EU DATA COLLECTION FRAMEWORK (DCF), REG. 199/2008, 665/2008 and DECISION 2010/93/EU

Report of the Regional Co-ordination Meeting for the Long Distance Fisheries (RCM LDF) 2015

Thünen Institute [TI]), Hamburg, Germany 21/04/2015 – 22/04/2015

Instituto Español de Oceanografía (IEO), Centro Oceanográfico de Cádiz Cádiz, Spain 9/06/2015 - 12/06/2015

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

Table of Contents 1. Executive summary...... 3 2. Introduction ...... 5 2.1 General ...... 5 2.2 Background & legal requirements...... 5 2.3 Terms of Reference ...... 5 2.4 Participants and Agendas ...... 7 2.5 Structure of the report ...... 7 2.6 Data call ...... 8 3. Review of EU Long Distance Fisheries activities ...... 9 3.1 CECAF area ...... 9 3.2 SPRFMO area ...... 16 4. Review progress in regional co-ordination since the 2014 RCM ...... 17 4.1 Follow-up of the 11th Liaison Meeting ...... 17 4.2 Feedback from end users, including NC meeting ...... 17 4.3 Sampling coordination in the area of competence of the RCM LDF . 17 5. Data Quality issues ...... 18 5.1 Progress on quality, control, validation etc...... 18 5.2 Developing statistical sound harmonised sampling programmes ... 18 6. New CFP and development of of EU-MAP ...... 21 6.1 Impact of the landing obligation ...... 21 6.2 Ranking of métier to find out whether any of the NPs need to be modified for 2015...... 22 7. Surveys, studies and pilot projects ...... 23 8. Any other business ...... 25 8.1 Recommendations ...... 25 8.2 Time and venue of the RCM LDF meeting in 2016 ...... 25 8.3 Chairmanship ...... 25 9. Glossary ...... 27 10. Annexes ...... 28 10.1 Annex 1 – Agenda of the 1st meeting (April 2015; Hamburg, Germany) ...... 28 10.2 Annex 2 – Agenda of the 2nd meeting (June 2015; Cadiz, Spain) . 29 10.3 Annex 3 - Minutes with the outcomes of the 1st RCM LDF meeting (April 21-22, 2015, Hamburg, Germany) ...... 31 10.4 Annex 4 – Amendments to the joint sampling program for small pelagics fishery in the CECAF area ...... 35 10.5 Annex 5 – Multilateral Agreement on joint sampling programme of the fishery activities in the SPRFMO ...... 37 Annex 2: “Observer Manual for biological data collection in SPRFMO waters”...... 38 10.6 Annex 6 – Landings by species reported by MS ...... 39 10.7 Annex 7 – Canary Islands- New métier sampled in the DCF: MIS_DES_0_0_0 ...... 43 10.8 Annex 8 – The lists of species indicated by FAO/CECAF as relevant for the assessments purposes ...... 46

2

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

1. Executive summary

Two RCM LDF meetings were held in 2015. The first meeting, held in April at Thünen Institute (TI), Hamburg, Germany, was called on an ad hoc basis to specifically address the urgent need of implementation of a sampling programme for the fishery activities by EU vessels in the SPRFMO area. The meeting was initiated during the EU National Correspondents meeting, organized by the European Commission on March 25, 2015. As a result, a new multilateral agreement on joint sampling programme of the fishing activities in the SPRFMO area was agreed and signed. The meeting also provided the platform to discuss the already established multi-lateral agreement for the CECAF region and resulted in signing an amendment to this agreement, extending the joint sampling programme in CECAF area until end of 2016.

The second meeting took place at Instituto Español de Oceanografía (IEO), Centro Oceanográfico de Cádiz, Spain, in June, with the aim to address the general Terms of Reference set for the RCMs 2015 meetings and to provide a platform for an overview of the EU long distance fisheries over the previous year in order to evaluate the scope of required regional coordination in area of data collection. The group reviewed the progress in regional coordination since 2014, the outcomes of the 11th Liaison Meeting and feedback from the end-users. The RCM LDF reviewed the Long Distance Fisheries activity by MS in CECAF and SPRMFO areas with the use of updated 2014 data provided by MS. There were limited EU fishing activity in the SPRMFO area in 2013 and 2014.

Based on the characteristics of fisheries in different regions within the CECAF area and following the proposal made by STECF EWG 14-18, geographical fishing zones in the CECAF area were revised. The RCM LDF proposes the inclusion of a new fishing ground (“Canary”). In this way, EU and non EU waters are separated at RCM level without modification of the RCM coverage, and without changes in sampling obligations or sampling patterns. Following this proposal, three fishing grounds are considered for CECAF: “Madeira”, “Canary” (both being the EU waters) and “From Morocco to Guinea Bissau” (as a non EU waters). General types of fisheries in the relevant area are described in the report. In Madeira and the Canaries, where only national vessels of one MS operate, coordination of data collection at regional level is not required as fisheries in those fishing grounds are already covered by the respective National Programmes. The status quo on the FPAs with Morocco, Mauritania, Senegal, and Guinea-Bissau were discussed. In order to check whether there were any substantial changes in the fishing pattern in the CECAF area in 2014 which would require amendments to the National Programmes in 2016, the group updated last year’s ranking and compared the updated version to the 2014 version. Based on that comparison, the RCM LDF is concluded that there is no need for amendments to the NPs for 2016 in respect of the long distance fisheries in CECAF area. The only change to the execution of NPs in current year and 2016 relates to the NPs budgets and the need to secure funding necessary to implement the multilateral agreement on the joint sampling programme for the fishery activities in the SPRFMO area (agreed and signed by the MS concerned in 2015). In relation to the evaluation of the impact of the introduction of the landing obligation and/or preparations for its implementation in the context of the Long Distance Fisheries, the RCM LDF discussed the preliminary results of the project “For the provision of advice on the management of discards in EU fisheries beyond EU waters” (conducted under the Framework Contract No. MARE/2012/21), concerning CECAF and FPAs of Morocco and Mauritania. In general, the introduction in EU legislation of the landing obligation has no impact on activity of the long distance fishery. The RCM DCF briefly discussed project proposal on “Strengthening regional cooperation in the area of fisheries data collection” (MARE/2014/19) in relation to the combined North

3

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

Atlantic/North Sea region. The group concluded that the work done within this project is beneficial for sampling procedures in place for the long distance fisheries. The outcomes of the project and possible future implications will be reviewed in 2016. In relation to call for proposals pre-announced by the Commission, regarding, i.a. inter- sessional work between the annual Regional Coordination Meetings, develop and test an operational framework for establishing and coordinating statistically-sound sampling programmes at a regional or EU scale, the RCM LDF decided not to form a consortium to apply for this grant, but rather participate on a national basis to other consortia that are likely to be formed. The RCM LDF 2015 made one recommendation in relation to future RCM LDF data calls – that the National Correspondents of all non-landlocked EU MS shall be contacted in order to be sure that all active fisheries in the areas in the competence of the RCM LDF are covered. It is expected that all National Correspondents contacted respond to the data call either with information on all fishing activity beyond the EU waters by the vessels under the flag of their MS or with confirmation of none of such activities, along with information on MS’ participation in the working groups of any RFMOs, concerning fishing activity in the waters outside the EU. With the expiration of the term of current chair, the RCM LDF proposes Sieto Verver (NL) as the new chair. The next RCM LDF meeting is planned for June 2016, and Lithuania kindly offered to host this meeting.

4

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

2. Introduction

2.1 General

Two RCM LDF meetings were held in 2015. The first meeting, held on April 21-22 at Thünen Institute (TI), Hamburg, Germany, was initiated during the EU National Correspondents meeting (organized by the European Commission on March 25, 2015) in order to provide the follow-up of the outstanding RCM LDF 2013 recommendation to establish a sampling programme for the fishery in the SPRFMO area. This meeting was called on an ad hoc basis to specifically address the urgent need of implementation of a multilateral agreement on joint sampling of the fishery activities in the SPRFMO area by the EU vessels already commenced late April 2015. The meeting also provided the platform to discuss the extension of the already established multi-lateral agreement for the CECAF region. The second meeting took place at Instituto Español de Oceanografía (IEO), Centro Oceanográfico de Cádiz, Spain, on 9–12 June, 2015, with the aim to address the general Terms of Reference set for the RCMs 2015 meetings and to provide a platform for an overview of the EU long distance fisheries over the previous year in order to evaluate the scope of required regional coordination in area of data collection. RCM LDF appreciated the excellent facilities offered by both Institutes to enable effective work of the group. The availability of SharePoint offered by ICES proves to be very efficient in organising the work before, during and after the meeting.

2.2 Background & legal requirements

The EU Data Collection Framework (DCF) establishes a framework for the collection of economic, biological and transversal data by Member States (MS). It was intended that this programme would provide the basic data needed to evaluate the state of fishery resources and the fisheries sector. The Regional Coordination Meeting for the Long Distance Fisheries (RCM LDF) proceeds from the Data Collection Framework (EC Regulation no. 199/2008) establishing a community framework for the collection, management and use of data in fisheries sector for scientific advice regarding the CFP. According to this regulation and without prejudice to their current data collection obligations under Community law, Member States (MS) shall collect primary biological, technical, environmental and socio-economic data within the framework of a multi-annual national programme drawn up in accordance with the Community programme. According to EC Regulation 665/2008, laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) 199/2008, and its technical Decision 2010/93/EU specifying practical aspects for data collection, actions planned by MS in their national programme shall be presented according to the predefined regions. The coordination of the data collection is recommended at regional level and specific meetings are in charge of facilitating this and these meetings aim to identify areas for standardisation, collaboration and task sharing between MS. RCMs are held annually with participants from each MS involved in fishing activity in the respective region.

2.3 Terms of Reference

The following terms of reference were set for discussion by the RCM LDF 2015 – 1st meeting (Hamburg, April 21-22, 2015): 1. Follow up of the RCM LDF 2013 recommendation to implement a multilateral agreement on the basis of joint sampling program of fisheries activity in SPRMFO area

5

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

o Protocol for the data collection – scope and format of data required by the SPRMFO standards (based on the SPRMFO Data Standards 2015) o Choice of the coordination agency for data collection o Cost sharing key o Conclusion of the agreement

2. Discussion on the possibility to extent the Multilateral agreement for sampling in CECAF

3. Any other business

The following terms of reference were set for discussion by the RCM LDF 2015 – 2nd meeting

(Cádiz; June 9-12, 2015): 1. Review progress since 2014 following up the 11th Liaison Meeting report 2. Review feedback from end users, including NC meetings 3. Analyse data from 2015 RCM LDF data call 4. Regional data collection, analysis and storage and the evolution towards RCGs  Consider the progress of the “strengthening regional cooperation in data collection” MARE/2014/19, and possible implications  Review progress in data quality screening, harmonisation of national and regional data checking procedures.  Consider the data collection protocols for at-sea and on-shore sampling in the context of regional sampling designs and probability selection methods.  Identify any amendments to NP needed in 2016. Consider future funding mechanisms to continue strengthening regional cooperation

5. Landing Obligation Evaluate the impact of the introduction of the landing obligation, and/or preparations for its implementation, in the context of the Long Distance Fisheries

6. National Administrations  Address any issues relating specifically to national administrations and consider the role of NC within the RCM/RCG context.  Task sharing and task trading mechanisms that might operate within the context of a regional sampling designs. 7. AOB  place and date of the next RCM/RCG LDF  election of the new chair

6

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

2.4 Participants and Agendas

First name Email address Organisation 1st meeting 2nd meeting

Hamburg Cadiz

April 2015 June 2015

Eva García Isarch [email protected] Instituto Español de Oceanografía (ES) X Centro Oceanográfico de Cádiz

Zeneida Romero [email protected] Instituto Español de Romero Oceanografía (ES) X Centro Oceanográfico de Cádiz

Ángeles Armesto [email protected] Instituto Español de Oceanografía (ES) X Centro Oceanográfico de Vigo

Sieto Verver [email protected] Institute for Marine Resources X X and Ecosystem Studies (IMARES, Wageningen UR), IJmuiden(NL)

Maksims Kovsars [email protected] Fish Resources Research Department in Riga (LV) X X

Irek Wojcik (Chair) [email protected] National Marine Fisheries Research Institute in Gdynia X X (PL)

Christoph Stransky [email protected] Thünen-Institut for Seafisheries in Hamburg (DE) X

Kay Panten [email protected] Thünen-Institut for Seafisheries in Hamburg (DE) X X

Vilda Griuniene [email protected] Ministry of the Agriculture, Fisheries Department (LT) X X

Romas Statkus [email protected] Fishery Service, Ministry of Agriculture (LT) X

Brigita Kukonenko [email protected] Fishery Service, Ministry of Agriculture (LT) X

The agendas of both meetings held in April 2015 in Hamburg and in June 2015 in Cadiz are included in Annex 1 and Annex 2, respectively.

