Article 1 Subject matter
This Regulation establishes a plan for four cod stocks corresponding to the following geographical areas: (a) the Kattegat; (b) the North Sea, the Skagerrak and the eastern Channel; (c) the west of Scotland; (d) the Irish Sea.
Article 2 Definitions
For the purposes of this Regulation, in addition to the definitions laid down in Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002, the following definitions shall apply: (a) ‘effort group’ means a management unit of a Member State for which a maximum allowable fishing effort is set. It is defined by a gear grouping and an area as set out in Annex I; (b) ‘aggregated effort group’ means the combination of all Member States’ effort groups having the same gear grouping and area; (c) ‘catch per unit effort’ means the quantity of cod caught and expressed in live weight by one unit of fishing effort expressed in kW-days during one year; (d) ‘appropriate age groups’ means ages 3, 4 and 5 for cod in the Kattegat; ages 2, 3 and 4 for cod in the Irish Sea, in the North Sea, Skagerrak and the eastern Channel; ages 2, 3, 4 and 5 for cod in the west of Scotland; or other age groups as advised as appropriate by STECF.
Article 3 Geographical definitions
For the purposes of this Regulation, the following geographical definitions of geographical areas shall apply: (a) ‘Kattegat’ means that part of Division IIIa, as delineated by ICES, that is bounded on the north by a line drawn from the Skagen lighthouse to the Tistlarna lighthouse and from this point to the nearest point on the Swedish coast and on the south by a line drawn from Hasenore to Gnibens Spids, from Korshage to Spodsbjerg and from Gilbjerg Hoved to Kullen; (b) ‘North Sea’ means ICES Subarea IV and that part of ICES Division IIIa not covered by the Skagerrak and Kattegat and that part of ICES Division IIa which lies within waters under the sovereignty or jurisdiction of Member States; (c) ‘Skagerrak’ means that part of ICES Division IIIa bounded on the west by a line drawn from the Hanstholm lighthouse to the Lindesnes lighthouse and on the south by a line drawn from the Skagen lighthouse to the Tistlarna lighthouse and from that point to the nearest point on the Swedish coast; (d) ‘eastern Channel’ means ICES Division VIId; (e) ‘Irish Sea’ means ICES Division VIIa; (f) ‘west of Scotland’ means ICES Division VIa and that part of ICES Division Vb which lies within waters under the sovereignty or jurisdiction of Member States.
Article 4 Calculation of fishing effort
For the purposes of this Regulation, the fishing effort deployed by a group of vessels shall be calculated as the sum of the products of capacity-values in kW for each vessel and the number of days each vessel has been present within an area set out in Annex I. A day present within an area shall be any continuous period of 24 hours (or part thereof) during which a vessel is present within the area and absent from port.
Article 5 Objective of the plan
1. The plan referred to in Article 1 shall ensure the sustainable exploitation of the cod stocks on the basis of maximum sustainable yield. 2. The objective set out in paragraph 1 shall be attained while maintaining the following fishing mortality on cod on appropriate age groups: Stock Fishing mortality Cod in the Kattegat 0,4 Cod to the west of Scotland 0,4 Cod in the Irish Sea 0,4 Stock Fishing mortality Stock Fishing mortality Cod in the Kattegat 0,4 Cod in the Kattegat 0,4 Cod to the west of Scotland 0,4 Cod to the west of Scotland Cod in the Irish Sea 0,4 Cod in the Irish Sea 3. For the cod stock in the North Sea, the Skagerrak and the eastern Channel, the objective set out in paragraph 1 shall be attained while maintaining the fishing mortality on cod on appropriate age groups referred to in Article 8.
