COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT on the implementation and functioning of Regulation (EU) 2017/1004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2017 on the establishment of a Union framework for the collection, management and use of data in the fisheries sector and support for scientific advice regarding the common fisheries policy and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 199/2008 (recast) Accompanying the document Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation and functioning of Regulation (EU) 2017/1004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2017 on the establishment of a Union framework for the collection, management and use of data in the fisheries sector and support for scientific advice regarding the common fisheries policy and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 199/2008 (recast)
Date: 2020-10-22
Institutions: Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, EU programme, common fisheries policy, data collection, fishery resources, fishing industry

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 22.10.2020  SWD(2020) 229 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT on the implementation and functioning of Regulation (EU) 2017/1004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2017 on the establishment of a Union framework for the collection, management and use of data in the fisheries sector and support for scientific advice regarding the common fisheries policy and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 199/2008 (recast) Accompanying the document Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation and functioning of Regulation (EU) 2017/1004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2017 on the establishment of a Union framework for the collection, management and use of data in the fisheries sector and support for scientific advice regarding the common fisheries policy and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 199/2008 (recast) {COM(2020) 664 final}  
 
 
ANNEX 1 
Data collection framework – graphic presentation 

 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX 2 
 Regional coordination groups 2017-2019 

This  table  lists  the  regional  coordination  groups  (RCGs),  which  cover  most  fishing 
fleets subject to DCF activities.  All  RCGs  have  now  developed  and  agreed  their  rules  of 
procedures  (RoP),  which  are  made  publicly  available  on  the  DCF  website.  In  2019,  an 
agreement was reached on the merging of RCG North Sea and Eastern Arctic (NS&EA) and 
RCG North Atlantic (NA). The newly formed RCG NANS&EA adopted the RCG NS&EA 
RoP. The table also lists the RCG composition, in terms of EU Member States and end users 
involvement.  (Mediterranean  and  Black  Seas  (Med&BS),  Large  Pelagic  (LP),  Long 
Distance Fisheries (LDF)) 

Baltic 

NA 

NS&E
A 

Med & BS 

LP 

LDF 

d
-
b
3
S
E
C

I

*

d
7
&
a
5
l
c
x
e

,
0
1
-
5
S
E
C

I

*
O
F
A
N

,
4
1
,
2
1
,
a
5
,
d
7
,
a
3

,
2

,
1
S
E
C

I

r
o
9
2
-
1
A
S
G
M
C
F
G

.

F
C
E
T
S

,

T
A
C
C

I

7
3
O
A
F

C
T
T
A

I

,

C
F
P
C
W

,

C
T
O

I

,

T
A
C
C

I

a
n
u
t

n
a
h
t

r
e
h
t
o
O
M
F
R

DK DE EE 
FI LV LT 
PL SE 

BE DK FR DE IE EE 
FI NL PT ES UK LV 
LT SE PL 

BG HR CY 
FR EL IT MT 
RO SI ES 

HR CY FR 
EL IT PT 
ES 

DE IT LV 
LT NL PL 
ES 

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 (ICES) 

  X  

X 

 X 

 X 

 X  

 X  

 X   

X 

Member 
States’ 
composition 
2017 

* = merged in 
2019 

annual meeting 

end users present 

RCG created 

rules of procedure 

2018 

annual meeting 

end users present 

rules of procedure 

2019 

annual meeting 

end users present 

RCG created 

rules of procedure 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
  
  
  
  
  
 
ANNEX 3 
Data calls and reporting obligations by end-users in 2017-2019 

 Data calls and reporting obligations by end-users in 2017-2019. The main and recurrent data calls and reporting obligations are listed here. 

 
 
 
 
ANNEX 4  
Commission participation in DCF meetings 

Mapping of DCF-related meetings, grouped by the responsible organising body (Commission, Member States and end users), that were attended by DG MARE, Unit C3. The group ‘Data IT system’ is inactive for 
the moment. The RCG NS & EA and the RCG NA merged in 2019. For the abbreviations, please refer to the main text.   

 
 
 
 
ANNEX 5  
STECF activities 2017–2019 on data collection  
(Plenaries and Expert Working Groups meetings) 

2019 https://stecf.jrc.ec.europa.eu/meetings/2019  
1.  EWG 19-05, Evaluation of mandatory surveys under the DCF, 13-17 May, Brussels 
2.  EWG 19-09, Evaluation of annual reports for data collection, 24-28 June, Gothenburg; 
3.  PLEN 19-02, Summer plenary meeting, 01-06 July, Brussels (scrutiny of EWG work on 

the evaluation of the annual reports for data collection results) 

4.  EWG 19-11, FDI: Fisheries Dependent Information, 16-20 September, JRC-Ispra 
5.  EWG 19-12, Revision of the EU multiannual programme for data collection (EU-MAP) 

after 2020, 16-20 Sept, Brussels 

6.  EWG 19-18, Evaluation of work plans for data collection, 4-8 Nov, Bremerhaven 
7.  PLEN  19-03,  Winter  plenary  meeting,  11-16  Nov,  Brussels  (scrutiny  of  EWG  work  on 
the EU-MAP revision after 2020 and results of  EWG on work plans for data collection 
evaluation) 

2018 https://stecf.jrc.ec.europa.eu/meetings/2018  
1.  EWG 18-04, Preparation for the evaluation  of the list  of mandatory research surveys  at 

sea, 14-18 May, Varese 

2.  EWG 18-10, Evaluation of annual reports, 25-29 June, Brussels 
3.  PLEN 18-02, Summer plenary meeting, 02-07 July, Brussels (scrutiny of EWG work on 

annual reports) 

4.  EWG 18-11, New FDI, 10-14 Sept, JRC-Ispra 
5.  EWG 18-18, Evaluation of work plans and data transmission failures, 05-09 November, 

Bremerhaven 

6.  PLEN 18-03, Winter plenary meeting, 12-17 November, Brussels (scrutiny of EWG work 

on evaluation of work plans and data transmission failures) 

2017 https://stecf.jrc.ec.europa.eu/meetings/2017 
1.  EWG 17-05, Fisheries Dependent Information – Classic, 19-23 June, JRC-Ispra 
2.  EWG 17-07, DCF 2016 annual reports evaluation and data transmission to end users in 

2016, 26-30 June, Gavirate 

3.  EWG 17-04, Quality assurance for DCF data, 03-7 July, Copenhagen 
4.  PLEN 17-02, Summer plenary meeting, 10-14 July, Brussels (scrutiny of EWG work on 

annual reports evaluation and data transmission) 