2.5 Structure of the report

Minutes with the outcomes of the 1st RCM LDF meeting (April 21-22, 2015, Hamburg, Germany) – Annex 3. Amendments to the multilateral agreement on joint sampling programme for the fishery activities in the CECAF area, agreed in 2014 and 2015 – Annex 4.

7

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

Multilateral agreement on joint sampling programme for the fishery activities in the SPRFMO area, agreed during the 1st RCM LDF meeting – Annex 5. ToR addressed by the 2nd RCM LDF meeting (June 9-12, 2015, Cadiz, Spain) are referred to in the following sections of the report.

ToR 1 - in section 4.1 ToR 2 - in section 4.2 ToR 3 - in section 2.6 and 3 ToR 4 - in section 5; 6.2 and 7 ToR 5 - in section 6.1 ToR 6 - in section 5.2 ToR 7 - in section 8

2.6 Data call

Prior to the 2nd RCM LDF 2015 meeting a data call was sent to National Correspondents of MS concerned requesting a revised and updated data on fishing activities in CECAF and SPRMFO areas. All MS participating in 2015 meeting responded to this data call and provided the data requested. Data were also received from the UK, a MS involved in the fishing activity in the CECAF area and not participating in 2015 meeting. Italy provided information that no activity were carried out in CECAF area by Italian vessels in 2013 and only one vessel operated in that area in 2014 (however, no effort and catch data were available at the meeting). No updated data were received from PT. For future data calls, RCM LDF recommends that the National Correspondents of all non- landlocked EU MS shall be contacted in order to be sure that all active fisheries in the areas in the competence of the RCM LDF are covered. It is expected that all National Correspondents contacted respond to the data call either with information on all fishing activity beyond the EU waters by the vessels under the flag of their MS or with confirmation of none of such activities. The recommendation is specified in section 8.1

8

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

3. Review of EU Long Distance Fisheries activities

3.1 CECAF area

Considering the fact that the new CFP1 states a clear difference between EU waters (article 4) and non EU waters, and following the proposal made in EWG 14-182 (see Table 6 of the EWG report), geographical fishing zones in the CECAF area were revised to comply with the separation between EU waters and non EU waters. Thus, after discussion, the RCM agreed on the inclusion of a new fishing ground (“Canary”), as an addition to the already existing other EU waters fishing ground - “Madeira”. In this way, EU and non EU waters are separated at RCM level without modification of the RCM coverage, and without changes in sampling obligations or sampling patterns. Following this proposal, three fishing grounds are considered for CECAF:

Fishing Ground “Madeira” EU waters Fishing Ground “Canary” Fishing Ground “From Morocco to Guinea Bissau” Non EU waters

In Madeira and the Canaries, only Portuguese and Spanish vessels, respectively, operate and the fisheries/métiers are already included in respective National sampling programs and therefore, coordination between MS is not needed. Following this RCM decision, fishery data are presented separately for the three Fishing grounds: “From Morocco to Guinea-Bissau”, “Madeira” and “Canary Islands”.

FISHING GROUND “FROM MOROCCO TO GUINEA-BISSAU” The information below describes the general types of fisheries in the relevant West African CECAF areas by MS (2014) as an overview of the CECAF Fisheries carried out by EU-fleets. Some fisheries cover very large areas along the West African shelf. As non-EU countries also conduct fisheries in this area, the catches taken by vessels of EU MS do only constitute a part of the total catches. As part of the EU fishing activity in West African waters, the Spanish fishery is mostly directed to demersal stocks, but there is also a purse seine fishery targeting small pelagics in Morocco. The other EU MS are operating in a pelagic fishery. An overview of species fished by EU MS in the CECAF area in 2014 is presented in Annex 6. In most cases the EU fishery has been carried out in this area under bilateral Fishing Partnership Agreements (FPAs) between the EU and the Coastal States. The responsibility for coordination of research activities in the area, stocks assessments and providing scientific advice for the stocks management lies with the Fishery Committee for the Eastern Central Atlantic (CECAF). In addition, the Joint Scientific Committees (JSCs) of the FPAs between the EU and the partner countries (Morocco, Mauritania, Senegal and Guinea-Bissau) play important role in setting an independent scientific cooperation framework between the EU and these countries.

1 REGULATION (EU) No 1380/2013 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy, amending Council Regulations (EC) No 1954/2003 and (EC) No 1224/2009 and repealing Council Regulations (EC) No 2371/2002 and (EC) No 639/2004 and Council Decision 2004/585/EC. 2 Review of DCF National programme amendments for 2015 (and the 2013 Annual Report for Bulgaria) & development of the revised DCF Multiannual Programme (EWG-14-18). Brussels, Belgium, 25-28 November 2014

9

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

The fisheries in the fishing ground “From Morocco to Guinea-Bissau” highly depend on the FPA between the EU and the third countries. The situation, by country, is described in the following sections: Morocco After a long period of negotiation, the new FPA with Morocco3 was finally ratified by the King of Morocco in July 2014, involving the re-opening of some EU fisheries in this fishing ground, starting September 2014. This FPA renewal involves new métiers operating in the zone that have not been mentioned in previous RCMs. This is the case for an artisanal fleet of longliners targeting Trichiuridae and Sparidae in the North (fishing Category Nº2 of the SFPA: “Small scale fishing in the North”). This métier was called “LLS_DEF_6_0_0” (6 referring to the hook size number), to differentiate it from “LLS_DEF_0_0_0”, which traditionally corresponded to longliners targeting black hakes and/or other demersal fish in the CECAF area (in this case, in the South zone of Morocco, under the fishing category Nº4: “Demersal fishing”) (see Tables 3.2 & 3.2). The métier “MISC_DEF_0_0_0” corresponds to the artisanal fleet from the Canary Islands that operates in South Morocco under the Fishing Category Nº3 of the FPA (“Small Scale Fishing in the South”). These are artisanal vessels that use rods and lines targeting demersal fish. Traps, which were also allowed in the last Protocol, are forbidden in the new one. Mauritania The Mauritanian FPA4 expired in July 2014, involving the closure of some EU fisheries. An extension was permitted to two fishing categories (Nº3: “Crustaceans” and Nº7: “Pelagic Fishing Trawlers”) until the end of 2014. Senegal The new SFPA with Senegal5, signed in October 2014 allows the métier OTB_DEF_>=70_0_0 to operate in the Senegalese EEZ. These are vessels targeting black hakes. This fleet started its activity in 2015 and no data were still available for this RCM. Guinea-Bissau A new FPA6 was signed with Guinea-Bissau in October 2014, which involved the reopening of the shrimper and -finfish fisheries at the beginning of 2015. The mixed fishery

3 COUNCIL DECISION of 16 December 2013 on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union, of the Protocol between the European Union and the Kingdom of Morocco setting out the fishing opportunities and financial contribution provided for in the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Kingdom of Morocco (2013/785/EU). Official Journal of the European Union 21-12-2013. L 349/1-3 and PROTOCOL between the European Union and the Kingdom of Morocco setting out the fishing opportunities and financial contribution provided for in the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Kingdom of Morocco. Official Journal of the European Union 7-12-2013. L 328/2-39.

4 COUNCIL DECISION of 18 December 2012 on the signing, on behalf of the European Union, and on the provisional application of the Protocol setting out the fishing opportunities and financial contribution provided for in the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Islamic Republic of Mauritania for a period of two years (2012/827/EU) and PROTOCOL Setting out the fishing opportunities and financial contribution provided for in the fisheries partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Islamic Republic of Mauritania for a period of two years. Official Journal of the European Union. 31- 12-2012. L361/43-84.

5 COUNCIL DECISION of 8 October 2014 on the signing, on behalf of the European Union, and provisional application of a Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Senegal and the Implementation Protocol thereto (2014/733/EU) and Agreement on a Sustainable Fisheries Partnership between the European Union and the Republic of Senegal. Official Journal of the European Union. 23-10-2014. L304/1-40.

6 COUNCIL DECISION of 16 October 2014 on the signing, on behalf of the European Union, and provisional application of the Protocol setting out the fishing opportunities and financial contribution provided for in the

10

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

carried out by trawlers targeting finfish and had traditionally been called “OTB_CEP_>=70_0_0”. However, after discussion at the RCM, this métier was renamed as “OTB_MCF_>=70_0_0”, considering that it targets both cephalopods and finfish. Since the reopening of the fishery, the fleet deployed a new exploitation strategy during the first months of activity in 2015. This strategy follows two different patterns: (i) either targeting cephalopods and finfish, and/or (ii) targeting black hakes, in deeper waters, and with low or no cephalopods bycatch. These two different patterns may follow the resources’ abundancies and are not predictable in advance for sampling purposes. Thus, pending on the potential continuity of these two different patterns followed by the same fleet under the same fishing category, maybe in the future there will be a need of splitting the métier “OTB_MCF_=70_0_0” in two different ones (“OTB_MCF_=70_0_0” and “OTB_DEF_=70_0_0”).

Table. 3.1. General types of fisheries in relevant CECAF areas by MS (2014)

FISHING GROUNDS FISHERY AREA COUNTRIES

Small pelagic Morocco Latvia, Poland, Lithuania, Germany, Spain

Demersal fish Spain

Crustaceans Spain

Demersal fish Mauritania Spain Bissau

- Lithuania, Latvia, Poland, Netherlands, Small pelagic Germany

Small Pelagic Guinea From Morocco to to Morocco From Crustaceans Guinea-Bissau No FPA in 2014 Demersal fish & cephalopods

Deep-water species Small pelagic Madeira Portugal*1

Demersal fish Madeira Molluscs

Small pelagics Canary Islands Spain

Canary Demersal fish 1Based on data provided in 2014

The following tables, based on the data from 2010 to 2014 provided to the RCM LDF by MS, show the main fishing activities in relation to fishing effort and total landings. UK provided data but they were not included as they require further revision. No activity were carried out in CECAF area by Italian vessels in 2013 and only one vessel operated in that area in 2014 (however, no effort and catch data were available at the meeting). Data from PT for 2014 were not available during the meeting.

Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Guinea-Bissau (2014/782/EU) and PROTOCOL setting out the fishing opportunities and financial contribution provided for in the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Guinea- Bissau. Official Journal of the European Union. 13-11-2014. L328/1-32.

11

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

Table. 3.2. Effort (fishing days) by country and métiers from 2010 to 2014.

