DOCSLIB.ORG

FFA Finland Baltic Herring & Sprat Fishery

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
FFA Finland Baltic Herring & Sprat Fishery MSC SUSTAINABLE FISHERIES CERTIFICATION FFA Finland Baltic Herring & Sprat Fishery Public Certification Report June 2018 Certificate Code: F-ACO-0123 Client: Finland Fishermen’s Association / Suomen Ammattikalastajaliitto R.Y. Assessment Conducted by: Acoura Marine Ltd On behalf of Acoura Jim Andrews and Giuseppe Scarcella Acoura Version V2.1 04/01/17 Acoura Marine Public Certification Report FFA Finland Baltic Herring & Sprat Fishery Assessment Data Sheet FFA Finland Baltic Herring & Sprat Fishery Public Certification Report June 2018 CAB details Acoura Marine Address 6 Redheughs Rigg Edinburgh EH12 9DQ Phone/Fax 0131 335 6662 Email [email protected] Contact name(s) Fisheries Department Client details Finland Fishermen’s Association / Suomen Ammattikalastajaliitto R.Y. Address Jordaksentie 124, FIN-07840, Lindkoski, Finland Phone/Fax +358 400720690 Email [email protected] Contact name(s) Kim Jordas Assessment Team Team Leader Jim Andrews P1 Assessor Giuseppe Scarcella P2 Assessor Jim Andrews P3 Assessor Jim Andrews Copyright © 2018 by Acoura Marine All rights reserved. No portion of this report may be reproduced in any manner for use by any other MSC Conformity Assessment Body without the express written permission of Acoura Marine, and subject to such conditions specified by Acoura Marine in any such permission. Page 2 of 380 Acoura Marine Full Assessment Template per MSC V2.0 02/12/2015 Acoura Marine Public Certification Report FFA Finland Baltic Herring & Sprat Fishery Contents 1 Glossary ...................................................................................................................... 12 2 Executive Summary ..................................................................................................... 14 3 Authorship and Peer Reviewers ................................................................................... 16 Assessment Team ................................................................................................ 16 Peer Reviewers ............................................................................................. 17 RBF Training ......................................................................................................... 17 4 Description of the Fishery ............................................................................................ 18 Units of Assessment (UoA) ................................................................................... 18 Units of Assessment ...................................................................................... 18 Other eligible fishers ...................................................................................... 19 Overlapping fisheries ..................................................................................... 20 Overlapping fisheries ..................................................................................... 20 Final UoC(s) .......................................................................................................... 20 Total Allowable Catch (TAC) and Catch Data ....................................................... 21 Scope of fishery .................................................................................................... 23 Overview of the fishery ......................................................................................... 24 Overview ........................................................................................................ 24 Trawl fishery .................................................................................................. 25 Herring Trap fishery ....................................................................................... 28 Principle One: Target Species Background ........................................................... 35 Sprat (Sprattus sprattus) in the Baltic Sea (Subdivisions 22-32) .................... 35 Herring ........................................................................................................... 40 Fishery management in the Baltic Sea ........................................................... 52 Multiannual plan for the stocks of cod, herring and sprat in the Baltic Sea and the fisheries exploiting those stocks, amending Council Regulation (EC) No 2187/2005 and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1098/2007 ................................................. 54 Multispecies considerations for the central Baltic stocks: cod in Subdivisions 25– 32, herring in Subdivisions 25–29 and 32, and sprat in Subdivisions 22–32 ................. 56 Target Species as “Key Low Trophic Level (LTL)” Species ............................ 60 Principle Two: Ecosystem Background ................................................................. 62 Primary & secondary non-target species ........................................................ 62 Endangered, Threatened & Protected (ETP).................................................. 80 Habitats ......................................................................................................... 99 Ecosystems ................................................................................................. 107 Principle Three: Management System Background............................................. 110 Legal & Customary Framework .................................................................... 110 Fishery management objectives................................................................... 118 Management systems and processes .......................................................... 120 Monitoring and evaluation ............................................................................ 