5.  EWG  17-17  (1),  Compilation  of  the  new  DCF  annual  report  template  -  part  1,  16-20 

October, Brussels 

6.  EWG  17-17  (2),  Compilation  of  the  new  DCF  annual  report  template  -  part  2,  23-27 

October, Brussels 

7.  EWG 17-12, Fisheries Dependent Information - new FDI, 23-28 Oct, JRC-Ispra 
8.  PLEN  17-03,  Winter  plenary  meeting,  06-11  November,  Brussels  (scrutiny  of  EWG 

work on new DCF annual report template) 

9.  EWG  17-13,  Evaluation  of  DCF  national  work  plans  amendments  for  2018/19,  13-18 

November, Hamburg 

 
 
 
ANNEX 6 
Data collected under the EU-MAP 

Delegated decision 

BIOLOGICAL DATA  

Table 1A Stocks in Union waters 
Table 1B Stocks of outermost regions of the Union 
Table 1C Stocks in marine regions under regional fisheries management organisations 
(RFMOs) and sustainable fishing partnership agreements (SFPAs) 
Table 1D Species to be monitored under protection programmes in the Union or under 
international obligation 
Table 1E Freshwater anadromous and catadromous species 
Table 2 Fishing activity (metier) by region 
Table 3 Species to be collected for recreational fisheries   
Table 4 Fishing activity variable  

SOCIO-ECONOMIC DATA for fish, aquaculture and processing sector 

Table 5A Economic variables for the fleet 
Table 5B Fleet segmentation   
Table 5C Geographical stratification by region 
Table 6 Social variables for the fishing and aquaculture sectors 
Table 7 Economic variables for the aquaculture sector 
Table 8 Environmental variables for the aquaculture sector 
Table 9 Segmentation to be applied for the collection of aquaculture data 
Table 10 Economic and social variables for the processing industry sector that may be 
collected on a voluntary basis  

Implementing decision 

SURVEYS 

List of research surveys at sea:  
Baltic Sea: 5 surveys 
North Sea and Eastern Arctic (ICES areas I and II): 15 surveys 
North Atlantic (ICES Areas V-XIV and NAFO areas): 19 surveys 
Mediterranean waters and Black sea: 4 surveys 

THRESHOLDS 

Thresholds on biological data collection 
Provision of catch estimates from existing recreational fisheries 
Thresholds on social and economic data on aquaculture 
Thresholds on environmental data on aquaculture 
Thresholds on Member State's participation (physical or financial) in research surveys 
at sea 

 
 
 
 
ANNEX 7 
EU MAP beyond 2021- consultation activities 

Timeline of EU MAP consultation (indicative from July 2020) 

 
 
 
ANNEX 8 
 Templates for work plans and annual reports 

Example of how the EU MAP requirements (upper left-hand box) are translated into the work plan template (middle box) and the annual report template (bottom right box): the sampling of 
commercial fisheries in the EU MAP includes details on the sampling fractions and the biological variables to be collected for the stocks listed in Tables 1A, 1B and 1C. These requirements are 
described in the work plan template in a series of tables – here we present Table 1C, that depicts the sampling intensity of the stocks and the biological variables to be collected. The annual 
report includes the above planning of the work plan table (white part) and the achieved sampled levels (grey part).       

 
 
 
 
ANNEX 9 
Summary of MS pilot studies 2017 – 2019 

This table marks the pilot studies undertaken by the Member States during the period 2017–
2019, based on the EU MAP.  

MS 

AT 

BE 

BG 

HR 

CY 

CZ 

DK 

EE 

FI 

FR 

DE 

GR 

HU 

IE 

IT 

LT 

LV 

MT 

NL 

PL 

PT 

RO 

SK 

SI 

ES 

SV 

UK 

Pilot study 1:  
Share of catches of 
recreational 
fisheries 

Pilot study 2:  
Level of fishing and 
impact on 
resources/ecosystems 

Pilot study 3:  
Employment data by 
education/nationality 

Pilot study 4:  
Environmental data 
on aquaculture 

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 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX 10 
Regional coordination groups’ recommendations 

This table briefly describes the recommendations put forward by the regional coordination groups (RCG) of the Baltic (RCG BALTIC), North 
Sea  and  Eastern  Arctic  (RCG  NS&EA),  North  Atlantic  (RCG  NA),  Mediterranean  and  Black  Sea  (RCG  MED&BS),  long  distance  fisheries 
(RCG LDF) and large pelagics (RCG LP)  for the period 2017-2019. The information was collated from the respective liaison meeting reports. 

2019 

2018 
Internal matters 

2017 

Governance 
Rules of Procedures 
(RoP) 

RCG secretariat 

Meetings 

RCG NA & RCG NS&EA: to establish  RCG 
NS&EA RoP as the RoP for the merged group 

RCG NANS&EA, RCG BALTIC: need for 
central resources to support RCG work 
RCG NA NS&EA, RCG BALTIC back-to-
back meeting in 2020 

Cooperation between RCG LDF with RCG 
NANS&EA, RCG BALTIC 

Regional sampling 
plans 

RCG BALTIC: small pelagic in the Baltic  

RCG MED&BS: small pelagic fish in the 
Adriatic Sea 

Fisheries overviews  RCG NA NS&EA: to approve 

RCG NA NS&EA, RCG BALTIC: to make 
publically available 

Survey data 

RCG NANS&EA, RCG BALTIC: all data 
from mandatory surveys to be made publicly 
available 

RCG MED&BS: amendment of RoP 

RCG MED&BS: RoP  

RCG LP: future status 

RCG NS&EA, RCG BALTIC: finance a secretariat 
for supporting RCG work 

Inter-sessional work (sub-groups) 

RCG NA:  
- Establish and maintain a pan regional RCG data end 
user subgroup 
- Pan-regional subgroup on regional sampling plans  
- Workshop to standardise methods of determining 
metiers from transversal data 

RCG LP: Establish in 2018 a workshop for launching a 
permanent group for temperate tuna 

Outcomes 

Surveys at sea 

RCG MED&BS: mesozooplankton sampling in 
MEDIAS (acoustic) surveys 

RCG NS&EA:  
- Common naming of surveys  
- Review of survey tables 

10 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
RCG NA NS&EA: to develop an inventory 
list from the survey databases 