Article 6 Minimum and precautionary levels
The minimum spawning biomass level and the precautionary spawning biomass level for each of the cod stocks shall be as follows: Stock Minimum spawning biomass Levels in tonnes Precautionary spawning biomass Levels in tonnes Cod in the Kattegat 6 400 10 500 Cod in the North Sea, Skagerrak and eastern Channel 70 000 150 000 Cod to the west of Scotland 14 000 22 000 Cod in the Irish Sea 6 000 10 000 Stock Minimum spawning biomass Levels in tonnes Precautionary spawning biomass Levels in tonnes Stock Minimum spawning biomass Levels in tonnes Precautionary spawning biomass Cod in the Kattegat 6 400 10 500 Cod in the Kattegat 6 400 10 500 Cod in the North Sea, Skagerrak and eastern Channel 70 000 150 000 Cod in the North Sea, Skagerrak and eastern Channel 70 000 Cod to the west of Scotland 14 000 22 000 Cod to the west of Scotland Cod in the Irish Sea 6 000 10 000 Cod in the Irish Sea
Article 7 Procedure for setting TACs for cod stocks in the Kattegat the west of Scotland and the Irish Sea
1. Each year, the Council shall decide on the TAC for the following year for each of the cod stocks in the Kattegat, the west of Scotland and the Irish Sea. The TAC shall be calculated by deducting the following quantities from the total removals of cod that are forecast by STECF as corresponding to the fishing mortality rates referred to in paragraphs 2 and 3: (a) a quantity of fish equivalent to the expected discards of cod from the stock concerned; (b) as appropriate a quantity corresponding to other sources of cod mortality caused by fishing to be fixed on the basis of a proposal from the Commission. 2. The TAC shall, based on the advice of STECF, satisfy all of the following conditions: (a) if the size of the stock on 1 January of the year of application of the TAC is predicted by STECF to be below the minimum spawning biomass level established in Article 6, the fishing mortality rate shall be reduced by 25 % in the year of application of the TAC as compared with the fishing mortality rate in the previous year; (b) if the size of the stock on 1 January of the year of application of the TAC is predicted by STECF to be below the precautionary spawning biomass level set out in Article 6 and above or equal to the minimum spawning biomass level established in Article 6, the fishing mortality rate shall be reduced by 15 % in the year of application of the TAC as compared with the fishing mortality rate in the previous year; and (c) if the size of the stock on 1 January of the year of application of the TAC is predicted by STECF to be above or equal to the precautionary spawning biomass level set out in Article 6, the fishing mortality rate shall be reduced by 10 % in the year of application of the TAC as compared with the fishing mortality rate in the previous year. 3. If the application of paragraph 2(b) and (c) would, based on the advice of STECF, result in a fishing mortality rate lower than the fishing mortality rate specified in Article 5(2), the Council shall set the TAC at a level resulting in a fishing mortality rate as specified in that Article. 4. When giving its advice in accordance with paragraphs 2 and 3, STECF shall assume that in the year prior to the year of application of the TAC the stock is fished with an adjustment in fishing mortality equal to the reduction in maximum allowable fishing effort that applies in that year. 5. Notwithstanding paragraph 2(a), (b) and (c) and paragraph 3, the Council shall not set the TAC at a level that is more than 20 % below or above the TAC established in the previous year.
Article 8 Procedure for setting TACs for the cod stock in the North Sea, the Skagerrak and the eastern Channel
1. Each year, the Council shall decide on the TACs for the cod stock in the North Sea, the Skagerrak and the eastern Channel. The TACs shall be calculated by applying the reduction rules set out in Article 7 paragraph 1(a) and (b). 2. The TACs shall initially be calculated in accordance with paragraphs 3 and 5. From the year where the TACs resulting from the application of paragraphs 3 and 5 would be lower than the TACs resulting from the application of paragraphs 4 and 5, the TACs shall be calculated according to the paragraphs 4 and 5. 3. Initially, the TACs shall not exceed a level corresponding to a fishing mortality which is a fraction of the estimate of fishing mortality on appropriate age groups in 2008 as follows: 75 % for the TACs in 2009, 65 % for the TACs in 2010, and applying successive decrements of 10 % for the following years. 4. Subsequently, if the size of the stock on 1 January of the year prior to the year of application of the TACs is: (a) above the precautionary spawning biomass level, the TACs shall correspond to a fishing mortality rate of 0,4 on appropriate age groups; (b) between the minimum spawning biomass level and the precautionary spawning biomass level, the TACs shall not exceed a level corresponding to a fishing mortality rate on appropriate age groups equal to the following formula: 0,4 – (0,2 * (Precautionary spawning biomass level – spawning biomass) / (Precautionary spawning biomass level – minimum spawning biomass level)) (b) between the minimum spawning biomass level and the precautionary spawning biomass level, the TACs shall not exceed a level corresponding to a fishing mortality rate on appropriate age groups equal to the following formula: 0,4 – (0,2 * (Precautionary spawning biomass level – spawning biomass) / (Precautionary spawning biomass level – minimum spawning biomass level)) (c) at or below the limit spawning biomass level, the TACs shall not exceed a level corresponding to a fishing mortality rate of 0,2 on appropriate age groups. 5. Notwithstanding paragraphs 3 and 4, the Council shall not set the TACs for 2010 and subsequent years at a level that is more than 20 % below or above the TACs established in the previous year. 6. Where the cod stock referred to in paragraph 1 has been exploited at a fishing mortality rate close to 0,4 during three successive years, the Commission shall evaluate the application of this Article and, where appropriate, propose relevant measures to amend it in order to ensure exploitation at maximum sustainable yield.