127 Page 3 of 380 Acoura Marine Full Assessment Template per MSC V2.0 02/12/2015 Acoura Marine Public Certification Report FFA Finland Baltic Herring & Sprat Fishery 5 Evaluation Procedure ................................................................................................. 128 Harmonised Fishery Assessment ........................................................................ 128 Harmonisation activities ............................................................................... 128 Comparison of scores .................................................................................. 129 Previous assessments ........................................................................................ 131 Assessment Methodologies ................................................................................ 131 Evaluation Processes and Techniques ............................................................... 132 Site Visits ..................................................................................................... 132 Consultations ............................................................................................... 132 Evaluation Techniques ................................................................................. 132 Risk Based Framework (RBF) Use .............................................................. 135 Scoring elements ......................................................................................... 137 6 Traceability ................................................................................................................ 140 Eligibility Date ..................................................................................................... 140 Traceability within the Fishery ............................................................................. 140 Trawl fishery UoAs ....................................................................................... 140 Trap fishery UoAs ........................................................................................ 141 Eligibility to Enter Further Chains of Custody ...................................................... 142 Parties eligible to use the fishery certificate ................................................. 143 Point of change of ownership of product ...................................................... 143 List of eligible landing points ........................................................................ 143 Eligibility of Inseparable or Practicably Inseparable (IPI) stock(s) to Enter Further Chains of Custody ......................................................................................................... 144 7 Evaluation Results ..................................................................................................... 145 Principle Level Scores ........................................................................................ 145 Summary of PI Level Scores ............................................................................... 145 Summary of Conditions ....................................................................................... 145 Recommendations .............................................................................................. 145 Determination, Formal Conclusion and Agreement ............................................. 145 Changes in the fishery prior to and since Pre-Assessment ............................................ 146 8 References ................................................................................................................ 148 9 Appendix 1: Assessment Tree ................................................................................... 163 MSC Principles & Criteria .................................................................................... 163 10 Appendix 2 Scoring and Rationales
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Evidence for Ecosystem-Level Trophic Cascade Effects Involving Gulf Menhaden (Brevoortia Patronus) Triggered by the Deepwater Horizon Blowout
    Journal of Marine Science and Engineering Article Evidence for Ecosystem-Level Trophic Cascade Effects Involving Gulf Menhaden (Brevoortia patronus) Triggered by the Deepwater Horizon Blowout Jeffrey W. Short 1,*, Christine M. Voss 2, Maria L. Vozzo 2,3 , Vincent Guillory 4, Harold J. Geiger 5, James C. Haney 6 and Charles H. Peterson 2 1 JWS Consulting LLC, 19315 Glacier Highway, Juneau, AK 99801, USA 2 Institute of Marine Sciences, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 3431 Arendell Street, Morehead City, NC 28557, USA; [email protected] (C.M.V.); [email protected] (M.L.V.); [email protected] (C.H.P.) 3 Sydney Institute of Marine Science, Mosman, NSW 2088, Australia 4 Independent Researcher, 296 Levillage Drive, Larose, LA 70373, USA; [email protected] 5 St. Hubert Research Group, 222 Seward, Suite 205, Juneau, AK 99801, USA; [email protected] 6 Terra Mar Applied Sciences LLC, 123 W. Nye Lane, Suite 129, Carson City, NV 89706, USA; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-907-209-3321 Abstract: Unprecedented recruitment of Gulf menhaden (Brevoortia patronus) followed the 2010 Deepwater Horizon blowout (DWH). The foregone consumption of Gulf menhaden, after their many predator species were killed by oiling, increased competition among menhaden for food, resulting in poor physiological conditions and low lipid content during 2011 and 2012. Menhaden sampled Citation: Short, J.W.; Voss, C.M.; for length and weight measurements, beginning in 2011, exhibited the poorest condition around Vozzo, M.L.; Guillory, V.; Geiger, H.J.; Barataria Bay, west of the Mississippi River, where recruitment of the 2010 year class was highest.