Cost sharing 

RCG NA NS&EA: cost‐ sharing agreements 
for surveys in 2020-2021 

RDB data 

RCG NA NS&EA: update stock information 

RCG BALTIC: carry out data checks 

RCG LDF:  
- Update data 
- Facilitate future uploads for combined areas 

RCG NA NS&EA:  
- SCRDB to review the RDB/RDBES Data 
Policy  
- SCRDB and ICES to create an RDB/RDBES 
Data confidentiality agreement 
RCG LDF: to fund work a through COM-
ICES agreement  

RCG NA NS&EA, RCG BALTIC: need for 
long term funding of the RDBES development 

RCG MED&BS: to apply STREAM data 
quality checks, before submitting data to the 
relevant data calls 

Data policy and 
confidentiality 

Funding 

Applications/ uses 

ICES 

Regional databases 

RCG NS&EA: finalize the work done on the 
population of the stock database table  

RCG MED&BS: setting up of a Regional Database 

RCG NA: collate survey information from MS for 
evaluation of EU‐ MAP 

RCG MED&BS:  
- Implementation of research surveys at sea 
- Introduction of new research surveys at sea 
RCG NA: cost‐ sharing agreements for surveys in 2018 – 
2019 

RCG MED&BS: procedures for cost sharing under the 
EMFF 

RCG BALTIC:  
- Request ICES to improve the RDB towards the data 
needs of WGEEL/ WGBAST 
- Request ICES to align the master stock database with 
data used in stock assessments 

RCG NA: Explore current RDB structure and data in 
simulations to test regional sampling designs 
RCG NA: RCG to re‐ establish representation at the SC‐
RDB 

RCG NA, RCG NS&EA, RCG BALTIC:  funding 
of RDBES development 

RCG NA:  
- Use of the RDBES to populate DCF National 
Report tables  
- Storage and maintenance of metiers variables 

Data Quality 

RCG NA: utilisation of RDB for completion and 
evaluation of MS national plans 

RCG NS&EA: development of quality evaluation tools 
based on InterCatch 

Scientific Advice 

RCG NS&EA: 
- Set guidelines for all WKs and WGs for writing 
recommendations to others  
- Recommendations addressed to WGNAS and 

RCG NS&EA: update of advice sheet 

Diadromous subgroup: recommendations to WGBAST, 
WGNAS, WGEEL 

11 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
DG MARE/STECF 

WGBAST on Atlantic salmon 

RCG NA: need for further inclusion of recreational 
caught fish in stock assessments 

Recreational 
fisheries (RF) 

RCG MED&BS: workshop for RF 

RCG NA NS&EA:  
- ICES to consider inclusion RF data in the 
RDBES 
- STECF to consider a workshop on the 
outcomes from pilot studies of RF 

sampling 

RCG MED&BS: establishment of a scientific 
network for sampling optimization 

Per Theme 

RCG NA:  
- Need for multispecies data collection for marine 
RF pilot surveys  
- To consider inclusion of marine RF data into the 
RDBES  
- To review the role of regional cooperation for 
surveys of marine RF in 2019 
RCG NS&EA: Endorsement of outcomes from 
metier workshop 2018 

Age reading 

RCG BALTIC: to finalise age readings for 
dab, flounder, brill and turbot 

RCG LP: promote regular workshops for Bluefin 
Tuna age reading and calibration in ICCAT 

RCG MED&BS:  
- Proposed Changes to FDI data call and new data calls  
- Improve communication between end users and MS 
before reporting DT failures to COM 
- Data availability and official data calls 
- Shorten the data‐ handling procedures 

RCG MED&BS: merging of length classes 

RCG LP:  
- shark sampling 
- Compatibility of shark sampling activities with CITES 

RCG LDF: suspension of EU sampling of small pelagics 
in CECAF area (From Morocco to Guinea‐ Bissau) 
RCG MED&BS: biological parameters – ageing 
protocols 

RCG MED & BS: MSs to harmonize age 
reading protocols for all target species 
RCG MED & BS: use of STREAM protocols 
for monitoring  

Fish stomach 
contents 
Data requirements 

Index rivers 
(diadromous 
species) 

RCG BALTIC: potential cost-sharing 

RCG NA, RCG NS&EA, RCG BALTIC: review 
and amendment of proposed Control Regulation to 
ensure DCF data requirements are met 

RCG Baltic: availability of last haul data 

RCG NA: implications of the Landing obligation 

RCG MED&BS: pilot studies on incidental catch of 
vulnerable species 

RCG LDF: data requirements small pelagics CECAF area 
(from Morocco to Guinea‐ Bissau) 

12 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Data collection – Member States EMFF allocation, commitments, spending – by end 2018 

Annex 11 

EMFF – 
allocated 

2014-2020 

(Euro) 

700,000 

Average 
annual 
EMFF 
allocation 
(Euro) 

EMFF 
committed 
(Euro)  

(2014-2018) 

EMFF 
committed 
spending / 
EMFF 
allocation 
(%) 

EMFF spent 
(Euro) 

(2014-2018) 

EMFF 
spending / 
EMFF 
allocation 
(%) 

