did  not  apply  the 
indicators in its report. 

The STECF review indicates that the fleets using 24-40m demersal trawls and seines did not 
fish  overfished  stocks,  and  was  economically  sustainable.  There  was,  however,  large 
underutilisation. 

While  Malta  reported  overcapacity  for  the  whole  fleet  for  2009  and  2010,  it  was  not 
conclusive  for  2011  because  of  the  absence  of  economic  and  social  data.  The  Maltese  fleet 
capacity was reduced significantly (- 32.8% in GT and 9.2% in kW).  

Vessel utilization was less than 50%. 

The  Netherlands  reported  that  some  demersal  vessels  were  rarely  used  and  it  would  be 
possible to fish the available quota with fewer vessels. For the demersal sector the biological 
indicator is still somewhat above its target level, but moved into the right direction from 2008 
to 2011. For the pelagic fleets, the biological situation was reasonably good in the Northeast 
Atlantic  but  fishing  pressure  on  stocks  targeted  in  West  African  and  other  distant-water 
fisheries was too high.  

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
The STECF review indicates that all five assessed fleets other than beam trawl 18-24m relied 
on  stocks  fished  above  MSY  levels.  In  addition,  the  demersal  trawls  and  seines  fleet  was 
underutilised. The pelagic fleets showed signs of economic over-capitalisation. 

Poland concluded that the fleet requires no further reduction. For central Baltic Sea herring, 
mainly  caught  by  the  pelagic  trawlers  of  24-40m,  fishing  mortality  was  too  high.  In  2009, 
there was noticeable improvement in economic indicators for the Baltic Sea fleet, except for 
longline vessels of 12-18m and demersal trawls of 18-24m. In 2011 2/3 of the Baltic Sea cod 
fleet received aid for temporary cessation. These vessels will soon return to fishing. 13.8% of 
the vessels were inactive, representing 16% of GT.  

Portugal concluded that the fleets are in balance with fishing opportunities. In 2011 the total 
capacity of the Portuguese mainland fleet was virtually unchanged (a 1% reduction).  

Large parts of the catches were made up of unassessed fish stocks. However, the indicators 
calculated by STECF showed that fleets relied on stocks fished above MSY levels. 

The STECF review shows that the fleets with mobile and passive gears 0-10m, and hooks 24-
40m  fleets  showed  weak  long-term  economic  performance.  Fleets  using  polyvalent  passive 
gears  0-10m,  drift  nets  and  fixed  nets  12-18m,  pots  and  traps  12-18m  and  purse  seines  18-
24m and 24-40m were underutilised. Fleets using polyvalent mobile and passive gears, with 
demersal  trawls  and  seines  and  with  hooks  24-40m  were  economically  sustainable  but  no 
assessment of biological sustainability was available.  

Romania did not submit a report for 2011. No Romanian DCF-data were available.  

Slovenia  reported  overcapacity  in  most  of  its  fleets.  Slovenia  plans  to  use  public  aid  for 
scrapping in the first half of 2012, and to adjust fishing effort for various fleets. 

The  fleet  was  characterised  by  significant  underutilisation,  with  55%  of  the  vessels  being 
inactive, but this includes part-time fishing on migratory species.  

Knowledge on the biological situation of stocks is poor and assessments are not available. 

Finland  did  not  apply  the  guidelines  in  its  report  nor  were  any  other  indicators  included  to 
assess  capacity  in  relation  to  fishing  opportunities.  Finland  stated  that  its  fleet  is  in  an 
acceptable balance with the fishing resources. In 2011 effort increased by 12.2% in relation to 
2010,  mostly  in  pelagic  fisheries.  From  the  75  vessels  of  the  offshore  segment,  28%  were 
inactive during 2011.  

Sweden reported that overcapacity can still be observed in several fleets and is attempting to 
tackle this by decommissioning. Two schemes have targeted cod trawlers. A total of -26% in 
GT and -19% in kW was withdrawn from the fleet.  

The  STECF  review  indicates  that  many  assessed  fleets  relied  on  stocks  fished  above  MSY 
levels.  In  addition,  the  fleets  using  passive  gears  10-12  m,  and  with  demersal  trawls  and 
seines 24-40 did not earn enough to replace large capital items. There was underutilisation in 
some sectors. 

The UK considers that many fleets operate sustainably because the resources they exploit are 
fished within the precautionary fishing mortality, though there is an imbalance in some areas 
(e.g. for stocks covered by recovery regimes). Since October 2010 a license parking facility 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
has  allowed  fleets  to  restructure.  The  UK  has  reported  on  achieved  capacity  reductions,  but 
does not present plans for further adjustments.  