    [Show full text]
  • Fish Bulletin 161. California Marine Fish Landings for 1972 and Designated Common Names of Certain Marine Organisms of California
    UC San Diego Fish Bulletin Title Fish Bulletin 161. California Marine Fish Landings For 1972 and Designated Common Names of Certain Marine Organisms of California Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/93g734v0 Authors Pinkas, Leo Gates, Doyle E Frey, Herbert W Publication Date 1974 eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California STATE OF CALIFORNIA THE RESOURCES AGENCY OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME FISH BULLETIN 161 California Marine Fish Landings For 1972 and Designated Common Names of Certain Marine Organisms of California By Leo Pinkas Marine Resources Region and By Doyle E. Gates and Herbert W. Frey > Marine Resources Region 1974 1 Figure 1. Geographical areas used to summarize California Fisheries statistics. 2 3 1. CALIFORNIA MARINE FISH LANDINGS FOR 1972 LEO PINKAS Marine Resources Region 1.1. INTRODUCTION The protection, propagation, and wise utilization of California's living marine resources (established as common property by statute, Section 1600, Fish and Game Code) is dependent upon the welding of biological, environment- al, economic, and sociological factors. Fundamental to each of these factors, as well as the entire management pro- cess, are harvest records. The California Department of Fish and Game began gathering commercial fisheries land- ing data in 1916. Commercial fish catches were first published in 1929 for the years 1926 and 1927. This report, the 32nd in the landing series, is for the calendar year 1972. It summarizes commercial fishing activities in marine as well as fresh waters and includes the catches of the sportfishing partyboat fleet. Preliminary landing data are published annually in the circular series which also enumerates certain fishery products produced from the catch.
    [Show full text]
  • Interaction Between Top-Down and Bottom-Up Control in Marine Food Webs
    Interaction between top-down and bottom-up control in marine food webs Christopher Philip Lynama, Marcos Llopeb,c, Christian Möllmannd, Pierre Helaouëte, Georgia Anne Bayliss-Brownf, and Nils C. Stensethc,g,h,1 aCentre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science, Lowestoft Laboratory, Lowestoft, Suffolk NR33 0HT, United Kingdom; bInstituto Español de Oceanografía, Centro Oceanográfico de Cádiz, E-11006 Cádiz, Andalusia, Spain; cCentre for Ecological and Evolutionary Synthesis, Department of Biosciences, University of Oslo, NO-0316 Oslo, Norway; dInstitute of Hydrobiology and Fisheries Sciences, University of Hamburg, 22767 Hamburg, Germany; eSir Alister Hardy Foundation for Ocean Science, The Laboratory, Citadel Hill, Plymouth PL1 2PB, United Kingdom; fAquaTT, Dublin 8, Ireland; gFlødevigen Marine Research Station, Institute of Marine Research, NO-4817 His, Norway; and hCentre for Coastal Research, University of Agder, 4604 Kristiansand, Norway Contributed by Nils Chr. Stenseth, December 28, 2016 (sent for review December 7, 2016; reviewed by Lorenzo Ciannelli, Mark Dickey-Collas, and Eva Elizabeth Plagányi) Climate change and resource exploitation have been shown to from the bottom-up through climatic (temperature-related) in- modify the importance of bottom-up and top-down forces in fluences on plankton, planktivorous fish, and the pelagic stages ecosystems. However, the resulting pattern of trophic control in of demersal fish (11–13). Some studies, however, have suggested complex food webs is an emergent property of the system and that top-down effects, such as predation by sprat on zooplankton, thus unintuitive. We develop a statistical nondeterministic model, are equally important in what is termed a “wasp-waist” system capable of modeling complex patterns of trophic control for the (14).