Métier (level 6) Country 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

LLS_DEF_0_0_0 ESP na

Total

MISC_DEF_0_0_0 ESP 955 883 *1 *1 76 Total 955 883 *1 *1 76 OTB_CEP_>=70_0_0 OTB_MCF_>=70_0_0*5 ESP 6174 5573 4044 *2,3 *3,4 Total 6174 5573 4044 *2,3 *3,4 OTB_CRU_>=40_0_0 ESP 8125 7272 3311 581 3346 Total 8125 7272 3311 581 3346 OTB_DEF_>=70_0_0 ESP 1178 686 658 683 755 Total 1178 686 658 683 755 OTB_DES_>=40_0_0 ITA 834 874 Total 834 874 OTB_MCF_>=70_0_0 ESP 1020 448 193 Total 1020 448 193 GER 160 404 54 71 LIT 1400 950 437 724 661 OTM_SPF_>=40_0_0 LVA NLD 696 621 393 125 467 POL 125 517 247 461 230 Total 2381 2492 1131 1310 1429 PS_SPF_0_0_0 ESP 495 463 *1 *1 4 Total 495 463 *1 *1 4 LLS_DEF_6_0_0 ESP 1286 na *1 *1 505 Total 1286 na *1 *1 505 Total métiers by years 21628 18361 9246 2588 6126

*1. No FPA with Morocco. *2. Fishing category not included in the last FPA with Mauritania. *3. No FPA with Guinea Bissau *4. No FPA with Mauritania *5. The métier OTB_CEP_>=70_0_0 fishing in Guinea Bissau should be renamed to OTB_MCF_>=70_0_0 na =not available.

Due to confidentiality issues, LVA could not provide effort data, because information about “days-at-sea” is compiled for whole fleet segment of vessels with length more than 40 meters (overall 5 vessels in the last two years), fishing in different fishing zones, including outside the CECAF area.

12

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

Table. 3.3. Landings (tons) by country and métiers from 2010 to 2014 (Fishing ground: “From Morocco to Guinea-Bissau”).

MÉTIER 2010 ESP GER ITA LIT LVA NLD POL TOTAL

OTM_SPF_>=40_0_0 20650 116840 87237 87564 14605 326096 OTB_CRU_>=40_0_0 5331 5331 OTB_CEP_>=70_0_0 OTB_MCF_>=70_0_0* 6403 6403 OTB_DEF_>=70_0_0 5090 5090 OTB_DES_>=40_0_0 1751 1751 PS_SPF_0_0_0 1093 1093 LLS_DEF_6_0_0 669 669 MISC_DEF_0_0_0 444 444

MÉTIER 2011 ESP GER ITA LIT LVA NLD POL TOTAL

OTM_SPF_>=40_0_0 37088 113700 89667 55044 60177 362976 OTB_CRU_>=40_0_0 5281 5281 OTB_MCF_>=70_0_0* 6967 6967 OTB_DEF_>=70_0_0 3603 3603 OTB_DES_>=40_0_0 2046 2046 LLS_DEF_6_0_0 789 789 MISC_DEF_0_0_0 469 469 PS_SPF_0_0_0 758 758

MÉTIER 2012 ESP GER ITA LIT LVA NLD POL TOTAL

OTM_SPF_>=40_0_0 14582 48300 30207 34926 29178 138894 OTB_CRU_>=40_0_0 2806 2806 OTB_MCF_>=70_0_0* 6994 6994 OTB_DEF_>=70_0_0 3474 3474

MÉTIER 2013 ESP GER ITA LIT LVA NLD POL TOTAL

OTM_SPF_>=40_0_0 62000 52820 11876 54137 174833 OTB_CRU_>=40_0_0 388 388

MÉTIER 2014 ESP GER ITA LIT LVA NLD POL TOTAL

OTM_SPF_>=40_0_0 8282 103400 57561 64661 19934 235374 OTB_CRU_>=40_0_0 1076 1076 LLS_DEF_6_0_0 199 199 MISC_DEF_0_0_0 48 48 PS_SPF_0_0_0 4 4

* The métier OTB_CEP_>=70_0_0 fishing in Guinea Bissau was renamed to OTB_MCF_>=70_0_0 in 2015 (see section 3.1 paragraph Guinea-Bissau)

The summary of landing statistics for small pelagic trawl fishery in the West African waters of the CECAF area, covering data from 2007 to 2014 is given in Table 3.4 below. The sharp decline

13

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

in landings occurred in 2012 due to the end of the FPA with Mauritania in July 2012. In 2013, this fleet reentered this fishing ground, but landings are still low, due to the very restrictive conditions of the new protocol of December 2012. At the time of the meeting, the group was not aware of the reason for substantial increase of landings in 2014 as compared to previous year.

Table. 3.4. Landings (tons) of the EU trawl pelagic fleet from 2007 to 2014. Data provided by RCM participants.

Year Total EU landings (t) 2007 176 371 2008 314 332 2009 338 692 2010 326 896 2011 355 676 2012 157 194 2013 180 833 2014 253 838

Tables 3.5 - 3.6 below show the results of métier ranking for effort and landings criteria respectively for EU fishing activity in the CECAF area.

Table 3.5 Percentage of average effort (period 2012-2014) of different métiers operating in the CECAF area. Métiers are comparable to previous reports. Métiers included in the 90% threshold are marked in grey.

Métier % Effort

OTB_CRU_>=40_0_0 40.153

OTB_CEP_>=70_0_0 23.505 OTB_MCF_>=70_0_0

OTM_SPF_>=40_0_0 21.469

OTB_DEF_>=70_0_0 11.628

LLS_DEF_6_0_0 2.802

MISC_DEF_0_0_0 0.422

PS_SPF_0_0_0 0.022

Table 3.6 Percentage of average landings (period 2012-2014) of different métiers operating in the CECAF area. Métiers are comparable to previous reports. Métiers included in the 90% threshold are marked in grey.

Métier % Landings OTM_SPF_>=40_0_0 96.114 OTB_DEF_>=70_0_0 2.016 OTB_CEP_>=70_0_0 1.020 (OTB_MCF_>=70_0_0) OTB_CRU_>=40_0_0 0.693 OTB_MCF_>=70_0_0 0.116 LLS_DEF_6_0_0 0.032 MISC_DEF_0_0_0 0.008 PS_SPF_0_0_0 0.001

14

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

According to the métier ranking, no changes were observed for 2014 as compared to previous years within the same métiers (Tab. 3.5 & 3.6). With regard to métier ranking for landings, the single métier OTM_SPF_>=40_0_0, targeting small pelagics, constitutes more than 90% threshold of métiers to be selected for sampling. In case of métier ranking for effort (Tab. 3.5), four métiers were selected for sampling, including three demersal métiers targeting crustaceans, cephalopods+finfish and demersal fish and one métier targeting small pelagics. Other métiers targeting both small pelagics and demersal species were also included in previous years due to their relevance in CECAF fisheries and their inclusion in respective FPAs fishing opportunities. Therefore, no major changes occurred in the métiers sampled during the period analyzed.

FISHING GROUND “CANARY”

A new métier was included in the Spanish National Programme in 2015. It is a mixed fishery carried out by an artisanal fleet fishing demersal species in the Canary Islands, using different types of fishing gears. The Annex 7 (“Canary Islands- New métier sampled in the DCF: MIS_DES_0_0_0”) includes the description of this métier. Effort and landings of the Canary Islands métiers are included in Tables 3.7 and 3.8, respectively.

Table 3.7. Effort (fishing days) by métiers for the Canary Islands.2010-2014.

Country Métier (level 6) 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 ESP PS_SPF_10_0_0 2812 2714 2574 4010 2716 MIS_DES_0_0_0 na na na 28039 29206

Table 3.8. Landings (tons) by métiers for the Canary Islands. 2010 to 2014.

COUNTRY MÉTIER 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

ESP PS_SPF_10_0_0 1281 1431 1694 2353 1965 MIS_DES_0_0_0 na na na 1006 1079

FISHING GROUND “MADEIRA”

Table 3.9. Effort (fishing days) by métiers for Madeira. 2010-2013.

Country Métier (level 6) 2010 2011 2012 2013 PT LHM_FIF_0_0_0 36 92 333 318 LHP_LPF_0_0_0 1534 1488 1911 1139 LLD_DWF_0_0_0 3579 3760 2518 2465 LLS_FIF_0_0_0 1117 817 914 674 MISC_MOL_0_0_0 829 402 737 595 PS_SPF_16_0_0 740 540 743 571 Total métiers by years 7835 7098 7156 5762

15

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

Table 3.10.- Landings (tons) by métiers for Madeira. 2010-2013.

COUNTRY MÉTIER 2010 2011 2012 2013

PT PS_SPF_16_0_0 556 738 535 593 MISC_MOL_0_0_0 120 127 121 89 LLS_FIF_0_0_0 51 55 53 26 LLD_DWF_0_0_0 2079 2148 1887 1846 LHP_LPF_0_0_0 851 975 2266 1009 LHM_FIF_0_0_0 1 2 5 6

The most significant changes in the fishing activities of the EU fleets in CECAF waters during 2014 in relation to the previous years are due to the restarting of some fisheries in Morocco and Guinea-Bissau, within the framework of the respective new protocols of July and October 2014. New métiers were reported for Morocco in this RCM, due to the fishing opportunities in the new FPA. The new SFPA with Senegal (October 2014) includes fishing opportunities for hake trawlers, which started to be used in 2015. In addition, the expiration of the last FPA with Mauritania, involving the cease of most EU fisheries at the end of 2014 should be noted.

3.2 SPRFMO area

Until 2011, the fishery in the SPRMFO area (South-East Pacific) was carried out by EU large pelagic freezer trawlers and was directed to Chilean jack mackerel (Trachurus murphyi) mainly. The fishery in this area is managed by the South Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Organisation (SPRMFO). An overview of fishing activity and species fished by EU MS in the SPRMFO area were presented in the RCM LDF 2012 Report. No EU fleet activities in that area were reported over 2012. In 2013 only one vessel under the Lithuanian flag was active with a negligible landings volume. Based on information available at the SPRMFO webpage7 and the National report of the European Union to the 2014 SPRFMO Science Committee, in 2014 only two EU vessels (one under DE and one under NL flags) were fishing in the SPRMFO area from May to October with the total catch of 19565 tonnes of Trachurus murphyi (representing 4.8% of the total catch of this species reported to SPRMFO).

7 COMM-03-INF-01; Data submitted to the SPRFMO Secretariat as at 15th January 2015 (https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/Meetings/Meetings-2013-plus/Commission-Meetings/3rd- Commission-Meeting-2015-Auckland-New-Zealand/COMM-03-INF-01-Data-Submitted-to-the- Secretariat.pdf)

16

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

4. Review progress in regional co-ordination since the 2014 RCM

4.1 Follow-up of the 11th Liaison Meeting The RCM reviewed the report from the 11th Liaison Meeting. There were no recommendations endorsed by the 11th LM specifically addressed to the RCM LDF to be reviewed and/or discussed by the group. The RCM LDF however, reflected on the recommendation endorsed by the LM related to the newly introduced landing obligation in the context of its impact on the data collection (See section 6.1).

4.2 Feedback from end users, including NC meeting Following the discussion held during the 2014 meeting, FAO/CECAF were contacted by RCM LDF participants from Spain in order to consult their data requirements, including species, biological variables and frequency of data to be collected in both short and long term perspective and the draft list of species and biological variables to be potentially included in the EU MAP (provided by the Commission in 2014) was sent for its revision. CECAF responded with the list of species that are assessed in demersal and small pelagic Working Groups, noting that sharks and rays included in the list are considered also of high relevance, although they are not assessed. The lists of species indicated by FAO/CECAF as relevant for the assessments purposes are provided in the Annex 8. With regard to the SPRMFO, its website gives clear details on the data required and the format for data submission. An overall comparison of observer data required by the SPRMFO with those under the DCF was presented in the RCM LDF 2011 report.