MS 

AT 

BE 

BG 

CY 

CZ 

DE 

DK 

EE 

GR 

ES 

FI 

FR 

HR 

HU 

IE 

IT 

LT 

LV 

MT 

NL 

PL 

PT 

RO 

SE 

SK 

SI 

UK 

100,000 

698,689 

99.8% 

257,408 

8,696,680 

1,242,383 

8,756,490 

100.7% 

3,420,655 

3,983,120 

569,017 

1,370,570 

34.4% 

935,331 

3,541,528 

505,933 

3,872,695 

109.4% 

1,625,782 

1,953,015 

279,002 

299,624 

15.3% 

66,084 

37,195,778 

5,313,683 

37,195,778 

100.0% 

19,663,775 

40,095,077 

5,727,868 

27,424,872 

68.4% 

21,609,095 

5,628,408 

804,058 

3,736,000 

16,368,547 

2,338,364 

15,342,220 

66.4% 

93.7% 

2,869,377 

6,410,771 

79,041,351 

11,291,622 

35,161,405 

44.5% 

35,092,020 

14,332,894 

2,047,556 

10,132,560 

70.7% 

8,408,569 

66,146,872 

9,449,553 

33,425,613 

50.5% 

26,600,570 

4,876,000 

696,571 

4,224,704 

1,751,293 

250,185 

1,688,617 

86.6% 

96.4% 

859,088 

32,557,058 

4,651,008 

36,923,391 

113.4% 

27,687,992 

46,985,079 

6,712,154 

46,585,393 

99.1% 

22,179,921 

2,757,954 

393,993 

1,869,761 

5,280,929 

754,418 

2,339,075 

67.8% 

44.3% 

915,262 

1,969,892 

3,541,528 

505,933 

3,541,528 

100.0% 

1,754,836 

26,675,264 

3,810,752 

25,600,000 

96.0% 

10,056,900 

7,434,311 

1,062,044 

6,673,578 

24,004,679 

3,429,240 

15,699,554 

3,555,675 

507,954 

2,021,328 

27,412,172 

3,916,025 

11,384,821 

700,000 

100,000 

0 

2,343,474 

334,782 

1,171,737 

89.8% 

65.4% 

56.8% 

41.5% 

0.0% 

50.0% 

3,853,923 

5,149,221 

2,019,595 

7,075,020 

0 

602,937 

52,441,314 

7,491,616 

25,217,017 

48.1% 

14,988,460 

Total 

520,000,000 

74,285,714 

362,357,020 

69.7% 

226,072,483 

Source: Infosys, 31.12.2018 

36.8% 

39.3% 

23.5% 

45.9% 

3.4% 

52.9% 

53.9% 

51.0% 

39.2% 

44.4% 

58.7% 

40.2% 

0.0% 

49.1% 

85.0% 

47.2% 

33.2% 

37.3% 

49.6% 

37.7% 

51.8% 

21.5% 

56.8% 

25.8% 

0.0% 

25.7% 

28.6% 

43.5% 

13 

 
 
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
Annex 12 
Summary of regional grants 

1.  Strengthening  regional  cooperation  in  the  area  of  large  pelagic  fishery  data  collection 

(RECOLAPE) 

This  report  refers  to  the  framework  contract  MARE/2016/22  and,  specifically,  to  the  Annex  III 
“Biological  data  collection  for  fisheries  on  highly  migratory  species”.  The  overall  objective  of  the 
project  is  to  strengthen  the  regional  cooperation  in  the  area  of  biological  data  collection  for  highly 
migratory species in the current context where, regional cooperation will evolve from a single meeting 
(RCM – Regional coordination meeting) to a continuous process that will have greater responsibilities 
(RCG  –  Regional  coordination  group).  The  project  has  been  involved  in  several  developments:  the 
design of Regional Sampling Plans (RSPs) for large pelagic stocks, creation of tools and protocols for 
collecting  new  data  around  FADs  (Fish  Aggregating  Devices), testing  the alternative  on-board  data 
collection  methods  and  the  design  of  an  appropriate  regional  framework  to  assess  the  data  quality. 
The  objective  of  this  final  report  is  to  explain  the  work  undertaken,  giving  details  of  the 
implementation  and  results  of  the  specific  work  packages.  The  final  section  in  each  work  package 
report also lists recommendations for the future work to improve the coordination in the collection of 
data on highly migratory species  

WP1 made a proposal for the future organisation of the Large Pelagic RCG (RCG-LP). This proposal 
includes meetings/subgroups, which are organized in three stages. The first stage has the objective of 
identifying data gaps and data needs, based on the research priorities for data collection identified by 
the  end-users  (stock  assessment  groups  within  the tuna  RFMOs).  It  is  expected  that  this  group  will 
serve to improve the coordination between data collection scientists and stock assessment scientists. 
The  second  stage  is  in  charge  of  designing  Regional  Sampling  Plans  (RSP)  both  for  the  target  and 
bycatch  species,  by  coordinating  both  dockside  and  on-board  sampling  for  the  different  stocks. 
Ideally,  this  coordination  should  be  achieved  by  methodological  groups  dealing  with  specific 
fisheries. The proposal includes four parallel groups based on stocks/gears; tropical tunas (focused on 
purse  seine  fleet),  longline  fisheries  outside  the  Mediterranean  Sea,  longline  fisheries  inside  the 
Mediterranean Sea and bluefin tuna fisheries. Finally, the third stage would evaluate the results of the 
two  preceding  stages,  and  it  would  make  the  final  decisions  of  greater  importance  and  approve  the 
RSPs.  

The WP2 explores all the elements needed for the design of a European Regional Work Plan that may 
replace the relevant parts of the MS National Work Plans. This WP includes two case studies: one for 
the Mediterranean swordfish and another for the tropical tunas in the Atlantic Ocean. In both cases, 
data needs and priorities were defined, current port sampling protocols were reviewed, and specific 
variations to current sampling design are recommended to increase the sampling efficiency.  

WP3 includes two independent pilot studies. WP3.1 proposes best standards for data collection and 
data  transmission  around  fish  aggregating  devices  (FADs),  which  are  presented  as  valid  to  fulfil 
minimum requirements in all tuna Regional Fisheries Management Organizations (RFMO). The use 
of FADs has continuously increased in tropical tuna purse seine fishery, with FAD-associated catches 
now exceeding those on free schools in the case of the European Fleet. Despite the importance of this 
fishery, little information is available on FAD use worldwide which is crucial for the understanding, 
monitoring and management of FADs use and the impacts on pelagic ecosystems. As a result, tuna 
RFMOs  have  called  for  FAD  management  plans,  including  data  collection  and  reporting  on 
deployment and use of FADs by purse seiners and support vessels1. 

1 Vessels fishing in cooperation with tropical tuna purse seine vessels. They do not fish but are devoted to 
supporting the activities with FADs.   

14 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
On  the  other  hand,  during  this  WP3.1  standards  for  data  submission  on  FOBs  to  RFMOs  were 
defined. This WP recommends that RFMOs templates should be adjusted to the data sources (FOB 
logbook and data coming from buoys attached to the FADs, which permit their constant tracking).   

The  second  pilot  study,  WP3.2,  compares  the  data  collected  using  Electronic  Monitoring  Systems 
(EMS)  to  the  data  collected  by  observers  and  self-reporting  programs,  to  determine  if  EMS  can  be 
used to reliably collect unbiased data on-board longline fleet. This pilot study, which was conducted 
in  the  longline  fleet  targeting  large  pelagic  species  around  La  Reunion  Island  (Indian  Ocean), 
demonstrates  that  using  the  EMS  is  a  viable  complement  or  alternative  to  collecting  the  data  using 
human observers, even if there are still some weaknesses.   