The STECF review indicates that many fleets relied on stocks fished above MSY levels. For 
the  fleets  using  pots  and  traps  <10m,  and  with  demersal  trawls  and  seines  12-18m,  18-24m 
and  >40m  no  assessment  of  reliance  on  the  resources  is  available,  but  these  fleets  were 
economically sustainable.  

5. 

CONCLUSIONS 

This  review  of  the  efforts  of  Member  States  to  achieve  a  sustainable  balance  between  fleet 
capacity  and  fishing  resources  proves  that  the  capacity  of  Europe's  fishing  fleet  is  still  too 
high.  Despite  reductions  in  the  size  of  many  European  fishing  fleets  over  the  last  decade, 
many  vessels  across  a  range  of  Member  States  did  not  break  even  financially  and  were 
underutilized. Many vessels also had too small revenues to make necessary investments such 
as modernisation of vessels and gears. 

In the reviewed period too many fleets were dependent on overfished stocks with respect to 
maximum sustainable yield, one of the core objectives of the reformed CFP.  

The current fleet management policy has failed to bring fleets into balance with the resources 
they  exploit.  It  is  not  sufficient  to  rely  on  compliance  with  national  capacity  ceilings 
(expressed in vessel size (GT) or power (kW)) only.  

Ensuring  the  balance  between  fleet  capacity  and  fish  resources  is  one  of  the  key  issues  for 
reforming the Common Fisheries Policy. The primary responsibility for fleet management lies 
with the Member States. Potential consequences of overcapitalisation of fleets and continued 
reliance on stocks fished above maximum sustainable yield are the proof that we need better 
fleet  management  instruments  under  the  reformed  CFP.  This  requires  that  Member  States 
manage  their  fleets  to  exploit  fish  stocks  below  maximum  sustainable  yield  levels  and  in  a 
way that enables them to be economically viable. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
Annex 1: Quality of information 

1 Qualitative and Descriptive Information 

Areas of concern where no or limited information was provided in national reports are listed 
with (X) in the table below. 

s
e
g
a
-
k
n
i
L

s
t
e
e
l
f
n
e
e
w
t
e
b

s
e
i
r
e
h
s
i
f
d
n
a

t
e
e
l
F

t
n
e
m
p
o
l
e
v
e
d

f
o

t
n
e
m
e
t
a
t
S

t
r
o
f
f
e

n
o
i
t
c
u
d
e
r

s
e
m
e
h
c
s

f
o
t
c
a
p
m

I

t
r
o
f
f
e

n
o
i
t
c
u
d
e
r

s
e
m
e
h
c
s

f
o
t
n
e
m
s
s
e
s
s
A

t
e
e
l
f

t
n
e
m
e
g
a
n
a
m

m
e
t
s
y
s

o
t

s
n
a
l
P

t
e
e
l
f

e
v
o
r
p
m

i

t
n
e
m
e
g
a
n
a
m

m
e
t
s
y
s

f
o

t
n
e
m
e
t
a
t
S

e
c
n
a
i
l
p
m
o
C

t
i
x
E
/
y
r
t
n
E

e
m
e
h
c
s

o
t

s
e
g
n
a
h
C

.
n
i
m
d
a

s
e
r
u
d
e
c
o
r
p

f
o
t
n
e
m
s
s
e
s
s
A

e
c
n
a
l
a
b

BE 

BG 

CY 

DE 

DK 

EE 

EL 

ES 

FI 

FR 

IE 

IT 

LT 

LV 

MT 

NL 

PO 

PT 

RO 

SI 

SE 

UK 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

Source: table 5.3 of report STECF-12-18 Review of national reports on Member States efforts to achieve balance 
between fleet capacity and fishing opportunities. 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2 Quantitative Information 

Evaluating  the  dependence  of  a  fleet  on  stocks  fished  above  MSY  levels  depends  on  the 
availability of quantitative fish stock assessments. These are available for most stocks in the 
Baltic and North Seas, but coverage in the Celtic Seas is incomplete. In the Mediterranean Sea 
many fleets fish on stocks of unknown status, but this area of knowledge is improving rapidly. 
While some Member States provided information on catch rates, this cannot be used to draw 
conclusions about sustainability. 

Most Member States reports did not address questions of balance at the level of fishing fleets 
as  defined  in  the  DCF.  This  hampers  quantitative  evaluation  of  the  balance  as  the  data 
available do not correspond to the fleets being evaluated. 

Data are also needed from Member States on the catches and the value of the catches for each 
fleet. This information is required by the DCF, but was not provided by all Member States. 

Information on return on fixed tangible assets (ROFTA) was missing or incomplete for some 
Member States. 