Article 9 Procedure for setting TACs in poor data conditions
Where, due to lack of sufficiently accurate and representative information, STECF is not able to give advice allowing the Council to set the TACs in accordance with Articles 7 or 8, the Council shall decide as follows: (a) where STECF advises that the catches of cod should be reduced to the lowest possible level, the TACs shall be set according to a 25 % reduction compared to the TAC in the previous year; (b) in all other cases the TACs shall be set according to a 15 % reduction compared to the TAC in the previous year, unless STECF advises that this is not appropriate.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Council Regulation (EC) No 1342/2008 of 18 December 2008 establishing a long-term plan for cod stocks and the fisheries exploiting those stocks calls for the performance of the management measures to be evaluated in the third year of implementation of the plan. The Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF) evaluated the plan in 2011. The STECF report stated that the cod plan has not achieved its objectives and that they are unlikely to be achieved by 2015. Furthermore, the report revealed that there are flaws in the design of the Regulation and problems with its implementation. In the light of this advice and of the opinions received from RACs and the Member States, the Commission is proposing an amendment to the Regulation. The proposal for the amendment of the Regulation does not cover all the problems identified since this amendment is intended as an interim solution pending the development and implementation of a mixed-fishery plan for North Sea fisheries as anticipated in the reform. Mixed-fishery plans represent a novel approach and the scientific tools required to develop, evaluate and assess the impact of such plans are not yet fully developed. At present, it is anticipated that these tools will become available later this year. This will then permit the start of the development and impact assessment process, through a series of meetings involving scientists and stakeholders during 2013. Given that mixed-fishery plans will involve trade-offs between fishing opportunities for different stocks caught in the same fisheries, it is likely that further consultation will be required to determine the final configuration of a North Sea plan. This means that it will not be possible to table a North Sea mixed fishery plan before 2014. The development of mixed-fishery plans for the other areas where there are cod stocks covered by the current cod plan will take longer, thus reinforcing the need for an amendment of the current cod plan which will address the most pressing needs as an interim solution. The main considerations justifying this amendment are the following: - The need to limit the scope in order to avoid increasing the effort by using different calculation methods By applying different methodologies for calculating fishing effort when setting national baselines and when calculating annual effort usage, some Member States have benefitted from higher levels of fishing effort than the plan is meant to allow. The amendment clarifies that whilst different calculation methods are available, Member States must use the same method to calculate their annual effort usage as the method they applied when setting national effort baselines. The proposed amendment is, therefore, necessary to ensure that the plan works as intended. This will lead to an improved management of the cod stocks and their long-term sustainability. - The need to introduce flexibility The TAC setting rules of the plan require estimates of certain parameters describing the state of the stock, in particular estimates of fishing mortality rates and stock biomass. In some geographical areas there is insufficient information to apply those rules, so the plan foresees automatic reductions of 25% in the TAC and effort in such circumstances. What was intended to be a rule to be applied in exceptional circumstances has proved to have become the norm in certain areas, which would lead within a few years to the effective closure not just of the cod fisheries but also of the other fisheries using the same gears in these areas. In some cases this is not an appropriate response to the scientific advice. It is therefore important to modify the rule about what to do in circumstances where the normal harvest rule cannot be applied, allowing more flexibility to reflect the scientific advice on a case by case basis. Additionally, Member States and stakeholders have expressed serious concerns about further effort reductions and their social and economic impacts on the industry. The amendment proposes a procedure for TAC and effort setting in the absence of the necessary information to apply the normal harvest rule. It proposes to take a case-by-case, and therefore a more flexible, approach though remaining firmly based on available scientific advice. This will ensure the possibility to pursue the fisheries whilst maintaining a precautionary approach. The amendment also proposes to allow Council to decide each year whether or not to apply further annual fishing effort reductions, once the fishing-effort baseline has been reduced for four consecutive years. This aims to address concerns on the on-going nature of effort reductions in light of its social and economic impact on industry. - The need to clarify and to simplify the procedure for applying Articles 11 and 13. The procedure for excluding from the fishing-effort regime those fishing activities that catch insignificant quantities of cod has proved to be extremely cumbersome, creating a considerable administrative burden and requiring constant recalculations of the total allocated effort in order to avoid an increase in fishing effort by the vessels that remain included in the effort regime. The amendment seeks to simplify the procedure, first by fixing the final date for the submission of any request to amend the effort baseline and secondly by making successful requests generally applicable to all vessels satisfying the same criteria without requiring Member States to submit separate requests. Some fleets that are excluded would not qualify for exclusion in accordance with proposed amendment therefore transitional measures are introduced. A further simplification is proposed, drawing from the enhanced accountability possible through the use of fully documented fisheries, where all catches are counted against quota. The proposal is to exempt vessels participating in fully documented fisheries trials from the effort regime. The STECF has assessed this as an acceptable management option. The French version of Article 13(2)(b) reads differently from other languages, causing different implementation of the regulation. To ensure uniform implementation