    [Show full text]
  • Reduction Fisheries: SFP Fisheries Sustainability Overview 2018
    Reduction Fisheries: SFP Fisheries Sustainability Overview 2018 September 2018 Reduction Fisheries: SFP Fisheries Sustainability Overview 2018 Reduction Fisheries: SFP Fisheries Sustainability Overview 2018 LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS Report Authors: Pedro Veiga (coordination) | Senior Scientist, Science Unit, Systems Division | [email protected] Marina Mendes | FishSource Fisheries Analyst, Systems Division | [email protected] Blake Lee-Harwood | Programs Division Director | [email protected] Fisheries evaluations and revisions in FishSource: Marina Mendes (coordination), Mariana Bock, Christie Hendrich, Matthew Cieri, David Villegas, Patrícia Amorim, Alexia Morgan, Susana Segurado, Pedro Veiga Suggested improvement actions in FishSource: Megan Westmeyer (coordination), Christiane Schmidt, Dave Martin, Doug Beveridge, Enrique Alonso, Geoff Tingley, Pedro Ferreiro Scientific advice Pedro Sousa PHOTO CREDITS Bottom left: Image courtesy of surasakiStock at FreeDigitalPhotos.net © Sustainable Fisheries Partnership, September 2018 KEYWORDS BMSY; fisheries; FishSource; FMSY; forage; improvement; low trophic level; ecosystem-based fisheries management; reduction; stock status; supply chain; sustainability; target Sustainable Fisheries Partnership wishes to acknowledge the generous support of BioMar, Cargill/EWOS, and Skretting in the production of this report. DISCLAIMER This report was mainly prepared with information available from FishSource.org™, a program of Sustainable Fisheries Partnership (SFP).
    [Show full text]
  • Harvesting Forage Fish Can Prevent Fishing-Induced Population
    Harvesting forage fish can prevent fishing-induced population collapses of large piscivorous fish Floor H. Soudijna,b,c,1 , P. Daniel¨ van Denderend , Mikko Heinoc,e,f , Ulf Dieckmannc,g , and Andre´ M. de Roosb,h aEcological Dynamics Group, Wageningen Marine Research, 1976 CP IJmuiden, The Netherlands; bInstitute for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Dynamics, University of Amsterdam, 1098 XH Amsterdam, The Netherlands; cEvolution and Ecology Program, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, A-2361 Laxenburg, Austria; dCentre for Ocean Life, Technical University of Denmark Aqua, Technical University of Denmark, 2800 Kongens Lyngby, Denmark; eDepartment of Biological Sciences, University of Bergen, 5006 Bergen, Norway; fInstitute of Marine Research, 5005 Bergen, Norway; gDepartment of Evolutionary Studies of Biosystems, The Graduate University for Advanced Studies (Sokendai), Hayama, Kanagawa 240-0193, Japan; and hSanta Fe Institute, Santa Fe, NM 87501 Edited by Alan Hastings, University of California, Davis, CA, and approved December 16, 2020 (received for review October 1, 2019) Fisheries have reduced the abundances of large piscivores—such that are considered essential in models of fish communities are: as gadids (cod, pollock, etc.) and tunas—in ecosystems around 1) fish-population size structure, 2) consistent accounting of the the world. Fisheries also target smaller species—such as herring, bioenergetic flows through fish populations and communities, capelin, and sprat—that are important parts of the piscivores’ and 3) size-selective predation and harvesting (10, 11). diets. It has been suggested that harvesting of these so-called In this study, we investigate the effects of fishing for for- forage fish will harm piscivores. Multispecies models used for fish- age fish on their predators, the piscivorous fish.