Information on the numbers of inactive vessels is available by length-class (irrespective of the 
target fishery or gear type) for most Member States from DCF data. However, the quality of 
this data source is in some cases questionable. 

In  the  national  reports,  values  of  the  technical  indicator  (the  average  vessel  days-at-sea 
divided  by  the  maximum  for  the  fleet)  were  provided  by  most  Member  States  but  this 
information  was  not  complete.  Seven  Member  States  did  not  provide  technical  indicator 
values in their national reports.  

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
Annex 2:  

Table 2.1: Compliance with the entry-exit ceiling at 31.12. 2011 (except outermost regions) 

GT

A

GT

MA X GT

B

A /B

kW

C

kW

MA X kW

D

C/D

at 31/12/2011

at 31/12/2011

15.326

7.373

64.503

64.294

14.281

59.571

83.807

373.465

153.998

175.393

4.213

34.725

45.216

7.996

135.585

33.379

86.826

934

1.002

16.028

29.642

18.864

8.023

88.604

71.114

21.630

77.334

88.122

397.752

176.362

183.964

11.013

47.202

73.489

14.890

166.384

38.254

94.805

1.874

1.057

18.207

42.778

202.317

231.747

81,24%

91,89%

72,80%

90,41%

66,02%

77,03%

95,10%

93,89%

87,32%

95,34%

38,26%

73,57%

61,53%

53,70%

81,49%

87,26%

91,58%

49,85%

94,75%

88,03%

69,29%

87,30%

49.135

61.307

232.469

148.277

38.915

182.307

483.390

841.788

701.022

51.585

66.093

313.976

167.089

52.739

210.083

492.999

909.704

772.971

1.056.757

1.112.589

45.329

52.684

54.357

77.489

288.415

82.890

299.565

7.714

10.763

171.167

170.472

810.306

47.909

60.458

73.516

95.792

350.736

91.637

314.912

6.296

10.974

182.375

211.038

914.989

95,25%

92,76%

74,04%

88,74%

73,79%

86,78%

98,05%

92,53%

90,69%

94,98%

94,62%

87,14%

73,94%

80,89%

82,23%

90,45%

95,13%

122,53%

98,08%

93,85%

80,78%

88,56%

BE

BG

DK

DE

EE

IE

EL

ES

FR

IT

CY

LV

LT

MT

NL

PL

PT

RO

SI

FI

SE

UK

Σ 31/12/2011

1.609.873

1.873.469

85,93%

5.866.515

6.510.460

90,11%

NB: Data extracted from the Union Fleet Register based on snapshot of 1.09. 2012 (Romania: snapshot of 1 March2012)

EN 

12 

EN 

 
  
 
Annex 3:  

Table 3.1. Member States' fleet evolution (vessels, tonnage and engine power) during 2011 (except outermost regions) 

N

BE

BG

DK

DE

EE

IE

EL

ES

FR

IT

CY

LV

LT

MT

NL

PL

PT

RO

SI

FI

SE

UK

Σ

89
2340
2.820
1.671
934
2.060
17.165
9.895
4.719
13.450
1004
786
171
1091
743
793
7.175
475
184
3.366
1.360
6.481
78.772

GT
31/12/2010
15.812

7.931

66.007

67.216

14.671

64.576

86.919

387.527

158.841

kW

N

51.198

63.444

240.115

158.225

40.205

185.334

503.554

873.921

713.684

185.398

1.106.479

4.145

40.804

45.965

11.900

130.623

37.268

86.969

1.181

1.003

16.684

32.945

207.641

43.071

61.455

54.395

85.314

289.246

86.899

300.677

6.656

10.859

172.884

178.232

827.737

1.672.025

6.053.585

GT
31/12/2011
15.326

kW

Δ N (%)

Δ GT (%) Δ kW (%)

49.135

61.307

232.469

148.277

38.915

182.307

483.390

841.788

701.022

1.056.757

45.329

52.684

54.357

77.489

288.415

82.890

299.565

7.714

10.763

171.167

170.472

810.306

Δ 2010-2011
-3,4%
-0,2%
-1,2%
-5,4%
-1,2%
1,6%
-3,0%
-3,3%
-1,7%
-2,9%
7,6%
-7,0%
-11,7%
-3,4%
-0,4%
-0,4%
-0,9%
5,7%
0,0%
-1,0%
0,6%
-0,4%

-3,1%
-7,0%
-2,3%
-4,3%
-2,7%
-7,7%
-3,6%
-3,6%
-3,0%
-5,4%
1,7%
-14,9%
-1,6%
-32,8%
3,8%
-10,4%
-0,2%
-20,9%
-0,1%
-3,9%
-10,0%
-2,6%