WP4 developed a data collection strategy for some variables not collected under the Data Collection 
Framework  (DCF).  These  variables  should  be  provided  by  the  fishing  industry  and  buoy  providers 
and  will  be  used,  in  combination  with  traditional  DCF  data,  for  Catch  per  unit  effort  (CPUE) 
standardisation, as well as in the estimation of alternative abundance indices in tropical tuna fisheries. 
The introduction of FADs in conjunctions with the satellite linked echo-sounder buoys was one of the 
most significant innovation introduced in the industrial tropical tuna purse seine fishery. These buoys 
provide information on the accurate geo-location of the floating object and estimation of fish biomass 
aggregated  underneath  the  FAD  along  its  trajectory,  which  increases  the  efficiency  of  the  fishing 
operations. Alternative indicators of tuna biomass and fishing effort can be derived from echosounder 
buoys,  which  could  help  to  assess  natural  variations  on  target  species  abundance  and  improved 
scientific  advice  for  stock  assessment.  As  such,  the  objectives  of  the  WP4  are  to  develop  a  data 
collection strategy on FADs to provide indicators of the total number of operational buoys at sea to 
improve the CPUE standardization procedure, to define dedicated algorithms to improve estimates of 
biomass  signal  from  echo-sounders,  and  to  develop  alternative  abundance  indices  in  tuna  fisheries, 
which requires the efforts from all the stakeholders.  

On the other hand, the WP4 is devoted to developing and test methods for the estimation of reliable 
estimates  of  tuna  presence  and  abundance  underneath  the  FADs.  The  algorithm  developed  for  one 
specific  brand  of  buoys  has  shown  a  very  good  efficiency  in  pattern  recognition  of  presence  and 
absence of tuna aggregation under FADs, regardless of the ocean. 

WP5 developed an R package2, named “dqassess”, which could improve the procedures assessing the 
quality of biological data on large pelagic stocks, at the national and regional levels. The introduction 
of  the  R  package  “dqassess”  has  to  be  seen  as  the  first  step  in  a  larger  dynamic  process.  Several 
projects  on  data  quality  assessment  have  been  started  by  different  initiatives  (e.g.  COST3);  the 
package needs to be linked to these projects. Furthermore, this kind of quality control and checks have 
to be tested by the community and all contributions, and feedback experiences should be considered 
to  improve  the  methodology  and,  especially,  to  follow-up  the  specific  user  needs.  In  addition, 
Mediterranean swordfish age-reading coordination exercise was conducted under WP5, which could 
be understood as an example of cooperation under the DCF between the institutes from several  MS 
and which could be extended to the rest of the LP species. This cooperation has resulted in common 
and  agreed  procedures  (age  scheme,  age  criteria)  and  methods  (preparation  of  the  spines)  used  for 
swordfish  age  reading.  Moreover,  it  is  recommended  that  the  coordination  on  the  swordfish  ageing 
should  continue,  organising  new  exchange  exercise  and  workshop  after  three  years  to  assess  any 
improvements that might be ascribed to the agreed-on procedures and common ageing protocol.  

Finally, WP6 has focused on a consultation process about the results obtained in the present project  
among MS involved in LP fisheries. The participation rate exceeded 50% including some of the most 

2 R Packages are the fundamental units of reproducible R code. They include reusable R functions, the 
documentation that describes how to use them, and sample data. R is a programming language and free software 
environment for statistical computing and graphics supported by the R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 
which is commonly used by fisheries researchers.  
3   https://wwz.ifremer.fr/cost/content/download/15319/file/COSTcore.pdf 

15 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
relevant countries with large pelagic captures. There is a broad consensus among MS on the general 
proposal to structure the RCG-LP in 3 stages, on the recommendations done for the development of a 
RSP for tropical tunas and Mediterranean swordfish, and for the procedures to assess the biological 
data quality.  

2.  Strengthening  Regional  cooperation  in  the  Area  of  fisheries  biological  data  collection  in  the 

Mediterranean and Black Sea (STREAM) 

The  STREAM  project  “Strengthening  Regional  cooperation  in  the  area  of  fisheries  biological  data 
collection  in the Mediterranean  and  Black  Sea”  aimed  at  providing  support  to the  Commission  and 
MSs to build up experience in new areas of regional cooperation in the Mediterranean and Black Sea 
for the realization of Multiannual Regional Work Programme (MRWP). 

The  Work  Package  1  performed  a  regional  consultation  to  obtain  views,  determine  the  degree  of 
consensus  on  possible  future  developments  of  regional  coordination  in  the  collection  of  biological 
data, on the implementation of common methodologies, the establishment of regional sampling plans 
as well as the development of ad hoc working groups, and note any outstanding areas of disagreement 
that  need  to  be  addressed.  The  results  of  the  consultation  pointed  out  the  urgent  need  to  progress 
towards  common  regional  methodological  approaches  for  the  collection  of  biological  data  on 
commercial  fisheries,  recreational  fisheries,  and  the  marine  ecosystem  in  general.  The  necessity  to 
better  develop  statistical  and  quality  check  aspects  related  to  the  collection  of  all  biological  data  at 
regional level, and strengthen the cooperation between MSs sharing the same marine resources in the 
region also emerged. WP1 also analysed the rules of procedures (RoPs) already developed during the 
RCG Med&BS (RCG Med&BS Report, 2017), identifying gaps and suggesting further actions. 

Under Work Package 2, we performed an analysis aimed at identifying stocks and fisheries (métiers) 
suitable for regional sampling. The analyses performed under WP2 of the project STREAM provided 
new insights on the identification of stocks and métiers driving the fisheries in the EU Mediterranean 
and Black Sea GSAs. On the basis of the 2013-2015 data, and taking into account a 75 % threshold of 
the  cumulative  value  and  volume  of  landings,  it  was  possible  to  identify  the  most  important  target 
species for all the demersal and small pelagic fisheries. The outputs of WP2 provided the elements to 
identify  the  case  studies  for  the  training  workshops  on  the  sampling  optimization  tools  and  the 
analyses performed under WP3. 