    [Show full text]
  • Fisheries Assessment Report
    IFFO Fishery Assessment Report Issue No; 5; Issue Date; Apr 14 FISHERIES ASSESSMENT REPORT IFFO GLOBAL STANDARD FOR RESPONSIBLE SUPPLY OF FISHMEAL AND FISH OIL R1 FISHERY: Sprat (Sprattus sprattus) LOCATION: North Sea, ICES subarea IV DATE OF REPORT: September 2016 ASSESSOR: Deirdre Hoare Global Trust Certification Ltd, 3rd Floor, Block 3, Quayside Business Park, Mill Street, Dundalk, Co. Louth, Ireland Tel: 042 932 0912 Fax 042 938 6864 Form No: 9 Report Ref: Page 1 of 14 CCM Code: This report shall not be reproduced in full or in part without the permission of Global Trust Certification Ltd. IFFO Fishery Assessment Report Issue No; 5; Issue Date; Apr 14 1. APPLICATION DETAILS AND SUMMARY OF THE ASSESSMENT OUTCOME Name: Address: Country: Norway, Denmark Zip: Tel. No. Fax. No. Email address: Applicant Code Key Contact: Title: Certification Body Details Name of Certification Body: Global Trust Certification Ltd. Assessor Name Peer Reviewer Assessment Days Initial/Surveillance/Re-certification Deirdre Hoare Sam Dignan 2 Surveillance Assessment Period September 2015 – September 2016 Scope Details 1. Scope of Assessment IFFO Global Standard for Responsible Supply – Issue 1 2. Fishery Sprat (Sprattus sprattus) 3. Fishery Location North Sea ICES subarea IV 4. Fishery Method pelagic trawl, purse seine Outcome of Assessment 5. Overall Fishery Compliance Rating Medium 6. Sub Components of Low Compliance None 7. Information deficiency None 8. Peer Review Evaluation Approve 9. Recommendation Maintain approval Global Trust Certification Ltd, 3rd Floor, Block 3, Quayside Business Park, Mill Street, Dundalk, Co. Louth, Ireland Tel: 042 932 0912 Fax 042 938 6864 Form No: 9 Report Ref: Page 2 of 14 CCM Code: This report shall not be reproduced in full or in part without the permission of Global Trust Certification Ltd.
    [Show full text]
  • Foreign Fisheries
    0 (._,. 111 . Government of Canada Gouvernernent du Canada I+ Fisheries and Oceans Peches et Oceans RECEIVED MnV ;>9 1979 1 0 Ref. No.,;('// FISH HABITAT DFO li lllll~~~~ lill rnll~l li ~~(ll li iil q ue MANAGEMENT BRANCH 12021041 FOREIGN FISHERIES E~STERN BLOC LANDINGS,, SELECTED SPECIES,, 1971-77 PREPARED BY: RAZIUDDIN M. SIDDIQUI STATISTICS, INTELLIGENCE & INDUSTRY MONITORING ECONOMIC POLICY BRANCH DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES AND OCEANS NT ARIO HD 9464 . C32 S5 no . l D ·: . ' ' . " 1 . ..._ . .... ..'.'.'. /\ "J Vl...l:..\NS B~liLlO i'HE(JuE PECHES ET OCEANS F 0 R E I G N F I S H E R I E S EASTERN BLOC LANDINGS., SELECTED SPECIES., 1971-77 NOVEMBER 1979 PREPARED BY: RAZZIUDDIN M, SIDDIQUI STATISTICS., -INTELLIGENCE & fNDUSTRY MONITORING ECONOMIC POLICY BRANCH DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES AND OCEANS OTTAWA., ONTARfO TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Introduction . 1 Eastern Bloc 2 Albania 3 Bulgaria 4 Czechoslovakia . 4 Germany Dem. Rep. 4 Hungary 5 Poland . 5 Romania 6 U.S.S.R. 6 Conclusion 7 APPENDIX Nominal Catch, Selected Species, 1971-77 Table 1. Bulgaria Table 2. Germany Dem. Rep. Table 3. Poland Table 4. Romania Table 5. U.S.S.R. INTRODUCTION This review describes the pattern and level of landings during the period 1971 through 1977 in the eight Eastern Bloc countries. It is hoped that the kriowledqP of fishery landings in the past will orove useful in identifying potential opportunities for the Canadian · fishing industry. The U.S.S.R. is the second most important harvester (after Japan) of fish and shellfish in the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Kosher Fish List