of this regulation, this provision should be clarified and amended. The proposed version corresponds to the French version, which is less restrictive in terms of implementation. Only vessels that do not target cod and that comply with the 5 % catch composition rule throughout the management period should be eligible for this derogation. -The need to reduce cod discards One of the main concerns with the current regulation is that TACs have not constrained cod catches. This has resulted in a considerable proportion of over-quota catches being discarded. In some fisheries, Member State cod-avoidance and discard-reduction measures have been partly successful in addressing this problem. But there is evidence of considerable levels of discards in some fisheries where the Member States concerned have not acted, even if action was suggested by the plan. In the light of the Commission's proposals to eliminate discards under a reformed CFP, and the large support for this expressed both by Member States and many stakeholders, there is a need to ensure that all EU legislation supports discards elimination rather than de facto allowing it. The amendment proposes to strengthen the obligation on Member State to take action where data confirms high level of discards in certain fisheries. - The need to specify the level of required monitoring and control The derogations from the plan provided for by Articles 11 and 13 represent a risk if not properly implemented. Poor implementation could undermine the success of the plan. STECF assessed the implementation of these derogations and pointed out the need to strengthen the monitoring, and control as well as the requirement for full documentation as basic justification for the derogation. The proposal addresses this risk by requiring Member States to assign a ‘very high risk’ level, as described in the control framework of the CFP, to those vessels benefiting from the derogations. The proposal also requires Member States to include adequate measures in their national control action programmes to ensure compliance with the required conditions. These modifications specify existing requirements and are applicable only if Member States use the derogation. - The need to align with the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union The cod plan pre-dates the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty. Given its continued application until it is replaced by a new mixed-fisheries plan, its procedures need to be brought in line with the decision-making provisions applicable since the entry into force of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU. The proposed amendment aligns the plan with the new comitology procedures. Accordingly, a draft proposal for amending Regulation (EC) No 1342/2008 has been prepared. The Commission is asked to adopt this proposal as soon as possible, and to forward it to the Council and the European Parliament.
Revised version (Article 9 Special procedure for setting TACs):
1. Where there is insufficient information to set the TACs in accordance with Article 7, the TACs for cod stocks in the Kattegat, the west of Scotland and the Irish Sea shall be set at a level indicated by scientific advice. However, if the level indicated by scientific advice is more than 20 % greater than the TACs in the previous year, they shall be set at a level 20 % greater than the TACs in the previous year, or if the level indicated by scientific advice is more than 20 % less than the TACs in the previous year they shall be set at a level 20 % less than the TACs in the previous year. 2. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, where scientific advice indicates that there should be no directed fisheries and that: (a) bycatch should be minimised or reduced to the lowest possible level; and/or (b) the catches of cod should be reduced to the lowest possible level; the Council may decide not to apply an annual adjustment to the TAC in the subsequent year or in subsequent years, on condition that the TAC set is for bycatch only. 3. Where there is insufficient information to set the TACs in accordance with Article 8, the TACs for the cod stock in the North Sea, the Skagerrak and the eastern Channel shall be set by applying paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article mutatis mutandis , unless consultations with Norway result in a different level of the TAC. 4. When scientific advice indicates that the application of the rules set out in Article 8(1) to (4) is not appropriate to meet the objectives of the plan, the Council may, notwithstanding the above mentioned provisions, decide on an alternative TAC level.
Article 10 Adaptation of measures
1. When the target fishing mortality rate in Article 5(2) has been reached or in the event that STECF advises that this target, or the minimum and precautionary spawning biomass levels in Article 6 or the levels of fishing mortality rates given in Article 7(2) are no longer appropriate in order to maintain a low risk of stock depletion and a maximum sustainable yield, the Council shall decide on new values for these levels. 2. In the event that STECF advises that any of the cod stocks is failing to recover properly, the Council shall take a decision which: (a) sets the TAC for the relevant stock at a level lower than that provided for in Articles 7, 8 and 9; (b) sets the maximum allowable fishing effort at a level lower than that provided for in Article 12; (c) establishes associated conditions as appropriate.
Article 11 Fishing effort regime
1. The TACs set out in Articles 7, 8 and 9 shall be complemented by a fishing effort regime whereby fishing opportunities in terms of fishing effort are allocated to Member States on an annual basis. 2. The Council may, acting on a Commission proposal and on the basis of the information provided by Member States and the advice of STECF referred to in paragraph 3, exclude certain groups of vessels from the application of the effort regime provided that: (a) appropriate data on cod catches and discards are available to allow STECF to assess the percentage of cod catches made by each group of vessels concerned; (b) the percentage of cod catches as assessed by STECF does not exceed 1,5 % of the total catches for each group of vessels concerned; and (c) the inclusion of these groups of vessels in the effort regime would constitute an administrative burden disproportionate to their overall impact on cod stocks. If STECF is not in position to assess that these conditions remain fulfilled, the Council shall include each group of vessels concerned in the effort regime. 3. Member States shall provide annually appropriate information to the Commission and STECF to establish that the above conditions are and remain fulfilled in accordance with detailed rules to be adopted by the Commission.