Under Work package 3, a data sharing agreement (DSA) was finalized specifying the type of data to 
be  shared,  the  common  data  format  and  rules  for  the  usage  of  these  data.  The  DSA  was  shared 
through the project sharepoint with National Correspondents for their feedback and agreement. Under 
Task  3.2,  some  modifications  were  made  to  the  RCG  Med&BS  Data  Call  format  to  allow  the 
recording  of  individual  measures  (e.g.,  weight,  sex,  maturity  and  age)  useful  for  analyses  on 
biological  variables,  and  information  related  to  the  fishing  area  and  (port)  that  can  be  used  in  the 
analyses performed by the Sampling Design tool (under Task 3.3) in order to perform the analyses in 
different  areas.  The  introduction  of  these  additional  fields  implied  necessary  modifications  to  the 
scripts for the conversion of the simplified format (RCG Med&BS Data Call) to the SDEF (Standard 
Data Exchange Format) used in COST.  
A regional data storage system for Mediterranean and Black Sea is not available, though requests for 
establishing a RDB have been proposed in past occasions. Besides the revision of the reference lists 
and data format also contributes to examine solutions related to the storage, processing and analysis of 
the data at regional level, taking into account the current situation, ongoing studies and developments. 
A  list  of  expectations  of  the  various  stakeholders  from  the  RDB  (requirement  specifications),  the 
potential users (actors) and the list of actions defining the interactions between a user and the system 
to achieve a goal (use cases) is described. 
Auxiliary tools to standardize and ease the procedures for data processing and management are made 
available  through  ad  hoc  scripts  for  the  conversion  of  primary  data  into  the  formats  for  data 
transmission  to  specific  data call (e.g.  EU-JRC  DCF,  GFCM  DCRF) and  use  of  existing  tools (e.g. 
COST) for data analyses. 

16 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The work done in Task 3.3 included the development of tools for the sampling optimization, and the 
application of the developed tools to specific case studies. The initial plan was to cover and analysed 
at  least  four  case  studies,  while  it  was  finally  decided  to  provide  the  results  of  five  case  studies  in 
order to have a wider overview on the potentialities of the developed tools and their applications. 
The methodology and the R tools developed in Task 3.3 of the project have been applied to 15 case 
studies during the 2 training workshops organized under WP7. Data for the case studies were obtained 
after a data call of RCG Med&BS, following a Data Sharing Agreement. 
R scripts to implement rules on how to allocate tasks or costs between Member States and assessing 
results  from  simulations  under  the  economic  perspective  were  developed.  Cost  implications  if 
Member  States  will implement  the  regional  sampling  plan  proposed under Task  3.3  were  evaluated 
and compared to the "business as usual" approach that consists of national sampling plans.  

The work of Work package 4 was organized into two Tasks. 
The  main  objective  of  Task  4.1  was  to  develop  a  RSP  adapted  to  the  characteristics  of  the 
stock/fisheries object of regional monitoring, which were identified by the WP2 of this project.  
In addition to the main stock proposed by MARE/2017/19 for stomach content data collection, e.g. 
European  hake  in  Mediterranean  GSAs  and  turbot  in  the  Black  Sea,  some  additional  stocks  were 
proposed for this data collection in the new sampling program: anglerfish, Lopius piscatorius and L. 
budegassa, in the Mediterranean, Mediterranean horse mackerel, Trachurus mediterraneus, and sprat, 
Sprattus sprattus, in the Black Sea. As main criteria followed for the selection of the new species, we 
considered  the  species  importance  in  terms  of  landings  and  commercial  value,  the  trophic 
relationships (e.g. predator, prey) with European hake in the Mediterranean, and turbot in the Black 
Sea. On this basis a new sampling scheme was proposed, taking into account, for each species, factors 
such  as  size  class,  season  (quarter),  and  type  of  sampling  (e.g.  experimental  fishing  and  biological 
sampling on commercial fishery). 
A  common  procedure  of  analysis  to  estimate  the  structure  of  the  exploited  fish  and  shellfish 
assemblages (in terms of species occurrence and relative abundance) was designed using the MEDITS 
trawl survey data. The proposed methodology was tested on a case study represented by the GSA9, 
using MEDITS data from 2015 to 2017. 
Under Sub-Task 4.1.3 “Data on incidental catch of non-target species, such as protected, endangered 
or  threatened  species”,  the  methodological  approach  developed  under  the  project  MARE/2014/19 
Med&BS was reviewed and updated. An analysis of pros and cons of the approach was performed, 
also taking advantage of the preliminary results that came from the pilot studies carried out under the 
MSs work plans. A cooperation started with experts from GFCM working on the implementation of a 
monitoring program on the incidental catch of vulnerable species, and the colleagues involved in the 
WP4 of the FishPi2 project. 
The new programme on data collection of incidental by catch was designed taking into consideration 
three case studies, two in the Mediterranean (trawl fisheries in the Gulf of Lions and the Adriatic Sea), 
one in the Black Sea (beam trawl fishery targeting Rapana whelk). The monitoring programmes are 
based on a combined approach coupling the fleet observer monitoring scheme already foreseen for the 
collection  of  biological  data  on  commercial  fisheries  and  discards  with  a  self-sampling  programme 
(log-books filled in by fishermen) through the proactive involvement of the fishing industry. 
The  Work  Package  5  performed  a  thorough  review  of  the  knowledge  on  SSF  and  RF  in  terms  of 
characterization of the fisheries, data collection approaches and needs, data quality and existing gaps 
has been performed. Furthermore, WP5 formulated guidelines for the collection of data in SSF and 
RF, and provided a list of recommendations for the implementation of monitoring programs on RFs. 
WP5 proposed a roadmap listing the steps that shall be taken by MSs to implement pilot studies on 
RFs in the new EU MAP.  
The work of WP6 has been organized and performed in three tasks. Task 6.1 developed a series of a 
priori and a posteriori data quality checks to be performed at national level. Two different R scripts 
were developed: a priori QC: quality checks carried out on the sampling data in  RCG CS format; a 
posteriori  QC:  quality  checks  on  the  Med&BS  Data Call  tables. The  a  priori  QC  script  is  aimed  at 
detecting  the  errors  or  inconsistencies  on  the  sampling  data,  before  the  raising  procedures  were 
applied.  Once  the  warnings  have  been  addressed,  the  conversion  tools  developed  within  STREAM 
Task  3.2  can  be  used  to  obtain  the  COST  objects  and  the  SDEF  tables  (RCG_to_COST  script); 