The group reviewed the minutes and outcomes of the last NC meeting arranged by the Commission on 25th March 2015. The main outcome of that meeting, in relation to the long distance fisheries, was the decision to call an ad hoc RCM LDF meeting in April 2015 in order to provide the follow-up of the outstanding RCM LDF 2013 recommendation to implement a multilateral agreement on the basis of joint sampling of the fishery activities in the SPRFMO area (Minutes of that meeting are presented in Annex 3).

4.3 Sampling coordination in the area of competence of the RCM LDF In 2011, all MS involved in CECAF pelagic trawlers fisheries (Germany, Poland, the Netherlands, Lithuania and Latvia) agreed to implement a common sampling programme in 2012 and 2013. The multilateral agreement between these MS includes an allocation key for sharing the costs of this programme. Sampling is based on an observer programme and is carried out by staff of IMROP (the Mauritanian Oceanographic and Fishery Research Institute). The programme is designed in accordance with current DCF requirements and is described in Annex 5 of the 2011 report of the RCM-LDF. In 2013, all partners to the multilateral agreement signed an amendment to extent the joint sampling program for small pelagics fishery in the CECAF area for another two years period, until 31 December 2015. This agreement was amended mid-term to reflect the new financing structure of the EMFF. In 2015, the agreement was again amended to extent the programme for one year. The current end date is December 31, 2016 (Annex 4). For the SPRFMO area, a new multi-lateral agreement was set in April 2015 (Annex 4). This agreement builds upon the experience gained with the CECAF agreement. The sampling programme is a continuation of sampling previously carried out under private arrangements from the industry and the programme is in line with DCF and SPRFMO requirements. This agreement will also end by December 31, 2016. Given the end date of both agreements, the options for continuation of the programmes need to be considered during the RCM LDF 2016 and if necessary, intersessionaly. Also, the continuation, scope and design of the sampling programmes need to be reviewed in the light of the new DCF as soon as the new DCF commences, including the redesigned sampling schemes. currently being developed by various working groups and projects.

17

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

5. Data Quality issues

5.1 Progress on quality, control, validation etc.

RCM LDF discussed the planned work under the granted EU project on “Strengthening regional cooperation in the area of fisheries data collection” (See section 7). The outcomes of this project are of relevance to this group in terms of addressing the data quality issues as described in earlier reports of this group (e.g. in 2012, 2014, indicating that data quality is poor or scarce for e.g. the CECAF area). Currently, no progress has been made in improving data quality by changing the sampling design as the current situation of sampling the fisheries in CECAF and SPRMFO area is still opportunistic, as is the fishery. This implies that it’s unlikely that a well established stratified sampling will be successful. The group wishes to benefit from the work carried out in the EU project and apply the methodology to sampling the LDF fishery where feasible. No major shortfalls, other than already identified, in data quality are expected.

5.2 Developing statistical sound harmonised sampling programmes

Proposed DCMAP framework for regional sampling programmes

Given the current stand-still in the development of the new DCF, no progress has been made towards the transformation of the RCM to RCGs. In general and as indicated during various Expert Groups, the future RCGs should work more like year round process, rather than a one-off meeting a year. The idea is to have a data compilation and analysis group, followed by intersessional work preparing the grounds for agreements on tasks sharing and cooperation. These agreements can then be concluded at a dedicated meeting where the NCs (or authorized representatives) are present. This is the ideal situation, but in practice, national legal legislation may prevent authorizing persons to sign on behalf of a MS. Where relevant, agreements need to be prepared well in advance to be able to seek prior approval of the MS. RCM LDF is convinced that given the current good cooperation in the region, a workable solution will be found. Again, as this issue is addressed in the above mentioned EU proposal (MARE/2014/19), RCM LDF will discuss the outcomes of this proposal regarding this transformation and act upon new information. Given the well established cooperation between the MS present in the RCM LDF, no concerns arise at this stage.

However, consultation of the main end-users is limited at this moment, a positive development is the first response by CECAF to a request to list species CECAF requires data for. This interaction is described in section 4.2 and in Annex 8. To ensure and improve adequate data collection, this consultation needs to be improved as soon as possible. Having a clear view of end-user needs, obligations and data requirements are crucial for a successful migration to a RCG and to establish effective and useful sampling plans in the regions. This issue has been addressed at various occasions, specifying that regional workplans should be developed in line with end-user priorities while operating within the boundaries of the available budgets and human resources.

Harmonizing national sampling programmes in CECAF and SPRMFO areas

The joint sampling programmes for pelagic fisheries are already established in CECAF and SPRFMO areas can be seen as the ultimate harmonization of sampling programmes as only one sampling protocol is executed. As detailed end user specifications lack at the moment, RCM LDF does not foresee to amend the sampling protocols for 2015/2016, unless new DCF requirements come into force during these years. Currently, the demersal fisheries in CECAF area are Spanish and as such Spain covers the sampling of these fisheries nationally without having the need to harmonize the sampling at regional level. The data is forwarded to CECAF working groups.

18

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

Statistical sound sampling in progress

As described in RCM LDF 2014 report, WKPICS2 provided a draft for “best practice” guidelines with best practice for the new DCF (WKPICS, 2012). To make a start with the development of a statistical sound sampling programme for long distance fisheries the RCM validated its sampling design and implementation of sampling the fisheries in the CECAF area with these guidelines in 2013 already (RCM LDF Report 2013). At that time, one general concern and three key inefficiencies in the sampling programmes were identified. The Liaison Meeting 2013 made two recommendations regarding data quality issues and sampling design that needed to be considered in the 2014 meeting. To ensure follow-up on these issues, the 2015 RCM revisited these points and updated the responses to the current status. Identified inefficiencies, LM recommendations, progress in resolving identified inefficiencies and follow up on recommendations are reported in the table below:

Identified inefficiencies (WKPICS guide Progress/ response from RCM LDF lines)/ Liaison Meeting recommendations/ other issues

An important matter for long distance fisheries is To improve the communication with end-users that they are active outside European and subsequently collect information to use as a waters/regions. Information on fleets and vessel basis for a regional sampling plan, RCM LDF activities of non-EU countries is not available for strives to contact relevant scientific groups in the RCM (at least for the CECAF area), this CECAF and SPRFMO to request access to these complicates the development of statistical sound groups or at least establish a communication harmonised sampling programmes at a regional channel to ensure optimal communication with level outside the EU. the end-users.

The chair of the RCM LDF will contact, in cooperation with the EU representative responsible for the area, FAO and request access to the FAO Working Group on the Assessment of Small Pelagic Fish off Northwest Africa as an observer. Preferably, the first participation will already take place in July 2015, when the next WG is held in Casablanca.

For SPRFMO, the Dutch co-chair of the SPRFMO scientific committee will be contacted to bring him up to date on EU obligations, future developments and to request feedback on the data collection and requirements from SPRFMO perspective.

The sample selection procedure. Samples, trips of IMROP has been instructed to select vessels a particular vessel, are selected opportunistically, randomly. However, as the number of available based on the cooperation willingness of particular vessels is (very) limited, the options for random vessels. In accordance with a statistically sound sampling are very scarce. sampling programme trips of vessels should be selected randomly.

System to monitor performance of sampling The external contractor provides information on schemes - Quality Indicators. A system to the sampling coverage for both areas upon request. monitor refusal rates and non-response rates is lacking for all monitored fisheries. Effective sample size (or appropriate proxy such as number of vessels or trips sampled) should be calculated and recorded.

19

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

Documentation of raising/weighting procedure for Not requested in current in DCF. Documentation national estimates. To date, estimates based on is available at IMROP (Mauritania) and IEO (Spain). On the long term, activities to compare samples of the long distance sampling and synchronize these protocols should be programmes have never been used in stock investigated. assessments or management.

It is recommended that a ‘dry-run’ on the No current action, however, this issue should be progress form end-user participation to defining addressed as soon as new DCF requirements are data needs and designing a regional sampling published. scheme is carried out during the roll-over years 2014-2016. The process itself, participating meetings and end-user specification can be used as specified by STECF EWG 13-02.

20

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

6. New CFP and development of of EU-MAP

6.1 Impact of the landing obligation

In general, in the context of long distance fisheries, which operate under the governance of the RFMO-managed international waters or waters of third countries with which the EU has a Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreement (SFPA), the landing obligation or discard plans (if and when in place) will depend on the specific management measures adopted by the relevant RFMO or SFPA and will be fishing area-specific.

In relation to the evaluation of the impact of the introduction of the landing obligation and/or preparations for its implementation in the context of the Long Distance Fisheries, one of the Spanish participants presented the results concerning CECAF and SFPAs of Morocco and Mauritania of the Specific Contract No. 3 “For the provision of advice on the management of discards in EU fisheries beyond EU waters”.

This project was carried out under Framework Contract No. MARE/2012/21 “Scientific advice for fisheries beyond EU Waters”. The Consortium members involved were MRAG (UK) (Coordinator), IEO and AZTI (ES), IMARES (NL) and IPMA (PT). The purpose of this project was to provide the Commission with an overview of the existing international obligations regarding the management of discards within selected RFMOs and SFPAs beyond EU waters and to identify to what extent such international obligations are aligned or inconsistent with the EU landing obligation (Article 15 of the new Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) regulation, to be implemented by 2019.

CECAF (as a RFO) and the SFPA with Morocco and Mauritania management measures were considered for this study. The first task of the project was to provide an inventory of the EU's international obligations concerning the management of discards and of all non-binding international recommendations, resolutions or any kind of soft law measures concerning the management of discards and identify which obligations are applicable to EU vessels by EU legislation but not applicable to all fleets at international level; and second, which internationally agreed measures that are binding in the Union and that are incompatible with the discard ban provided by the new CFP Regulation.

Considering that CECAF acts exclusively as an advisory body, providing advice on fisheries management issues to its members, no obligations related to the management of discards are imposed by CECAF itself. In this context, it was also noted that the EU landing obligation is not applicable in waters subject to a third country sovereignty or jurisdiction (Article 15d), as is the case of Morocco, Mauritania and Guinea-Bissau.

Among the two West African SFPAs considered, only one measure under the current protocol of the SFPA EU-Morocco applies both to a single species with an EU-specific TAC, as well as to a fleet in which an EU métier is active. It is the case of the 0% bycatch limitation of swordfish (Xiphias gladius), established for the métier of artisanal longliners targeting Trichiuridae in the North (Fishing category No. 2 of the FPA: “Small scale fishing in the North”). Swordfish is a species subject to an ICCAT TAC in North Atlantic waters and is also listed within Council Regulation (EC) 104/2015. Therefore the EU landing obligation applies based on Article 15(1). However, the bycatch limitation under the EU-Morocco FPA does not stipulate how bycatch exceeding 0% limit must be managed and therefore there is no specific obligation to discard catches of swordfish. Thus, the conclusion was that no EU métiers are considered to be affected by a potential inconsistency between the EU landing obligation and the terms of the Morocco or Mauritania SFPA protocols.

21

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

6.2 Ranking of métier to find out whether any of the NPs need to be modified for 2015.

In order to check if the fisheries in 2014 had similar pattern as in previous years or whether there were significant changes to that pattern and to evaluate whether or not there is a need for amendments of NP for 2016 in relation to the long distance fishing activity, the group performed the ranking of métiers using effort (days at sea) and landings data for 2012-2014 for the CECAF area (see section 3.1 – “CECAF area” for details). Based on the above analysis of the most actual métier ranking at the regional level compared with the métiers selected for sampling in the NPs 2014-2016 in respect of the fishing activity in the CECAF area, the RCM LDF is concluded that there is no need for changes or amendments to the NPs for 2016 in respect of the long distance fisheries in CECAF area.

The only change to the execution of NPs in current year and 2016 relates to the NPs budgets and the need to secure funding necessary to implement the multilateral agreement on the joint sampling programme for the fishery activities in the SPRFMO area (agreed and signed by the MS concerned in 2015).