    Kosher Fish List Cichlids Including: Tilapias Mozambique mouthbrooder Tilapia mossambica; Cichlios; Rio Grande perch This is a consolidated list of the more common Cigarfish See: Jacks varieties, additional types with their latin species Cisco See Trouts name at the JSOR office and at www.jsor.org Coalfish See: Codfish Cobia, cabio, or black bonito Cod, cultus, black, blue, Albacore See: Mackerels or ling. See: Greenlings, Sablefish Amberjack See: Jacks Codfish, Including: Cod, Haddock, Pacific cod; Pollock, Anchovies Including: European anchovy, North of saithe, or coalfish; Walleye Pollock, Hakes; Whiting; California anchovy Blue whiting or poutassou Tomcods or frostfish Angelfish and butterfly fish Coho salmon See: Trouts Barracudas Corbina or Corvina, See: Drums Bass See Sea Basses. Temperate basses, Sunfish, Drums Crapplie See: Sunfish Blackfish See: Carps, Wrasses Blacksmith See: Damselfish Crucian carp See: Carps Blueback See: Flounders, Herrings, Trouts Dolphin fish or mahimahis Not to be confused with the Bluefish or snapper blue Mammal called Dolphin or Porpoise, which is non kosher. Bluegill See: Sunfish Drums and croakers, Including: Seatrouts and Bocaccio See: Scorpionfish carvinas; Weakfish, White seabass, Croakers, Silver Bonefish perch, White or King croaker; Black croaker Spotfin Bonito See: Cobia, Mackerels croaker); Yellowfin croaker, Drums; Red drum or channel bass Freshwater drum, Kingfish or king Bowfin Bowfish, Freshwater dogfish, or grindle whitings California corbina, spot or lafayette; Queenfish Bream See: Carps, Atlantic Pomfret, P Cubbyu or ribbon fish Brill See: Flounder Flounders Including: Summer flounder or fluke, Yellowtail flounder, Winter flounder, lemon sole, Buffalo Fishes See: Suckers Halibuts; "Dover" sole, "English" sole, Yellowfin sole Burbot See: Codfish Pacific turbots, Curlfin turbot or Diamond turbot, ButterFish Pacific pompano, harvestfish Greenland turbot or halibut Brill (scophthalmus rhomus).
    [Show full text]
  • Fish Stocks United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)
    General situation of world fish stocks United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Contents: 1. Definitions 2. Snapshot of the global situation 3. Short list of "depleted" fish stocks 4. Global list of fish stocks ranked as either "overexploited," "depleted," or recovering by region 1. Definitions Underexploited Undeveloped or new fishery. Believed to have a significant potential for expansion in total production; Moderately exploited Exploited with a low level of fishing effort. Believed to have some limited potential for expansion in total production; Fully exploited The fishery is operating at or close to an optimal yield level, with no expected room for further expansion; Overexploited The fishery is being exploited at above a level which is believed to be sustainable in the long term, with no potential room for further expansion and a higher risk of stock depletion/collapse; Depleted Catches are well below historical levels, irrespective of the amount of fishing effort exerted; Recovering Catches are again increasing after having been depleted 2. Snapshot of the global situation Of the 600 marine fish stocks monitored by FAO: 3% are underexploited 20% are moderately exploited 52% are fully exploited 17% are overexploited 7% are depleted 1% are recovering from depletion Map of world fishing statistical areas monitored by FAO Source: FAO's report "Review of the State of World Marine Fisheries Resources", tables D1-D17, ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/007/y5852e/Y5852E23.pdf 3. Fish stocks identified by FAO as falling into its
    [Show full text]
  • FFA Finland Baltic Herring & Sprat Fishery
    MSC SUSTAINABLE FISHERIES CERTIFICATION FFA Finland Baltic Herring & Sprat Fishery Public Comment Draft Report March 2018 Certificate Code: TBC Client: Finland Fishermen’s Association / Suomen Ammattikalastajaliitto R.Y. Assessment Conducted by: Acoura Marine Ltd On behalf of Acoura Jim Andrews and Giuseppe Scarcella Acoura Version V2.1 04/01/17 Acoura Marine Peer Review Draft Report FFA Finland Baltic Herring & Sprat Fishery Assessment Data Sheet FFA Finland Baltic Herring & Sprat Fishery Public Comment Draft Report March 2018 CAB details Acoura Marine Address 6 Redheughs Rigg Edinburgh EH12 9DQ Phone/Fax 0131 335 6662 Email [email protected] Contact name(s) Fisheries Department Client details Finland Fishermen’s Association / Suomen Ammattikalastajaliitto R.Y. Address Jordaksentie 