17 

 
 
 
subsequently,  the  SDEF  tables  can  be  used  to  obtain  the  Med&BS  Data  Call  tables  applying  the 
SDEF_to_DGMARE_Med_BS script. Then, the a posteriori quality checks can be carried out to get a 
report containing information on the spatial and temporal coverage of all the relevant tables, as well as 
to detect records with discrepancies..  
The work performed under Task 6.2 has been implemented taking into consideration two case study 
species:  red  mullet,  Mullus  barbatus,  and  common  pandora,  Pagellus  erythrinus.  The  analyses 
performed on the age variability in red mullet and the procedures set up for the implementation of an 
exchange  exercise  and  a  workshop  on  the  ageing  of  common  Pandora  will  represent  common 
procedures to be extended to other species with the aim checking the quality of age data.  
Task 6.3 developed a detailed calendar for national and regional checks by means of the a priori and a 
posteriori data quality check scripts developed by Task 6.1. A first draft of the calendar was presented 
and  discussed  with  Member  State  National  Correspondents  and  stakeholders  during  the  STREAM 
Knowledge  Exchange  Workshop  (Rome,  11-12  April  2019),  and  the  proposed  final  version  of  the 
calendar took into account their comments and suggestions. 
The Work Package 7 performed an analysis aimed at mapping the training needs and the expertise in 
the  various  fields  of  biological  data  collection.  This  analysis  was  performed  through  an  ad  hoc 
questionnaire. The results of the answers received from the questionnaire were presented at the RCG 
Med&BS meeting in Kavala (September 2018). 
In  cooperation  with  WP3,  two  workshops  were  organized  for  the  experts  in  the  region.  The  two 
workshops involved training on use of regional tools developed for optimising sampling intensity, and 
took place in Kavala (in parallel with the RCG Med&BS meeting, September 2018) and in Bari (1-4 
October 2018). A third workshop (Workshop on age reading of common pandora) was organized in 
cooperation with Task 6.2, and took place in Livorno (26-28 March 2019). 
For Work Package 8, a written consultation was carried out with NCs after the STREAM Knowledge 
Exchange Workshop (11-12 April 2019), asking them to evaluate the main points tackled in the WPs 
1-6, and express their level of agreement/disagreement on a scale of semantic scores ranging from -3 
to +3, with the value 1 representing a judgement of indifference and the value ±3 representing highest 
agreement/disagreement. The feedback from the National Correspondents was generally positive.  

3.  Strengthening regional cooperation in the area of fisheries data collection – Socio-economic data 

collection for fisheries, aquaculture and the processing industry at EU level (SECFISH) 

The  final  report  of  the  SECFISH  project  provides  an  overview  of  the  achievements/results  in  the 
project between August 2018 and the End of the project (May 15th 2019) and problems encountered 
during that period.  
For WP 1 was finalised shortly after the first reporting period (Month 9).  
The  Handbook  is finalized  as  product  from  WP 2.  It  gives  a  comprehensive  overview  on  sampling 
design  and  estimation  methods.  Participants  in  WP  3  on  the  disaggregation  of  economic  data  have 
developed the R-Script and have tested this script with country data. During the PGECON  meeting 
2019 a training session was organised to allow participants from outside the SECFISH project to test 
the methodology with their own data.  
The results of WP 4 include an overview on the situation of fishing rights in the EU Member States, 
methods to assess the value of these intangible assets and a description of some applications of the 
proposed  methods.  The  participants  in  WP  5  have  done  a  feasibility  study  on  a  possible  data 
collection of raw material in the EU. Finland, Denmark and Germany were used as case studies where 
Finland  is  already  collecting  the  data  and  it  was  assessed  how  a  data  collection  could  look  like  in 
Denmark and Germany.  
The report for WP 6 gives an overview on the availability of socioeconomic data and a methodology 
for socioeconomic data collection for EU fisheries, aquaculture, and the fisheries processing industry. 
In WP 7 the participants summarized the main outputs of the ICES WGRFS on recreational fisheries 
and  developed  suggestions  for  a  quality  assurance  framework  including  data  formats  for  the  use  in 
RDBs, socioeconomic data collection requirements and future coordination activities. 
Background and project objectives  
The  project  coordinator  has  organized  for  WP  8  since  the  delivery  of  the  interim  report  a  Web-
Meeting  in  December  2018  and  a  physical  meeting  in  The  Hague  in  March  2019.  He  presented  an 

18 

 
 
 
overview on the SECFISH project and coordinated the presentation of the project participants at the 
PGECON meeting.  
This  project  was  funded  under  the  Call  for  Proposals  Mare  2016/22:  Strengthening  regional 
cooperation  in  the  area  of  fisheries  data  collection.  It  addressed  the  TOR  regarding  social  and 
economic data collection issues. As stated in the project proposal the project especially addresses the 
following overall and specific objectives: 

Improves completeness and reliability of the social and economic data collection. 
Improves the availability of data to scientists to provide advice to end-users. 

- 
- 
-  Address  aspects  raised  by  the  Scientific,  Technical  and  Economic  Committee  for 
Fisheries  (STECF)  and  other  relevant  scientific  committees  to  improve  the  social  and 
economic data collection (e.g. data on raw material for the processing industry to be able 
to form a link to the sustainable exploitation of fish stocks in the regional seas). 
Improves the regional coordination between MS of different regions regarding sampling 
design and end-user needs.  

- 

-  With new approaches to disaggregation of data this data can be used to define different 
fleet segments, which could be, for example, a group of vessels in a certain fishery or if 
possible  a  metier.  Metiers  are  applied  by  the  fisheries  biologists  in  stock  assessment 
exercises and management strategy evaluations to describe a group of vessels. 

-  Addressing  coordination  of  methodologies  for  socio-economic  data  collection  going 

beyond the coordination through PGECON. 