22

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

7. Surveys, studies and pilot projects

Early 2015, 2 project proposals were granted in response to the EU call for proposals on “Strengthening regional cooperation in the area of fisheries data collection” (MARE/2014/19). The 2 projects cover the Mediterranean region and the combined North Atlantic/North Sea region. The latter project was presented and briefly discussed at the RCM. The project (also known as the fishPi project) revolves around the following strategic aims:

• To propose Regional Sampling Designs • To develop and implement the use of probability based selection methods

• To propose mechanisms for international working (e.g. conversion of RCMs to RCGs)

• To develop cooperation within and between regions The ultimate added value is created by producing better estimates based on statistically credible methods, while these are based on efficient and cost effecting working procedures. From an organisational point of view, the project leadership is in the hands of the Scottish University of St Andrews. The consortium consists of 14 institutions (40 individuals) completed with 2 external statistical experts. The total budget is approximately 400k€. The duration of the project is 12 months, ending April 2016. The actual work is distributed over 4 work packages:

1.Regional cooperation (including reviewing existing coordinating activities, proposals for regional work programmes and regional/national consultations on the implementation of the case studies, stemming from Work Package 2) 2. Regional Sampling designs for commercial fisheries based on case studies:

a) Small pelagics b) North Sea mixed demersal fisheries c) North Sea flatfish d) Northern & Southern Hake These studies include regional sampling designs, estimation methods and protocols, data exchange formats and code lists and provision of standardized R-scripts. 3.Regional sampling programmes for fisheries and ecosystem impact data not currently collected (including by-catch currently undersampled within the DCF like PETS, analyse different observation methods, stomach analysis and sampling procedures, sampling of small scale fisheries and recreational fisheries). 4. Data quality at a national and regional level and output products (including development of detailed guidelines for application of quality indicators at national and regional datasets, standardized R-scripts, develop working procedures for quality control through e.g. regional databases) The group felt that the work done within this project is beneficial for sampling procedures in place for the long distance fisheries. The outcomes of the project and possible future implications will be reviewed in 2016. The Commission pre-announced a call for proposals by mid-2015 to continue the work of the 2014 call. A 1.8m€ proposal will be launched to:

a) Conduct inter-sessional work between the annual Regional Coordination Meetings or meetings of the Planning Group of Economists;

b) further develop regional and EU-wide databases and transmission process for DCF data;

23

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

c) develop and test an operational framework for establishing and coordinating statistically-sound sampling programmes at a regional or EU scale;

d) trial the collection of new variables that may be required under reformed CFP.

(http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/maritimeaffairs_fisheries/contracts_and_funding/annual_work_progra mme/2015/c_2014_9794_en.pdf, page 14).

Based on this scope, RCM LDF decided not to form a consortium to apply for this grant, but rather participate on a national basis to other consortia that are likely to be formed, building upon the experience gained in the 2014 call. The Framework Contract No. MARE/2012/21 “Scientific advice for fisheries beyond EU Waters” has been performed during 2014 and continued in 2015 through the development of a number of specific contracts. The aim of this framework contract is to constitute a provision of scientific advice and other services for the implementation of the CFP beyond EU waters. The contract has been conceived to provide the European Commission with a flexible tool to give specific and timely scientific responses through advice and/or other specific preliminary services needed for the provision of the advice, which is necessary for the day-to-day policy and management of fisheries managed under RFMOs and SFAs, in the context of the external dimension of the Common Fisheries. More detailed description of that project was provided in the RCM LDF 2014 report.

24

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

8. Any other business

8.1 Recommendations

In order to ensure that all active fisheries in the areas in the competence of the RCM LDF are covered and that updated information on the MS’ involvement in working groups of any RFMOs related to fishing activity in the waters outside the EU is available, the RCM LDF made the following recommendation:

Recommendation 2015-1 : RCM LDF Data calls RCMLDF 2015 RCM LDF recommends that from 2016 onwards, data calls related Recommendation to long distance fisheries are addressed to all non-landlocked EU MS in order to:

 ensure that all active fisheries in the areas in the competence of the RCM LDF are covered;  obtain information on MS’ participation in the working groups of any RFMOs related to fishing activity in the waters outside the EU It is expected that all National Correspondents contacted respond to the data call either with information on all fishing activity beyond the EU waters by the vessels under the flag of their MS or with confirmation of none of such activities. Follow-up actions  RCM LDF Chair to launch data call needed  All non land-locked Members States to respond Responsible persons Chair of the RCM LDF and non land-locked Members States for follow-up actions Time frame (Deadline) RCM LDF Data Calls from 2016 onwards

8.2 Time and venue of the RCM LDF meeting in 2016

In order to ease the coordination workload for experts attending more than one RCM and following the expected work schedule for 2016, the next RCM LDF will be held in June 2016, unless urgent issues call for an earlier meeting. Regarding the venue of the next RCM LDF meeting, the Lithuania invites the group to come to Klaipeda or Vilnius for its next meeting. The RCM appreciated the invitation by Lithuania to hold the meeting.

8.3 Chairmanship

While taking into account EU Regulation 665/2008 Article 4.2, RCM LDF proposes Sieto Verver (NL) as the new chair. The group thanked Irek for chairing and guiding the group for 4 consecutive years.

25

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

In order to facilitate the common memory of the group, the following table provides an overview of the venues and chairmanship of this RCM.

Year Venue Chair Hamburg, Germany 2015 Irek Wojcik (Poland) Cádiz, Spain 2014 IJmuiden, The Netherlands Irek Wojcik (Poland) 2013 Constanza, Romania Irek Wojcik (Poland) 2012 Madrid, Spain Irek Wojcik (Poland) Maria Teresa Garcia (Spain) and Dirk-Jan van der Stelt 2011 Ljubljana, Slovenia (The Netherlands) 2010 Madrid, Spain Maria Teresa Garcia (Spain) and Jaime Mejuto (Spain)

26

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

9. Glossary

AR Annual Report (of activities carried out by MS under the DCF) AWP Annual Workplan CECAF Fishery Committee for the Eastern Central Atlantic CFP Common Fishery Policy (EU) CR Control Regulations (EU) DCF Data Collection Framework (follow up of DCR) DC-MAP Multi Annual Programme for Data Collection (follow up of DCF) EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone EFMM European Fisheries and Maritime Fund EWG STECF Expert Working Group FPA Fishing Partnership Agreement GFCM General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (FAO) IATTC Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission ICCAT International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas ICES International Council for the Exploration of the Sea IOTC Indian Ocean Tuna Commission JSC Joint Scientific Committees (of the FPA) LDF Long Distance Fishery LM Liaison Meeting LP Large Pelagic species MRR Master Reference Register MS Member State(s) (of the EU) NA North Atlantic NP National Programme (of activities carried out by MS under the DCF) NS&EA North Sea and Eastern Arctic OP Operational Programme PGCCDBS Planning Group on Commercial Catches, Discards and Biological Sampling PGECON Planning Group on Economic Issues PGMed Mediterranean Planning Group for Methodological Development RCG Regional Coordination Group RCM Regional Coordination Meeting RDB Regional Data Base (of the RCM) RDB S.C. Regional Data Base Steering Committee (of the RCM) RFMO Regional Fisheries Management Organization SPRMFO South Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Organization STECF Scientific, Technical and EconomicCommittee for Fisheries WCPFC Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission WGRFS ICES Working Group on Recreational Fisheries Surveys WKPICS ICES Workshop on the Practical Implementation of Statistical Sound Catch Sampling Programmes

27

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

10. Annexes

10.1 Annex 1 – Agenda of the 1st meeting (April 2015; Hamburg, Germany)

EU DATA COLLECTION FRAMEWORK (DCF) REG. 199/2008

Regional Co-ordination Meeting for the Long Distance Fisheries (RCM LDF 2015 – 1) Hamburg, 21 – 22 April, 2015 Thünen Institute [TI]), Hamburg, Germany

Agenda (draft) General time schedule: Tuesday Wednesday 11:00 - 18:00 - meeting time 09:00 – 16:00 - meeting time 13:00 – 14:30 - Lunch 10:45 – 11:15 - Coffee break 16.00 - 16.30: Coffee break 13:00 - 14:30 - Lunch

Work Plan Tuesday, 21st April 2015 11.00 - 16.00 : Plenary session: 4. Welcome, organization & house rules, adoption of the agenda, appointment of rapporteurs 5. Folow up of the RCM LDF 2013 recommendation to implement a multilateral agreement on the basis of joint sampling program of fisheries activity in SPRMFO area o Protocol for the data collection – scope and format of data required by the SPRMFO standards (based on the SPRMFO Data Standards 2015) o Choice of the coordination agency for data collection o Cost sharing key o Conclusion of the agreement 16.30 – 18.00 : Plenary session: Point 2 continued

Wednesday, 22nd April 2015 9.00 - 10.45 : Plenary session

6. Discussion on the possibility to extent the Multilateral agreement for sampling in CECAF

11.15 – 13.00 : Plenary session Point 3 continued

14.30 – 16.00 : Plenary session:

7. Any other business 8. Adoption of the draft report

Closure of the meeting

28

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

10.2 Annex 2 – Agenda of the 2nd meeting (June 2015; Cadiz, Spain)

EU DATA COLLECTION FRAMEWORK (DCF) REG. 199/2008

Regional Co-ordination Meeting for the Long Distance Fisheries (RCM LDF 2015 – 2) Cádiz, 9–12 June, 2015

Instituto Español de Oceanografía (IEO), Centro Oceanográfico de Cádiz Puerto Pesquero. Muelle de Levante, Cádiz, Spain

Agenda General time schedule: Tuesday – Thursday Friday 9:00 - 18:00 - meeting time 09:00 – 14:00 - meeting time 11:00 – 11:30 - Coffee break 11:00 – 11:30 - Coffee break 13:00 - 14:30 - Lunch 16:00 – 16:30 - Coffee break

Work Plan Tuesday, 9th June 2015 9.00 - 10.45 : Plenary session 9. Welcome, introduction of the participants, organization & house rules

10. Discussion on the proposed ToRs, adoption of the agenda and appointment of rapporteurs

 ToR 1 Review progress since 2014 following up the 11th LiaisonMeeting report o Follow-up of recommendations o Review of the outputs of RCM 2014 o Review of the outputs of the 11th Liaison Meeting

 ToR 2 Review feedback and recommendations from data end users

11.15 – 13.00 : Plenary session

 ToR 2 continued  ToR 3 Analyse data from 2015 RCM LDF data call o Update the catch statistics (based on data tables provided by MS)

14.30 – 18.00 : Plenary sessions:

 ToR 3 continued

Wednesday, 10th June 2015 9.00 – 18.00 : Plenary session (the whole day)

 ToR 4 Regional data collection, analysis and storage and the evolution towards RCGs

29

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

o Consider the progress of the “strengthening regional cooperation in data collection” mare/2014/19, and possible implications; o Review progress in data quality screening, harmonisation of national and regional data checking procedures. o Consider the data collection protocols for at-sea and on-shore sampling in the context of regional sampling designs and probability selection methods. o Identify any amendments to NP needed in 2016. Consider future funding mechanisms to continue strengthening regional cooperation

Thursday, 11th June 2015

9.00 - 10.45 : Plenary session

 ToR 5 Landing Obligation o Evaluate the impact of the introduction of the landing obligation, and/or preparations for its implementation, in the context of the Long Distance Fisheries 11.15 – 13.00 : Plenary session

 ToR 6 National Administrations o Address any issues relating specifically to national administrations and consider the role of NC within the RCM/RCG context. o Task sharing and task trading mechanisms that might operate within the context of a regional sampling designs

14.30 – 16.00 : Plenary session:

 ToR 6 continued

16.30 – 18.00 : Plenary session:

 Draft recommendations – discussion  Adoption of the recommendations  Report assemblage and reading

Friday, 12th June 2015

9.00 - 10.45 : Plenary session

 Report assemblage and reading – continued  ToR 8 Any other business o place and date of the next RCM/RCG LDF o election of the new chair  Adoption of the draft report

Closure of the meeting

30

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

10.3 Annex 3 - Minutes with the outcomes of the 1st RCM LDF meeting (April 21-22, 2015, Hamburg, Germany)

Minutes of the Ad hoc Regional Coordination Meeting for the Long Distance Fisheries (RCM LDF 2015-1)

Hamburg, 21-22 April 2015

1 Introduction

The meeting of RCM LDF 2015-1 was initiated during the EU National Correspondents meeting of March 25, 2015 in order to provide the follow-up of the outstanding RCM LDF 2013 recommendation to implement a multilateral agreement on the basis of joint sampling of the fishery activities in the SPRFMO area. As the main RCM LDF meeting is due in June, while the fisheries in the SPRMFO area by the EU vessels already commences late April, the main meeting will not meet in time to ensure coordination of adequate biological sampling during the 2015 fishing season. The Member States involved thus agreed to meet on an ad hoc basis to address the recommendation in question. While addressing the SPRFMO recommendation, the meeting also provides the platform to discuss the extension of the already established multi-lateral agreement for the CECAF region as this agreement is due to terminate by the end of 2015.