Article 12 Fishing effort allocations
1. Each year, the Council shall decide on the maximum allowable fishing effort for each effort group by Member State. 2. The maximum allowable fishing effort shall be calculated by means of a baseline established as follows: (a) for the first year of application of this Regulation the baseline shall be established for each effort group as the average effort in kW-days spent during the years 2004-2006 or 2005-2007, according to the preference of the Member State concerned, based on the advice of STECF; (b) for the subsequent years of application of this Regulation the baseline shall be equal to the maximum allowable fishing effort of the previous year. 3. The effort groups for which an annual adjustment in the maximum allowable fishing effort shall be applied shall be decided on the following basis: (a) the catches of cod taken by vessels in each of the effort groups shall be evaluated on the basis of data submitted by Member States in accordance with Articles 18, 19 and 20 of Council Regulation (EC) No 199/2008 of 25 February 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 ( 8 ); (b) a list shall be compiled for each of the areas defined in Annex I to this Regulation of the aggregated effort groups and their corresponding cod catches, including discards. This list shall be arranged in ascending order of cod catch in each effort group; (c) the cumulative catches of cod in the lists established according to point (b) shall be calculated in following way. For each aggregated effort group, the sum shall be calculated of the cod catch by that effort group and the cod catches made by all aggregated effort groups in the preceding entries in the list; (d) the cumulative catches calculated according to point (c) shall be calculated as a percentage of the total cod catch by all aggregated effort groups in the same area. 4. For aggregated effort groups where the percentage cumulative catch calculated according to paragraph 3(d) is equal to or exceeds 20 %, annual adjustments shall apply to the effort groups concerned. The maximum allowable fishing effort of the groups concerned shall be calculated as follows: (a) where Articles 7 or 8 applies, by applying to the baseline the same percentage adjustment as that set out in those Articles for fishing mortality; (b) where Article 9 applies, by applying to the baseline the same percentage adjustment in fishing effort as the reduction of the TAC. 5. For effort groups other than those referred to in paragraph 4, the maximum allowable fishing effort shall be maintained at the level of the baseline.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Council Regulation (EC) No 1342/2008 of 18 December 2008 establishing a long-term plan for cod stocks and the fisheries exploiting those stocks calls for the performance of the management measures to be evaluated in the third year of implementation of the plan. The Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF) evaluated the plan in 2011. The STECF report stated that the cod plan has not achieved its objectives and that they are unlikely to be achieved by 2015. Furthermore, the report revealed that there are flaws in the design of the Regulation and problems with its implementation. In the light of this advice and of the opinions received from RACs and the Member States, the Commission is proposing an amendment to the Regulation. The proposal for the amendment of the Regulation does not cover all the problems identified since this amendment is intended as an interim solution pending the development and implementation of a mixed-fishery plan for North Sea fisheries as anticipated in the reform. Mixed-fishery plans represent a novel approach and the scientific tools required to develop, evaluate and assess the impact of such plans are not yet fully developed. At present, it is anticipated that these tools will become available later this year. This will then permit the start of the development and impact assessment process, through a series of meetings involving scientists and stakeholders during 2013. Given that mixed-fishery plans will involve trade-offs between fishing opportunities for different stocks caught in the same fisheries, it is likely that further consultation will be required to determine the final configuration of a North Sea plan. This means that it will not be possible to table a North Sea mixed fishery plan before 2014. The development of mixed-fishery plans for the other areas where there are cod stocks covered by the current cod plan will take longer, thus reinforcing the need for an amendment of the current cod plan which will address the most pressing needs as an interim solution. The main considerations justifying this amendment are the following: - The need to limit the scope in order to avoid increasing the effort by using different calculation methods By applying different methodologies for calculating fishing effort when setting national baselines and when calculating annual effort usage, some Member States have benefitted from higher levels of fishing effort than the plan is meant to allow. The amendment clarifies that whilst different calculation methods are available, Member States must use the same method to calculate their annual effort usage as the method they applied when setting national effort baselines. The proposed amendment is, therefore, necessary to ensure that the plan works as intended. This will lead to an improved management of the cod stocks and their long-term sustainability. - The need to introduce flexibility The TAC setting rules of the plan require estimates of certain parameters describing the state of the stock, in particular estimates of fishing mortality rates and stock biomass. In some geographical areas there is insufficient information to apply those rules, so the plan foresees automatic reductions of 25% in the TAC and effort in such circumstances. What was intended to be a rule to be applied in exceptional circumstances has proved to have become the norm in certain areas, which would lead within a few years to the effective closure not just of the cod fisheries but also of the other fisheries using the same gears in these areas. In some cases this is not an appropriate response to the scientific advice. It is therefore important to modify the rule about what to do in circumstances where the normal harvest rule cannot be applied, allowing more flexibility to reflect the scientific advice on a case by case basis. Additionally, Member States and stakeholders have expressed serious concerns about further effort reductions and their social and economic impacts on the industry. The amendment proposes a procedure for TAC and effort setting in the absence of the necessary information to apply the normal harvest rule. It proposes to take a case-by-case, and therefore a more flexible, approach though remaining firmly based on available scientific advice. This will ensure the possibility to pursue the fisheries whilst maintaining a precautionary approach. The amendment also proposes to allow Council to decide each year whether or not to apply further annual fishing effort reductions, once the fishing-effort baseline has been reduced for four consecutive years. This aims to address concerns on the on-going nature of effort reductions