The consortium covered the main sea basins of the European Union (Baltic Sea, North Sea, Western 
Waters,  Celtic  Sea  and  Mediterranean  Sea)  and  a  wide  variety  of  fleet  segments,  aquaculture 
production systems and sectors of the fish processing industry. 
The  project  was  organised  in  7  Work  packages  which  were  in  line  with  the  objectives  for  socio-
economic data collection outlined in the call text. The consortium consisted of institutes with a long-
lasting  experience  in  economic  data  collection  and  research  activities  regarding  application  of  the 
DCF data for end-users needs in the advisory process. The institutes participate regularly in PGECON 
work and provide an overview on what has been achieved in 2016-17 (WP 1).  
In WP 2 the consortium addressed the methodologies for sampling designs and estimation methods 
by providing a handbook including the relevant information. The handbook will be available on the 
DCF website. 
The disaggregation of economic variables is one of the main problems we face analysing economic 
effects  of  management  decisions.  The  consortium  developed  a  methodology  (R-code)  for  a 
standardised routine to disaggregate the economic data.  
In  more  and  more  countries  tradable  fishing  rights  are  introduced.  It  is,  therefore,  important  to 
estimate the intangible assets like fishing rights in EU fisheries. This was addressed in WP 4. 
WP 5 elaborated on the possibilities to collect data on raw material in the fish processing industry. 
The  STECF  has  repeatedly  argued  that  without  information  on  the  origin  of  raw  material  it  is 
impossible to draw a link between the processing sector and the fishing fleets.  
As it is important to improve the collection on social variables (e.g. included in the new DCF), WP 6 
addressed possibilities for improvements of the data collection.  
WP 7 elaborated on the possibilities for the economic data collection on recreational fisheries. The 
main  reason  is  that  there  are  some  regions  where  recreational  fisheries  are  very  important  for  the 
regional economy.  
The  project  ended  May  14th  2019.  This  draft  final  report  includes  a  description  of  the  WP  with 
objectives  and  achieved  results.  In  addition,  a  description  of  encountered  difficulties  is  added.  All 
deliverables are available on the SECFISH Webinterface. 

4.  Strengthening  regional  cooperation  in  the  area  of  fisheries  data  collection  -  biological  data 

collection in EU waters (fishPi2 ) 

FishPi2  stands for the  region  of  North  Atlantic,  North  Sea  and  Eastern  Arctic. The final report  was 
sent in May 2019 and the time-series data used in the study are mainly from 2015 and 2016. 
The  project  has  built  on  the  work  achieved  in  the  fishPi  project,  further  strengthening  regional 
cooperation, and has provided some clear guidance on the implementation phase of regional sampling.  

19 

 
 
  
Work packages (WP) have specifically addressed: 
(WP1)  prerequisites for  the functioning  of  Regional  Coordination  Groups  (RCGs).  Comparing 
the tasks and objectives today and the desired future situation, including the analysis of the absence of 
RCGs. The outcomes are recommendations such as, among others, to set up a better organization and 
recognition  of  the  experts  work;  create  a  specific  website  and  a  secretary  to  help  with  the 
administrative tasks; or the establishment of permanent subgroups, including pan-regional subgroups 
(9 are mentioned, and include topics such as the landing obligation, the quality of data, catadromous 
species or the revision of the EU MAP). 
(WP2)  sets  out  scoping  of  regional  fisheries.  Three  case  studies  were  chosen  based  on  agreed 
criteria for a regional sampling plan (stock fished by fleets from more than one nation fleet or landed 
in more than one nation; and for which landings are not dominated by a single nation).  
- 

Celtic Sea: anglerfish, megrim, whiting, pilchard, pollack, where no country have more than 
60% of the landings.  
Wider  North  Sea:  otter  trawl,  seine  and  beam  trawl  fisheries,  which  are  mixed  fisheries 
including cod, haddock, plaice and sole. Several MS have vessels in more than one area and 
some MS land into other MS.  
Iberian Waters: demersal trawl fisheries from Portugal and Spain, including anglerfish, black-
bellied anglerfish, hake, megrim, four spot megrim, horse mackerel, blue whiting, Nephrops, 
mackerel and deep rose shrimp. 

- 

- 

(WP3)   proposes  regional  sampling  plans  for  commercial  fisheries,  based  in  two  cases  studies: 
North Sea demersal fisheries and Iberian trawl fisheries. Both cases confirm that regionally stratified 
sampling designs with proportional effort allocation perform better than the status-quo. Moving from 
theory to implementation should be taken forward through the RCGs. 
(WP4)  stomach  and  incidental  bycatch  sampling.  Ecosystem  components  and  species  for  which 
information would be particularly important to obtain, an overview of available data for bycatch of 
protected species and detailed methods to identify priority species has been collected. Prey mortality 
and prey-predator dependency have been analysed in six different ecosystems. Outcomes show that 
26 predatory species affect 22 prey species in Baltic Sea, Bay of Biscay, Irish Sea, Kattegat and the 
North Sea including Skagerrak; while in Celtic Sea, Eastern English Channel and the North Sea, 10 
predatory  species  affected  by  seven  commercially  exploited  prey  species.  On  Bycatch  of  protected 
species, 74 cases studies, covering six types of cases were analysed from Germany, Greece, Iceland, 
Ireland, Netherlands, Spain, Sweden and the UK.  
(WP5)  small scale fisheries and marine recreational fisheries sampling.  Despite the differences, 
SSF and MRF have things in common: low  mobility, dependency on local and regional ecosystems 
and impact on coastal fish and shellfish resources and habitat (nursery for many species). Therefore, 
similar  approaches  to  data  collection  and  management  may  be  considered.  Census  using  landing 
declarations  on-shore  and  sampling  on-board  and  on-shore  have  been  considered;  15  different 
providers of electronic systems (recording, reporting, monitoring) and the experience of 14 scientist 
using them have been contacted. Case studies come from ES, FR, PT and UK, with special mention to 
the recreational European seabass Northern stock case study. 
(WP6)  national  and  regional  data  quality.  This  WP  compared  Fisheries  Dependent  Information 
(FDI)  data  call  from  different  end-users  (EC,  ICES,  GFCM,  ICCAT,  IOTC,  FAO).  Translating 
national  data  to  data  call  is  a  translation  work  in  time  and  space  plus  renaming  the  information 
properties of the object (the same vessel is code differently in different data calls).This WP facilitates 
guidance to address data quality at national level (conformity, stability, consistency, accuracy) while 
mentioning data quality at end-user level (timeliness, completeness, adequacy). The outcome of this 
WP is the CLEFRDB, a library of the free software for statistical computing called R.  
The project outcomes have been disseminated to the North Sea and Eastern Arctic, North Atlantic, 
and  Baltic  RCGs  in  September  2018  (WP7).  The  feedback  from  these  interactions  led  to  a 
dissemination workshop with National Correspondents and DG MARE representatives in February 
2019 (WP8).  
The  project  team  established  close  links  with  other  successful  consortia  and  the  STREAM  project 
(which  stands  for  the  Mediterranean  and  Black  Sea)  in  particular,  thus  building  both  within  region 
expertise and facilitating pan-regional cooperation. 

20 

 
 
So  far,  many  of  the  outputs  from  fishPi2  are  already  being  implemented  and  some  of  the  key 
by  RCGs.
are 
recommendations 

considered 

report 

active 

under 

noted 

the 

in 

21 

 
 
22