The following participants attended the meeting:

 Christoph Stransky (Germany)  Ireneusz Wójcik (Poland, chair)  Kay Panten (Germany)  Maksims Kovsars (Latvia, part-time)  Sieto Verver (The Netherlands)  Vilda Griunienė (Lithuania)

The participants appreciated the offer by Germany to host the meeting.

2 Agreements for the SPRFMO region

Rationale

Based on the current DCF regulation, all MS fishing in the SPRFMO area for Chilean Jack Mackerel hold the obligation to sample at least 10% of the fishing activities in the area8. The fisheries conducted by Germany, Lithuania, The Netherlands and Poland in SPRMFO area are all similar, involving pelagic vessels targeting jack mackerel. Given the experiences with the successful implementation of a multi-lateral agreement in the CECAF area, the MS involved expressed their wish to set up a similar multi-lateral agreement for the SPRFMO area to ensure labour and cost-efficient sampling in the region.

The following paragraphs present the main outcomes of the discussions at the meeting and the subsequent conclusions. The outcomes of the discussions during the meeting are reflected in the actual multi-lateral agreement.

Choice of the coordination agency for data collection

The Netherlands offered to coordinate the biological data collection in SPRFMO area through a multi- lateral agreement for all MS involved for the years 2015 & 2016. The actual work will be done by a subcontractor (Corten Marine Research, CMR), hired by The Netherlands.

Conclusion: Germany, Lithuania, The Netherlands and Poland agreed that The Netherlands will act as the coordinating agency for the multi-lateral agreement. The Netherlands will organize the sampling on behalf of its partners as described in the multi-lateral agreement between Germany, Lithuania, The Netherlands and Poland.

8 CMM 3.01; Conservation and Management Measure for Trachurus murphyi (SPRFMO-COMM-03 (2015) ANNEX H)

31

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

Cost sharing key

The group discussed various options for a cost sharing key. The two most obvious cost sharing keys relate to either the TAC share for each MS or the average landings over a certain period of time. The latter construction was not considered appropriate for this region as the fishery has an opportunistic character and the united fleet owners distribute the quota and effort over the vessels (and flag states) available for the fisheries. Hence, landings are not a “true” MS figure, but based more on opportunistic behaviour of the industry.

In order to achieve maximum stability for cost sharing, the group agreed to follow the relative TAC distribution as determined by the EU Regulation on Fishing Opportunities 2015 (regulation 2015/523)9.

Conclusion: Following the relative TAC shares as described in the EU Regulation on Fishing Opportunities 2015 (regulation 2015/523), Germany, Lithuania, The Netherlands and Poland agree on the following cost sharing key for the subcontracting costs of the biological sampling in the SPRMFO area. This key applies to 2015 and 2016.

Member State Share in costs (%)

Germany 25.15

Lithuania 17.50

The Netherlands 27.26

Poland 30.09

Sampling coverage and costs

The group discussed the sampling coverage of the fisheries in terms of appropriate and sufficient coverage of the fishing season. Two options were discussed: adhere to the minimum of 10% coverage of the fishing effort in the region (SPRFMO requirements) or strive to cover the entire fishing season thus ensuring both sufficient coverage as well as addressing the recommendation by the autumn 2014 meeting of the SPRFMO Scientific Committee to ensure adequate coverage throughout a fishing season. The latter option also addresses the intention of the European Commission to adhere to end-user recommendations.

For both options, either 10% coverage or “full” coverage, CMR provided the group with budget forecasts. The first option would costs € 59.845,= (ex VAT), the second option € 81.705,= (ex VAT). Should the fishery increase during 2015 or 2016 and the chosen option proves to be insufficient, an ad hoc solution to expand the sampling coverage will be sought between the partners.

Conclusion: Following the intentions of the European Commission to adhere to end-user requirements and recommendations, Germany, Lithuania, The Netherlands and Poland agree to ensure full coverage of the fishing season. This implies a maximum 5 trips of 6 weeks during the entire season.

Tendering

The group discussed the need for tendering procedures. Given the current, already well established framework for data collection in the region by CMR as well as proven reliability, accuracy and

9 Council Regulation (EU) 2015/523 of 25 March 2015 amending Regulations (EU) No 43/2014 and (EU) 2015/104 as regards certain fishing opportunities

32

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

scientific achievements, CMR currently is the obvious candidate for this assignment. Hence, the group considered tendering for this assignment is not appropriate.

Protocol for the data collection in SPRFMO area

The group discussed the manual for data collection in SPRFMO area as provided to the group by CMR10. Comparisons were made between the SPRFMO Data Standards11 and the manual. The following observations were made:

The CMR observer manual provides for collection of all information required by SPRFMO, except the following:

There are no forms found in the observer manual collecting information required in the SPRFMO Data Standards, Annex 7 Part B Paragraph q “Record any bycatch mitigation measures employed”.

 Record any bycatch mitigation measures employed:

 Were bird scaring (tori) lines in use? (nil/equipment code - as described in Section L)

 Were bird bafflers in use? (nil/equipment code - as described in Section N)

 Describe the offal/discard discharge management in place (select all that apply: no discharge during shooting and hauling/ only liquid discharge/waste batching ≥ 2 hours/other/none).

 Were any other measures used to reduce the bycatch of marine mammals, seabirds, septiles or species of concern? (Yes/No)

The observer manual also does not include forms for Annex 7 Part G Paragraph 2 and 3 of the SPRFMO Data Standards:

 Record sex of each individual for taxa where this is feasible from external observation, e.g. pinnipeds, small cetaceans or Elasmobranchii species of concern.

 Were there any circumstances or actions that may have contributed to the bycatch event? (e.g. tori line tangle, high levels of bait loss)

Conclusion: The Netherlands will notify CMR and will request to collect the required data and include the required forms in the manual if appropriate. Should the additions be considered not relevant to these fisheries, partners might agree to accept the exception to collect the data. In addition, CMR will be asked to specify in the manual that the data collection protocol is based on SPRMFO requirements, including reference to the relevant SPRFMO document (CMM 3.02)

Multi-lateral agreement

Following the conclusions as described above, Germany, Lithuania, The Netherlands and Poland settled a multi-lateral agreement for biological sampling in the SPRFMO area. The agreement was signed by Germany, The Netherlands and Poland at the meeting. Lithuania will sign the agreement later, due to national legal arrangements, and will distribute the signed agreements to the Partners.

Based on this agreement The Netherlands will subcontract CMR.

10 Observer manual for PFA vessels in the Pacific, version 5 11 CMM 3.02, Conservation and Management Measure on Standards for the Collection, Reporting, Verification and Exchange of Data (SPRFMO-COMM-03 (2015) ANNEX K)

33

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

3 Agreement for the CECAF region

Amendment to the agreement

The current multi-lateral agreement (signed in 2011) for biological sampling in the CECAF region terminates on December 31, 2015. The original agreement has been amended a few times to reflect changes in the financing structure and to extent the end-date. The last amendment dates from December 2014 determining the end-date of the agreement on December 31, 2015. In December 2014, the subcontractor involved, CMR, indicated that they would not be able to extent the services into 2016. This statement was withdrawn in April 2015, thus allowing to extent the agreement for 2016.

Given the experiences with the successful implementation of a multi-lateral agreement in the CECAF area over the last years, the MS involved expressed their wish to amend the current agreement again to allow for the extension.

Conclusion: The current agreement for biological sampling in the CECAF area will be extended to December 31, 2016.

Costs and cost sharing key

CMR provided the group with a budget forecast for 2016, resulting in a slight increase (Appx 3000Euro) of the maximum total costs as compared to currently agreed budget. Having reviewed the budget forecast, the group agrees with the amended budget.

Currently, the total costs are shared over the partners following the average distribution of the landings over the reference period 2008-2012. The group explored the impact of shifting the reference period to 2010-2014 as well as using the entire period of 2008-2014 as a reference period. Both options didn’t result in any significant shift in the relative contribution of the partners, hence the already established cost sharing key was considered to be appropriate and could be continued.

Conclusion: The total maximum costs for biological sampling in the CECAF area for 2016 amounts to €67.700. The cost sharing key will not be modified for 2016.

Final conclusion

Following the conclusions described above, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, The Netherlands and Poland settled the amendment to the multi-lateral agreement for biological sampling in the CECAF area. The amendment was signed at the meeting by Germany, The Netherlands and Poland. Due to national legal arrangements, Lithuania and Latvia will sign the amendment later and will distribute the signed agreements to the Partners.

Based on this conclusion The Netherlands will amend the subcontract with CMR.

4 Any other business

Considerations for future sampling

Through the current setup of multi-lateral agreements, biological sampling in both CECAF and SPRFMO area is secured for 2015 and 2016. The group briefly addressed the follow-up of this work after 2016. The current setup through an expert sub-contractor, focussing on these two areas alone, proves to be very efficient. CMR however stressed that 2016 will be the last year of service as the owner will retire by 2017. Various options to follow-up are possible, ranging from new subcontractors (if any at all) to individual MS actions to cater for national obligations. Given the current experiences with the multi-lateral agreement, the group felt that continuation of this setup in some form would be preferred.

One option that could be explored would be that one MS acts as coordinating body, while having an overview of experienced and available observers across the partners.

This issue needs further exploration at the upcoming RCM LDF.

34

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

10.4 Annex 4 – Amendments to the joint sampling program for small pelagics fishery in the CECAF area

The following two amendments to the agreement extending the joint sampling program for small pelagics fishery in the CECAF was signed by all MS involved in 2014 and 2015.

AMENDMENT TO:

Multi-lateral agreement between Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, The Netherlands and Poland for biological data collection of pelagic fisheries in CECAF waters

This Amendment replaces the initial amendment dated December 2013, to reflect the impact of the introduction of the EMFF in the co-financing options. The amendment is retrospectively accepted as per 1st January 2014.

The Multi-lateral agreement between Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, The Netherlands and Poland for biological data collection of pelagic fisheries in CECAF waters, as signed by all countries named in June 2011 (See annex) is amended as follows from 1st January 2014 onwards:

Term:

The multi-lateral agreement is extended beyond its initial end date of 31 December 2013. The new end date is 31 December 2015.

Costs:

The cost share for each country of the total costs follows a key based on the share in average landings in 2008-2012. Due to the move from direct to in-direct co-funding through national EMFF budgets, co-funding of the National expenses shall be covered through the National EMFF budget of each respective member. As of 2014, co-funding is no longer executed through the Dutch National Budget as it was in previous years.

Cost shares are maximum amounts, in case of lower costs, deductions might apply in line with the relative shares.