in light of its social and economic impact on industry. - The need to clarify and to simplify the procedure for applying Articles 11 and 13. The procedure for excluding from the fishing-effort regime those fishing activities that catch insignificant quantities of cod has proved to be extremely cumbersome, creating a considerable administrative burden and requiring constant recalculations of the total allocated effort in order to avoid an increase in fishing effort by the vessels that remain included in the effort regime. The amendment seeks to simplify the procedure, first by fixing the final date for the submission of any request to amend the effort baseline and secondly by making successful requests generally applicable to all vessels satisfying the same criteria without requiring Member States to submit separate requests. Some fleets that are excluded would not qualify for exclusion in accordance with proposed amendment therefore transitional measures are introduced. A further simplification is proposed, drawing from the enhanced accountability possible through the use of fully documented fisheries, where all catches are counted against quota. The proposal is to exempt vessels participating in fully documented fisheries trials from the effort regime. The STECF has assessed this as an acceptable management option. The French version of Article 13(2)(b) reads differently from other languages, causing different implementation of the regulation. To ensure uniform implementation of this regulation, this provision should be clarified and amended. The proposed version corresponds to the French version, which is less restrictive in terms of implementation. Only vessels that do not target cod and that comply with the 5 % catch composition rule throughout the management period should be eligible for this derogation. -The need to reduce cod discards One of the main concerns with the current regulation is that TACs have not constrained cod catches. This has resulted in a considerable proportion of over-quota catches being discarded. In some fisheries, Member State cod-avoidance and discard-reduction measures have been partly successful in addressing this problem. But there is evidence of considerable levels of discards in some fisheries where the Member States concerned have not acted, even if action was suggested by the plan. In the light of the Commission's proposals to eliminate discards under a reformed CFP, and the large support for this expressed both by Member States and many stakeholders, there is a need to ensure that all EU legislation supports discards elimination rather than de facto allowing it. The amendment proposes to strengthen the obligation on Member State to take action where data confirms high level of discards in certain fisheries. - The need to specify the level of required monitoring and control The derogations from the plan provided for by Articles 11 and 13 represent a risk if not properly implemented. Poor implementation could undermine the success of the plan. STECF assessed the implementation of these derogations and pointed out the need to strengthen the monitoring, and control as well as the requirement for full documentation as basic justification for the derogation. The proposal addresses this risk by requiring Member States to assign a ‘very high risk’ level, as described in the control framework of the CFP, to those vessels benefiting from the derogations. The proposal also requires Member States to include adequate measures in their national control action programmes to ensure compliance with the required conditions. These modifications specify existing requirements and are applicable only if Member States use the derogation. - The need to align with the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union The cod plan pre-dates the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty. Given its continued application until it is replaced by a new mixed-fisheries plan, its procedures need to be brought in line with the decision-making provisions applicable since the entry into force of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU. The proposed amendment aligns the plan with the new comitology procedures. Accordingly, a draft proposal for amending Regulation (EC) No 1342/2008 has been prepared. The Commission is asked to adopt this proposal as soon as possible, and to forward it to the Council and the European Parliament.
Revised version (Article 12 Fishing effort allocations):
1. Each year, the Council shall decide on the maximum allowable fishing effort for each effort group by Member State. 2. The maximum allowable fishing effort shall be calculated by means of a baseline established as follows: (a) for the first year of application of this Regulation the baseline shall be established for each effort group as the average effort in kW-days spent during the years 2004-2006 or 2005-2007, according to the preference of the Member State concerned, based on the advice of STECF; (b) for the subsequent years of application of this Regulation the baseline shall be equal to the maximum allowable fishing effort of the previous year. 3. The effort groups for which an annual adjustment in the maximum allowable fishing effort shall be applied shall be decided on the following basis: (a) the catches of cod taken by vessels in each of the effort groups shall be evaluated on the basis of data submitted by Member States in accordance with Articles 18, 19 and 20 of Council Regulation (EC) No 199/2008 of 25 February 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 ( 8 ); (b) a list shall be compiled for each of the areas defined in Annex I to this Regulation of the aggregated effort groups and their corresponding cod catches, including discards. This list shall be arranged in ascending order of cod catch in each effort group; (c) the cumulative catches of cod in the lists established according to point (b) shall be calculated in following way. For each aggregated effort group, the sum shall be calculated of the cod catch by that effort group and the cod catches made by all aggregated effort groups in the preceding entries in the list; (d) the cumulative catches calculated according to point (c) shall be calculated as a percentage of the total cod catch by all aggregated effort groups in the same area. 4. For aggregated effort groups where the percentage cumulative catch calculated according to paragraph 3(d) is equal to or exceeds 20 %, annual adjustments shall apply. The maximum allowable fishing effort of the groups concerned shall be calculated as follows: (a) where Articles 7 or 8 apply, by applying to the baseline the same percentage adjustment as that set out in those Articles for fishing mortality; (b) where Article 9 applies, by applying the same percentage adjustment in fishing effort as the adjustment of the TAC compared with the previous year. 5. For effort groups other than those referred to in paragraph 4, the maximum allowable fishing effort shall be maintained at the level of the baseline. 6. By way of derogation from paragraph 4, the Council may, where the maximum allowable fishing effort has been reduced for four consecutive years, decide not to apply an annual adjustment to the maximum allowable fishing effort in the subsequent year or in subsequent years.