124, FIN-07840, Lindkoski, Finland Phone/Fax +358 400720690 Email [email protected] Contact name(s) Kim Jordas Assessment Team Team Leader Jim Andrews P1 Assessor Giuseppe Scarcella P2 Assessor Jim Andrews P3 Assessor Jim Andrews Copyright © 2017 by Acoura Marine All rights reserved. No portion of this report may be reproduced in any manner for use by any other MSC Conformity Assessment Body without the express written permission of Acoura Marine, and subject to such conditions specified by Acoura Marine in any such permission. Page 1 of 380 Acoura Marine Full Assessment Template per MSC V2.0 02/12/2015 Acoura Marine Peer Review Draft Report FFA Finland Baltic Herring & Sprat Fishery Contents 1 Glossary .....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Seafood Industry Integration in All EU Member States with a Coastline
    STUDY Requested by the PECH committee Seafood industry integration in all EU Member States with a coastline Policy Department for Structural and Cohesion Policies Directorate-General for Internal Policies PE 629.176 - October 2018 EN RESEARCH FOR PECH COMMITTEE Seafood industry integration in all EU Member States with a coastline Abstract This study researched the drivers and mechanisms of both structural and non-structural horizontal and vertical integration in the seafood industry in all Member States with a coastline. The objective of the study was to identify trends among the Member States. The observed trends generally fall into three broad, inter-linked categories: regulatory environment, natural resources and firm performance. This document was requested by the European Parliament's Committee on Fisheries. AUTHORS Profundo: Ward Warmerdam, Barbara Kuepper, Jeroen Walstra, Mara Werkman, Milena Levicharova, Linnea Wikström MRAG: Daniel Skerrit, Laura Enthoven Robin Davies Consulting: Robin Davies Research managers: Priit Ojamaa, Carmen-Paz Martí Project and publication assistance: Adrienn Borka, Mariana Vaclacova, Marcus Breuer Policy Department for Structural and Cohesion Policies, European Parliament LINGUISTIC VERSIONS Original: EN ABOUT THE PUBLISHER To contact the Policy Department or to subscribe to updates on our work for the PECH Committee please write to: [email protected] Manuscript completed in October 2018, rev. edition December 2019 © European Union, 2019 This document is available on the internet in summary
    [Show full text]
  • RCM Baltic) 2016
    Report of the Regional Co-ordination Meeting for the Baltic Sea region (RCM Baltic) 2016 Thünen Institute of Baltic Sea Fisheries (OF) Alter Hafen Süd, 18069 ROSTOCK, GERMANY 29 th August to 2 nd September, 2016 Inhalt 1. Executive summary ..................................................................................................................... 3 2. Main points of the meeting ......................................................................................................... 5 2.1 Subgroup A – National Plans 2016 ....................................................................................................... 6 2.2 Subgroup B – Evolution to RCGs ........................................................................................................... 6 2.3 Subgroup C – Data analysis .................................................................................................................... 8 2.4 Sub Group: Anadromous and Catadromous species ...................................................................... 8 3. Recommendations ................................................................................................................ 9 4. Annexes .................................................................................................................................. 11 Annex 1. List of participants at RCM Baltic 2016 ........................................................................................ 12 Annex 2. Background & legal requirements .................................................................................................
    [Show full text]