Total Landings 2008-2012 (RCM LDF Data) and cost shares by partners

average Landings Cost share per Partner 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2008- share 2012 year

Netherlands 83,630 68,019 92,980 55,044 34,926 66,920 22.95% € 14,864 Germany 0 0 20,650 37,088 14,582 14,464 4.96% € 3,212 Poland 17,709 46,287 14,605 60,177 29,178 33,591 11.52% € 7,462 Lithuania 120,100 124,480 116,040 121,000 44,133 105,151 36.06% € 23,356 Latvia 68,410 81,283 87,237 89,667 30,723 71,464 24.51% € 15,874

TOTAL 289,849 320,069 331,512 362,976 153,542 291,590 100.00% € 64,768

35

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

AMENDMENT TO:

Multi-lateral agreement between Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, The Netherlands and Poland for biological data collection of pelagic fisheries in CECAF waters

April 2015

This Amendment adapts the Amendment dated December 2014 to extend the effective time-frame for this multi-lateral agreement and to reflect budget modifications for 2016. This amendment commences 1st of January 2016.

The Multi-lateral agreement between Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, The Netherlands and Poland for biological data collection of pelagic fisheries in CECAF waters, as signed by all Member States concerned in June 2011, and amended in December 2014, is amended as follows from 1st January 2016 onwards:

Term:

The multi-lateral agreement is extended until 31 December 2016.

Costs:

The cost share of the total costs for 2016 for each Member State follows a key based on the share in average landings in 2008-2012, as previously agreed. Following EMFF co-funding rules, co-funding of the national expenses shall be covered through the National EMFF budget of each respective Member State.

Cost shares are maximum amounts, in case of lower costs, deductions might apply in line with the relative shares.

Total Landings 2008-2012 (RCM LDF Data) and cost shares by partners

average Landings Cost share per Partner 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2008- share 2012 year € 3,358 Germany 0 0 20,650 37,088 14,582 14,464 4.96% € 16,593 Latvia 68,410 81,283 87,237 89,667 30,723 71,464 24.51% € 24,413 Lithuania 120,100 124,480 116,040 121,000 44,133 105,151 36.06% € 15,537 Netherlands 83,630 68,019 92,980 55,044 34,926 66,920 22.95% € 7,799 Poland 17,709 46,287 14,605 60,177 29,178 33,591 11.52% € 67,700 TOTAL 289,849 320,069 331,512 362,976 153,542 291,590 100.00%

36

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

10.5 Annex 5 – Multilateral Agreement on joint sampling programme of the fishery activities in the SPRFMO

Multi-lateral agreement between the responsible institutions of Germany, Lithuania, The Netherlands and Poland for biological data collection of pelagic fisheries in SPRFMO waters Germany, Lithuania, The Netherlands and Poland agree to co-operate in the biological data collection of pelagic fisheries in SPRMFO waters in 2015 and 2016. This agreement is in accordance with EC Regulation 665/2008, laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation 199/2008. Having regard the above mentioned Regulation, the project proposal including budget forecast “Biological Data Collection of pelagic fisheries in SPRFMO waters in compliance with the DCF” (Annex 1) as well as the “Observer Manual for biological data collection in SPRFMO waters” (Annex 2), discussed at the Ad Hoc Regional Coordination Meeting for Long Distance Fisheries in Hamburg, April 21st , 2015, the following details apply to this agreement: Partners The following Member States are considered as partner within this agreement:

Member State Institute Contact person Germany Thünen Institute (TI) Christoph Stransky (National Correspondent) Lithuania Fisheries Service under the Ministry of Agriculture Indre Sidlauskiene of the Republic of Lithuania (Director)

The Netherlands Centre for Fisheries Research (CVO) Sieto Verver (Head CVO) Poland National Marine Fisheries Research Institute Ireneusz Wójcik (NMFRI) (Head of Department, DCF Coordinator)

Coordination The Netherlands coordinates the execution of this multi-lateral agreement. The Netherlands will contract independent contractor ‘Corten Marine Research’ (CMR) to carry out the actual work.

Sampling protocol Biological sampling is carried out on board EU fishing vessels in SPRFMO area by CMR observers. These observers are instructed by CMR and follow the sampling protocol as described in “Observer Manual for biological data collection in SPRFMO waters”, based on data collection requirements set out in “CMM 3.02, Conservation and Management Measure on Standards for the Collection, Reporting, Verification and Exchange of Data (SPRFMO-COMM-03 (2015) ANNEX K)”.

Data responsibility CMR is responsible for data collection, quality control and delivery to the SPRFMO scientific working group of all data collected under this agreement. CMR also reports all data to CVO and CVO will distribute the data to Partners upon request.

Costs The total costs for the sampling programme is estimated at the amount of € 81,705,= ex VAT per year. This sampling programme is eligible for co-funding under the national EMFF budget of the respective partners. The total costs are shared by the partners following the relative shares in fishing opportunities in the SPRMFO area as set in the Council Regulation (EU) 2015/523 of 25 March 2015 amending Regulations (EU) No 43/2014 and (EU) 2015/104 as regards certain fishing opportunities. Cost shares are maximum amounts, in case of lower costs, deductions might apply in line with the relative shares. The yearly costs by partner are shown in the following table:

37

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

Partner Share (%) Contribution Germany 25.15 € 20.548 Lithuania 17.50 € 14.300 The Netherlands 27.26 € 22.273 Poland 30.09 € 24.584 Total contribution € 81.705

The Netherlands sends each Partner an invoice per year, to which standard financial conditions apply.

Access to vessels On top of Council Regulation 199/2008 (Section 2, Article 11), each Partner ensures access to its fleet for the observers under this agreement. Denied access to vessels does not exempt a Partner from legal or financial obligations.

Term This agreement commences retrospectively on January 1, 2015. With exception of financial obligations, this agreement ends on December 31, 2016. This agreement, with exception of financial obligations, is subject to dissolve prior to this date in case the pelagic fishery in the SPRMFO area by EU vessels closes.

Signatures Member State Name Function Signature Thünen Institute Christoph Stransky National Correspondent (TI) Germany Date: 21 April 2015 Fisheries Service Indre Sidlauskiene Director under the Ministry of Agriculture of the Republic of Lithuania (FS) Date: ______Lithuania Centre for Sieto Verver Head Centre for Fisheries Fisheries Research Research The Netherlands Date: 21 April 2015 National Marine Ireneusz Wójcik Head of Department Fisheries (NMFRI), DCF Research Coordinator Institute (NMFRI) Poland Date: 21 April 2015

Annex 1: “Biological Data Collection of pelagic fisheries in SPRFMO waters in compliance with the DCF”.

Annex 2: “Observer Manual for biological data collection in SPRFMO waters”.

38

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

10.6 Annex 6 – Landings by species reported by MS

Landings by species (tons) in area “From Morocco to Guinea Bissau”. Data from 2014(*) Species DE ES LT LV NL PL Alectis alexandrinus (ALA) Alfonsinos nei (ALF) 8 Aphanopus carbo (BSF) Aristeus varidens (ARV) Arius heudelotii (SMC) Boops boops (BOG) Brachydeuterus auritus (GRB) Brama australis (BRU) 55 Brama brama (POA) 4 1 9 4 Campogramma glaycos (VAD) 11 Caranx rhonchus (HMY) Caranx spp. (TRE) Centrolophidae (CEN) Centrophorus squamosus (GUQ) Chaceon maritae (CGE) Chloroscombrus chrysurus (BUA) Dentex dentex (DEX) 12 1 39 Diplodus spp. (SRG) 7 Emmelichthyidae (EMT) Engraulis encrasicolus (ANE) Epigonus telescopu (EPI) Euthynnus alletteratus (LTA) 13 Farfantepenaeus notialis (SOP) 226 Galeichthys feliceps (GAT) Haemulidae (Pomadasyidae) (GRX) Hemicaranx bicolor (HXB) Katsuwonus pelamis (SKJ) 1 Lichia amia (LEE) 1 5 Loligo vulgaris (SQR) Mene maculata (MOO) merluccius (HKE) 1 76 258 Merluccius spp (HKX) 4219 Mugil cephalus (MUF) 1 Mugilidae (MUL) 1 Muraena helena (MMH) Osteichthyes (MZZ) 2557 7 Pagellus spp. (PAX) 10 Pagrus pagrus (RPG) Parapeneus longirostris (DPS) 813 Parapristipoma octolineatum (GRA)

39

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

Patella spp. (LPZ) Phycis phycis (FOR) Plectorhinchus mediterraneus (GBR) 15 Pomadasys incisus (BGR) Pomatomus saltatrix (BLU) Pontinus kuhlii (POI) Ruvettus pretiosus (OIL) Sarda sarda (BON) 6 1 30 48 Sardina pilchardus (PIL) 3993 4 12 985 43800 332 Sardinella aurita (SAA) 886 23 17627 2663 Sardinella maderensis (SAE) 56 9127 1163 Sardinella spp. (SIX) 2 Scomber japonicus colias (MAS) 2645 19 15050 1104 Scomber scombrus (MAC) 1825 Scomberomorus cavalla (KGM) Scomberomorus tritor (MAW) Scombroidei (TUX) 4 Selene dorsalis (LUK) Sparidae (SBX) 1 1 Sphyraena spp (BAR) Spondylosoma cantharus (BRB) 8 Thunnus alalunga (ALB) Thunnus albacares (YFT) Thunnus obesus (BET) Trachinotus ovatus (POP) 1 Trachurus picturatus (JAA) Trachurus spp (JAX) 681 29728 485 Trachurus trachurus (HOM) 1 270 14325 Trachurus trecae (HMZ) 45 Trichiuridae (CUT) 177 1 119 Trichiurus lepturus (LHT) 25 400 Unknown 9 1012 Xiphias gladius (SWO) Zeidae (ZEX)

(*) – UK data for 2014 have been delivered but not listed because some errors still need to be adjusted by the Member State. PT and IT data for 2014 not available at the time of the meeting

40

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

Landings by species (tons) in Canary. Data from 2014

Species CANARY (ES) Alectis alexandrines (ALA) Aphanopus carbo (BSF) Aristeus varidens (ARV) Arius heudelotii (SMC) Auxis thazard, A. rochei (FRZ) 8 Auxis thazard (FRZ) Balistidae (TRI) 24 Beryx spp (ALF) 47 Bodianus scrofa (IVD) 6 Boops boops (BOG) 28 Brachydeuterus auritus (GRB) Brama australis (BRU) Brama brama (POA) Campogramma glaycos (VAD) Caranx ronchus (HMY) Caranx spp. (TRE) Centrolophidae (CEN) Centrophorus squamosus (GUQ) Chaceon maritae (CGE) Chelon labrosus (MLR) 2 Chloroscombrus chrysurus (BUA) Chromis limbata (HZL) 2 Conger conger (COE) 20 Dentex dentex (DEX) Dentex spp (DEX) 100 Dicentrarchus labrax (BSS) 2 Diplodus spp (SRG) 40 Emmelichthyidae (EMT) Engraulis encrasicolus (ANE) 34 Epigonus telescopes (EPI) Epinephelus marginatus 28 Euthynnus alletteratus (LTA) Farfantepenaeus notialis (SOP) Galeichthys feliceps (GAT) Haemulidae (Pomadasyidae) (GRX) Helicolenus dactylopterus (BRF) 3 Hemicaranx bicolour (HXB) Katsuwonus pelamis (SKJ) 2 Lepidopus caudatus (SFS) Lichia amia (LEE) Lithognathus mormyrus (SSB) Loligo vulgaris (SQR) 4 Mene maculata (MOO) (HKE) 12 Merluccius spp (HKX) Mora moro (RIB) Mugil cephalus (MUF) 4 Mugilidae (MUL) Mullus surmuletus (MUR) 20 Muraenae helena (MMH) Muraenidae (MUI) 71 Mycteroperca fusca (MKF) 12