Article 13 Allocation of additional fishing effort for highly selective gear and cod-avoiding fishing trips
1. Member States may increase the maximum allowable fishing effort for effort groups for which the effort has been adjusted in accordance with Article 12(4) and subject to the conditions set out in paragraphs 2 to 7. 2. The maximum allowable fishing effort may be increased within effort groups in which the fishing activity of one or more vessels: (a) is carried out having on board only one regulated gear the technical attributes of which result, according to a scientific study evaluated by STECF, in catching less than 1 % cod (highly selective gear); (b) results in a catch composition of less than 5 % cod per fishing trip (cod-avoiding fishing trips); (c) is conducted in accordance with a cod avoidance or discard reduction plan which reduces fishing mortality for cod among participating vessels by at least as much as the effort adjustment referred to in Article 12(4); or (d) is carried out in the west of Scotland area to the west of a line drawn by sequentially joining with rhumb lines the positions laid down in Annex IV measured according to the WGS84 coordinate system, provided that the participating vessels are equipped with satellite-based vessel monitoring systems (VMS). 3. Vessels referred to in paragraph 2 shall be subject to increased frequency of monitoring, concerning in particular: (a) the exclusive use of the highly selective gear during the fishing trips concerned in accordance with paragraph 2(a); (b) the amount of discards in compliance with paragraph 2(b); (c) the reduction in fishing mortality in accordance with paragraph 2(c); (d) the amount of catches and discards occurring to the west of the line specified in paragraph 2(d); and subject to arrangements for the regular provision of data to the Member State concerning the respect of the special conditions laid down in those points. 4. The increase of fishing effort under this Article shall be calculated for each of the vessels in the effort groups concerned that operate under special conditions referred to in paragraph 2, points (a), (b), (c) and (d), and shall be no more than the amount needed to compensate the effort adjustment referred to in Article 12(4) for the gears involved in those actions. 5. Any increases of the fishing effort allocation carried out by the Member States shall be notified to the Commission, by April 30 of the year during which the compensation for the effort adjustment shall take place. The notification shall include details of the vessels operating under the special conditions referred to in points (a), (b), (c) and (d) of paragraph 2, the fishing effort per effort group that the Member State expects to be carried out by those vessels during that year, and the conditions under which the effort of the vessels is being monitored, including control arrangements. 6. Member States shall report to the Commission by 1 March each year at the latest about the amounts of effort used within the actions during the previous year. 7. The Commission shall request STECF to compare annually the reduction in cod mortality which would result from the application of point (c) of paragraph 2 with the reduction it would have expected to occur as a result of the effort adjustment referred to in Article 12(4). In light of this advice the Commission may propose adjustments in effort that may be applied for the relevant gear grouping the following year.
Article 14 Member States’ obligations
1. For the vessels flying its flag, each Member State shall decide on a method for allocating the maximum allowable fishing effort to individual vessels or a group of vessels, in the light of a number of criteria, including, for example: (a) promotion of good fishing practices, including data collection enhancement, discard reduction and minimisation of the impact on juvenile fish; (b) participation in cooperative programmes to avoid unnecessary by-catches of cod; (c) low impact on the environment, including fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions; (d) proportionality with respect to allocation of fishing opportunities in terms of fish quota. 2. For each of the areas set out in Annex I to this Regulation, each Member State shall issue special fishing permits in accordance with Council Regulation (EC) No 1627/94 of 27 June 1994 laying down general provisions concerning special fishing permits ( 9 ) for vessels flying its flag which engage in fishing activities in that area and using a gear belonging to one of the gear groupings set out in Annex I to this Regulation. 3. For each of the areas set out in Annex I, the total capacity expressed in kW of the vessels having special fishing permits issued in accordance with paragraph 2 shall not be greater than the maximum capacity of the vessels that have been active in 2006 or 2007 using a regulated gear and fishing in the geographical area concerned. 4. Each Member State shall establish and maintain a list of vessels holding the special permit referred to in paragraph 2 and make it available on its official website to the Commission and other Member States.