-4,0%
-3,4%
-3,2%
-6,3%
-3,2%
-1,6%
-4,0%
-3,7%
-1,8%
-4,5%
5,2%
-14,3%
-0,1%
-9,2%
-0,3%
-4,6%
-0,4%
15,9%
-0,9%
-1,0%
-4,4%
-2,1%

7.373

64.503

64.294

14.281

59.571

83.807

373.465

153.998

175.393

4.213

34.725

45.216

7.996

135.585

33.379

86.826

934

1.002

16.028

29.642

202.317

1.609.873

5.866.515

-2,0% -3,7% -3,1%

86
2.336
2.786
1.580
923
2.092
16.658
9.571
4.640
13.063
1.080
731
151
1.054
740
790
7.110
502
184
3.332
1.368
6.453
77.230

NB: Data extracted from the Union Fleet Register based on snapshot of 01.09. 2012 (Romania: snapshot of 01.03 2012)

EN 

13 

EN 

 
  
 
Annex 4 

Table 4.1. EFF commitments in permanent cessation (2007 – 31.07. 2012) 

IE
MT
FR
IT
EL
BE
NL
ES
SE
DK
LV
LT
PT
BG
CY
UK
PL
EE
RO
DE
FI
SI
EU

% S
97%
55%
52%
38%
33%
32%
24%
23%
21%
20%
17%
12%
11%
10%
9%
8%
6%
4%
1%
0%
0%
0%
22%

NS
46
15
473
1067
796
9
23
668
30
69
134
32
65
21
14
97
73
16
5
0
0
0
3653

% R
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
1,60%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
0,10%
0,50%
0,00%
0,80%
0,40%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
0,20%
6,30%
0,70%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
0,50%

NR
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
1
1
0
8
1
0
0
0
0
5
10
5
0
0
0
38

%S + %R
97%
55%
52%
40%
33%
32%
24%
23%
21%
20%
18%
13%
11%
10%
9%
8%
6%
10%
2%
0%
0%
0%
22%

S+R
46
15
473
1074
796
9
23
669
31
69
142
33
65
21
14
97
78
26
10
0
0
0
3691

Source: MS data based on formal request by DG MARE (08. 2012) to submit cumulative EFF data for 
the period 01.01 2007 to 31.07. 2012) 

%s: Percentage of EFF commitments so far in scrapping;  

NS: Number of scrapping operations (vessels);  

R%: Percentage of EFF committed to reassignment of vessels;  

NR: Number of reassignments (vessels); 

%S + %R: Total percentage scrapping + reassignment

EN 

14 

   EN 

 
 
Annex 5:  

Indicators used by STECF 

The "sustainable harvest rate indicator" is an average of the fishing mortality rates 
experienced by the fish stocks exploited by each fleet, with the importance in the average 
weighted according to the economic importance of each stock in the catches. When this 
indicator equals 1, then on average the stocks are being exploited at a maximum sustainable 
yield rate. For values above 1, the fleet is, on average, relying on overexploited stocks and 
vice versa. This measure does not take account of the fact that some stocks in the mix of 
catches may be more or less seriously overexploited or depleted, nor does it take account of 
the extent of the impact of other fleets on the exploitation of the resources.  

Two "Economic sustainability indicators" are used. The Return on Fixed Tangible Assets 
(ROFTA) (a proxy for the Return on Investment) is a measure of long-term economic health. 
It measures the net profit divided by the value of capital investments. If this rate is higher than 
the risk-free interest available elsewhere (nominally 2%) then the fleet is in a healthy 
economic state and is able to replace large capital items as this becomes necessary. If the 
ROFTA is below 2% this means that such investments are not worthwhile in financial terms 
because greater gains may be obtained by investing funds elsewhere.  

The ratio "Current Revenue/Break-Even Revenue" (CR/BER) is a measure of short-term 
viability. If it is less than one then vessels cannot cover their operating costs and will have to 
stop fishing when they run out of cash; and above one the vessels can cover their operating 
costs, but this does not mean that they generate sufficient income to replace large capital 
items. 

Two measures are used to assess whether vessels are "fully utilised". A "Technical Indicator" 
is defined as the ratio of the average time spent at sea divided by the maximum feasible 
fishing time in the relevant activity. It takes a value of unity when all vessels are fishing as 
much as practicable, even though the fishing season may be short. Values less than one 
indicate that parts of the fleet are fishing less than they could. A threshold value of 70% is 
usually taken as a sign of a significant under-use. However, some vessels may not fish at all 
in the entire year and are "inactive". If there are many inactive vessels in a fishing fleet, this is 
an indication that the fleet is not in balance with the resources.  

EN 

15 

   EN