Article 15 Regulation of fishing effort
Member States shall monitor the capacity and activity of their fleet by effort groups and shall take appropriate action if the maximum allowable fishing effort established in accordance with Article 12 is about to be reached, in order to ensure that the effort will not exceed the set limits.
Article 16 Exchange of maximum allowable fishing effort between Member States and reconstitution of effort
1. The maximum allowable fishing effort established in accordance with Article 11 may be adapted by the Member States concerned in view of: (a) the exchange of quotas carried out pursuant to Article 20(5) of Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002; and (b) reallocations and/or deductions made pursuant to Article 23(4) of Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 and Articles 21(4), 23(1) and 32(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93. 2. The maximum allowable fishing effort established in accordance with Article 12 may be adapted by a Member State which discontinues the exchange of quotas in any of the areas mentioned in Article 3, to the extent that this Member State used to execute these exchanges during the reference period for establishing the baselines as specified in Article 12(2), and needs to exert additional effort in any of the effort groups concerned in order to use the quota recovered. This reconstitution of effort shall be accompanied by a reduction in total allowable fishing effort by the Member State that has returned the quota to the quota recovering Member State, reflecting the extent to which its effort groups have less quota available for fishing, unless the Member State returning the quota did not use the corresponding effort for establishing the abovementioned baselines. 3. Notwithstanding Article 17(2), in 2009, Member States may modify their effort allocations by transferring fishing effort and capacity between the geographical areas referred to in Article 3, provided that this transfer involves fishing activities referred to in Article 13(2)(a) and (b). Such transfers shall be notified to the Commission. The maximum allowable fishing effort referred to in Article 12(2)(a) shall be modified accordingly.
Article 17 Exchange of maximum allowable fishing effort across effort groups
1. A Member State may amend its effort allocations by transferring fishing capacity across effort groups, under the conditions set out in paragraphs 2 to 5. 2. The transfer shall be allowed between gear groupings but not between geographical areas, provided that the Member State concerned provides the Commission with information on the catch per unit effort (cpue) of its donor and receiving gear group, averaged over the last three years. 3. Where the cpue of the donor gear group is higher than the cpue of the receiving gear group, the transfer shall in general be made on a 1 kW-day to 1 kW-day basis. 4. Where the cpue of the donor gear group is lower than the cpue of the receiving gear group, the Member State shall apply a correction factor to the amount of effort in the receiving gear group so that the latter’s higher cpue is compensated for. 5. The Commission shall request STECF to develop standard correction factors that might be used to facilitate the transfer of effort across gear groups with different cpue.
Article 25 Designated ports
1. Where more than two tonnes of cod are to be landed in the Community from a Community fishing vessel, the master of the vessel shall ensure that such landings are made only at designated ports. 2. Each Member State shall designate ports into which any landing of cod in excess of two tonnes shall take place. 3. Each Member State shall make available on their public website the list of designated ports and associated inspection and surveillance procedures for those ports, including the terms and conditions for recording and reporting the quantities of cod within each landing. The Commission shall transmit this information to all Member States.
Article 30 Decision-making procedure
Where this Regulation provides for decisions to be taken by the Council, the Council shall act by qualified majority on the basis of a proposal from the Commission.
Article 31 Amendments to Annex I
Based on the advice of STECF, the Commission may amend the Annex I to this Regulation in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 30(2) of Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 and on the basis of the following principles: (a) effort groups shall be laid down as homogeneously as possible with respect to the biological stocks captured, the sizes of fish captured either as target or as by-catch and the effects on the environment of the fishing activities associated to the effort groups; (b) the number and size of effort groups shall be cost-efficient in terms of management burden relative to conservation needs.
Article 32 Detailed rules
Detailed rules for the application of Articles 11(3), 14, 16 and 17 of this Regulation may be adopted in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 30(2) of Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002.
Article 33 Assistance under the European Fisheries Fund
1. For each of the four cod stocks referred to in Article 1, for those years in which the stock is situated below the relevant precautionary spawning biomass level set out in Article 6, the long-term plan shall be deemed to be a recovery plan within the meaning of Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002, and for the purposes of Article 21(a)(i) of Regulation (EC) No 1198/2006. 2. For each of the four cod stocks referred to in Article 1, for those years other than those referred to in paragraph 1, the long-term plan shall be deemed to be a management plan within the meaning of Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002, and for the purposes of Article 21(a)(iv) of Regulation (EC) No 1198/2006.
Article 34 Review
The Commission shall, on the basis of advice from STECF and after consultation of the relevant Regional Advisory Council, evaluate the impact of the management measures on the cod stocks concerned and the fisheries on those stocks, at the latest in the third year of application of this Regulation and then each third successive year of application of this Regulation and, where appropriate, propose relevant measures to amend it.
Article 35 Repeal
Regulation (EC) No 423/2004 is hereby repealed. References to the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 423/2004 shall be construed as references to the provisions of this Regulation.
Article 36 Entry into force
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union . It shall apply from 1 January 2009. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.