41

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

Oblada melanura (SBS) 4 Octopus vulgaris (OCC) 23 Osteichthyes (MZZ) Others 6

Pagellus spp (PAX) 44

Pagrus pagrus (RPG)

Pagrus spp (SBP) 82

Pandalidae (PDZ) Parapeneus longirostris (DPS) Parapristipoma octolineatum (GRA) 9 Patella spp. (LPZ) Percoidei Phycis phycis (FOR) 13 Plectorhinchus macrolepis (GBL) Plectorhinchus mediterraneus (GBR) Plesionika edwarsii (LKW) 8 Plesionika narval (PVJ) 49 Polymixia nobilis (PXV) Polyprion americanus (WRF) 5 Pomadasys incisus (BGR) 2 Pomadasys perotaei (PKE) Pomatomus saltatrix (BLU) 5 Promethichthys prometheus (PRP) 5 Pseudocaranx dentex (TRZ) 39 Ruvettus pretiosus (OIL) 4 Sarda sarda (BON) 6 Sardina pilchardus (PIL) 258 Sardinella aurita (SAA) 381 Sardinela maderensis (SAE) 100 Sardinella spp. (SIX) Sarpa salpa (SLM) 55 Scomber colias (MAS) 696 Scomber scombrus (MAC) Scorpaena scrofa (RSE) 6 Sepia officinialis Sepia spp. (IAX) Seriola spp. (AMX) 52 Serranus spp 40 Sparisoma cretense (PRR) 179 Sphyraena spp (BAR) 6 Spondyliosoma cantharus (BRB) 24 Stephanolepis hispidus (FIK) 17 Sthenoteuthis pteropus (OFE) 2 Thunnini (TUN) Trachinotus ovatus (POP) 3 Trachurus picturatus (JAA) Trachurus spp (JAX) 431 Trachurus trachurus (HOM) Trichiuridae (CUT) Trichiurus lepturus (LHT) Umbrina canariensis (UCA) 2

42

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

10.7 Annex 7 – Canary Islands- New métier sampled in the DCF: MIS_DES_0_0_0

Canary Islands- New métier sampled in the DCF: MIS_DES_0_0_0

In 2014 a new métier, named MIS_DES_0_0_0, for the artisanal fleet fishing demersal species in the Canary Islands (FAO Division 34.1.2) was approved by the Commission to be included in the Spanish National Programme (from 2015 onwards). The main reasons for the inclusion of this métier were (i) the increasing interest in the knowledge of artisanal fisheries for monitoring and possible application of management measures, and (ii) the contribution to the Marine Strategy Framework in the Canary Archipelago. A description template of this métier is included in below.

For the period 2011 to 2013 the estimated economic value for demersal fish and crustaceans in Canaries assumes an average annual value of 4.8 million Euros, of which 26.4% corresponds to Tenerife Island (source: Government of the Canary Islands).

This artisanal activity is carried out by a polyvalent and multi-species fleet using traps (fish and shrimp pound nets; moray pots), hooks (hand lines and demersal longlines), and nets (lift and trammel nets). The fleet performs diurnal fishing trips of less than one day, and uses several fishing gears to capture demersal species, some of them caught with different gears during the same fishing trip. The current regulation of this activity establishes a specific fishing license named “artes menores” (small gears) for this fishery, and management measures such as marine protected areas, selectivity devices, spatiotemporal closures for the use of specific trammel nets, maximum number of traps per boat, minimum depth of traps, etc.

In the period 2011-2013, landings occurred in 29 fishing ports, being Tenerife the island with the largest number of boats (30%) and higher effort (27%) of the fishery in the Canary Islands. For this period, a total of 558 artisanal vessels landed demersal species in the Canary Islands. Ship length is highly variable although most of them are less than 10m length. In order to select more accurately the demersal artisanal métier, absolute and proportional values in landings and fishing trips were obtained in relation to the general activity of this polyvalent artisanal fleet (often fishing pelagic resources at the same trip or seasonally). Thereby, the mean values obtained for this métier (period 2013-2014) of landings, trips and number of boats were 1.043 tons, 28.623 fishing days and 343 boats, respectively.

There is a high number of target species, but the most important (in landings or for socio- economical reasons) are parrotfishes (Sparisoma cretense), seabreams (Pagrus spp and Dentex spp), morays (Muraenidae), amberjacks (Seriola spp), alfonsinos (Beryx spp) and shrimps (Plesionika narval). There are also other species that should not be considered as by-catch due to their relevance in the fishery, i.e. other seabreams (Sparidae), groupers (Serranidae), triggerfish (Balistidae) and octopuses (period 2013-2014).

The strategy for concurrent sampling will be scheme 1 (comprehensive sampling of all species), and the planned sampling intensity is 1 fishing trip per month at sea, on board of selected boats. In 2015, concurrent samplings will be carried out off Tenerife Island by IEO staff in the Oceanographic Center of Canaries. It has been designed the strategy of ship selection and we visited all the fishermen’s associations in Tenerife (a total of 10), in order to meet and inform them about the planned sampling. We considered that these meetings are essential to get the support and collaboration of artisanal fishermen before starting the sampling at sea. Owners of more than 40 selected boats have shown interest and readiness to host our scientific observers. Once the authorities (Harbour Master’s Office - Ministry of Public Works) provide us the permission to board on these vessels, it is expected to begin the concurrent sampling at sea by mid-2015. No data are available about discards, but it is a multi-specific fishery where most of the species are commercialized and therefore discards are not considered significant.

43

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

Description template for the métier MIS_DES_0_0_0

CANARIAN DEMERSAL FISHERY RCM RCM LDF (Long Distance Fisheries) Name of métier: MIS_DES_0_0_0 Flag countries: ESP Date of update: 13-10-2014 Description of the métier Spatial distribution of Territorial waters of the Canary Islands the fishing activity of the métier Seasonal pattern of the The fleet is operative all the year fishing activity of the métier Number of vessels There are 558 vessels with different length: involved in métier by 0-<10 m: 451 LOA group (Appendix III 10-<12 m: 50 12-<25 m: 57 EC949/2008): Detailed gear types and Fish pound nets: minimum mesh opening 50.8mm. Maximum dimensions 3m x 1m. selectivity devices used Shrimp pound nets: minimum mesh opening >12mm in métier Moray pots: Minimum diameter 60cm, Minimum length 100cm Demersal Longlines: Maximum number of hooks 500. Maximum length of mother line 2000m Hand lines: allowed Trammel nets: minimum mesh opening of 400mm (external panel) and 82mm (internal panel). Maximum height of the net 2m. Maximum length of each internal panel 50m and maximum length of the net 350m Lift nets: minimum mesh opening 12mm and maximum size of the net (diameter) 3.3m

Management measures Spain: Closed area: The 3 Marine Protected Areas in El Hierro, La Palma and La Graciosa Authorised gear traps, demersal longlines, hand lines, trammel nets, lift nets. See gear details above Minimum authorised mesh size: see gear details above By-catches: no data available Minimum sizes: Sparisoma cretense: 20 cm Pagrus pagrus: 33 cm Dentex gibbosus: 35 cm Muraena augusti: not established (adviced 56 cm) Seriola spp: not established Beryx splendens: not established (adviced 37 cm) Plesionika narval: not established (adviced 1,6 cm)

Main target and by-catch Target species: species for the métier Parrot fish (Sparisoma cretense), seabreams (Pagrus spp, Dentex spp), morays (Muraenidae), amberjacks (Seriola spp), alfonsinos (Beryx spp), narval shrimp (Plesionika narval) By-catch species: no data available

Indicate level of discard of Species Level of discarding major species (mostly subset of G1 or G2 species) DISCARD DATA NOT AVAILABLE

Is significant part of the Landing country Sampling agreement (y/n) catches landed in foreign countries?

44

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

No No Sampling of the métier Indicate if this Métier is merged with other métiers No for sampling Justification for merging: Sampling scheme Type of sampling Sampling frame and Data collected The sampling scheme primary sampling unit for Retained catch. will be at sea (scheme data collection Concurrent at sea 1) One trip per month (minimum) will be sampled, as the fishing trips are of less than 1 day Observers at sea Yes Self sampling Yes Sampling landings on shore Indicate if the Métier is associated with particular sampling problems: This métier is polyvalent and includes several fishing gears (traps, gillnets, hooks, liftnets)

Additional remarks (historical and others):

45

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

10.8 Annex 8 – The lists of species indicated by FAO/CECAF as relevant for the assessments purposes

Table A.8.1 - Species indicated by CECAF to be included in the EU MAP. FAO division 34.1.1.

Species (Engl.) Species (Latin) Classification Habitat Priority Southern pink shrimp Farfantepenaeus notialis Crustacean demersal high Deepwater rose shrimp Parapenaeus longirostris Crustacean demersal high Common squid Loligo vulgaris Mollusc demersal high Common octopus Octopus vulgaris Mollusc demersal high Cuttlefish Sepia hierredda Mollusc demersal high Common cuttlefish Sepia officinalis Mollusc demersal high Cuttlefish Sepia spp. Mollusc demersal high Other hake Merluccius spp. Teleost demersal medium Tongue sole Cynoglossus spp. Teleost demersal high

Canary dentex Dentex canariensis Teleost demersal medium Congo dentex Dentex congoensis Teleost demersal medium Large-eye dentex Dentex macrophthalmus Teleost demersal high Morocco dentex Dentex maroccanus Teleost demersal medium Dentex Dentex spp. Teleost demersal high Black hake Teleost demersal high Demersal species Demersal Black hake Merluccius senegalensis Teleost demersal high Red pandora Pagellus acarne Teleost demersal high Red pandora Pagellus bellottii Teleost demersal high Blackspot seabream Pagellus bogaraveo Teleost demersal medium Pandora Pagellus spp. Teleost demersal high Bastard grunt Pomadasys incisus Teleost demersal medium Grunt Pomadasys spp. Teleost demersal high cuttlefishes Sepia spp. Mollusc demersal medium Seabream Sparus spp. Teleost demersal high Seabream Sparidae Teleost demersal high

Anchovy Engraulis encrasicolus Teleost pelagic high Sardine Sardina pilchardus Teleost pelagic high Round sardinella Sardinella aurita Teleost pelagic high Short-body sardinella Sardinella maderensis Teleost pelagic high Chub mackerel Scomber japonicus Teleost pelagic high Other Mackerel Scomber spp. Teleost pelagic high Atlantic horse mackerel Trachurus trachurus Teleost pelagic high Small pelagic species pelagic Small Trachurus trecae Teleost pelagic high

46

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

Table A.8.2.- Species indicated by CECAF to be included in the EU MAP. FAO division 34.1.3.

Species (Engl.) Species (Latin) Classification Habitat Priority Southern pink shrimp Farfantepenaeus notialis Crustacean demersal high Deepwater rose shrimp Parapenaeus longirostris Crustacean demersal high Common squid Loligo vulgaris Mollusc demersal high Common octopus Octopus vulgaris Mollusc demersal high Cuttlefish Sepia hierredda Mollusc demersal high Common cuttlefish Sepia officinalis Mollusc demersal high Cuttlefish Sepia spp. Mollusc demersal high Other hake Merluccius spp. Teleost demersal medium Grunt Brachydeuterus spp. Teleost demersal high Tongue sole Cynoglossus spp. Teleost demersal high

Canary dentex Dentex canariensis Teleost demersal medium Congo dentex Dentex congoensis Teleost demersal medium Large-eye dentex Dentex macrophthalmus Teleost demersal high Morocco dentex Dentex maroccanus Teleost demersal medium Dentex Dentex spp. Teleost demersal high White grouper Epinephelus aeneus Teleost demersal high Demersal species Demersal Lesser African threadfin Galeoides decadactylus Teleost demersal high Black hake Merluccius polli Teleost demersal high Black hake Merluccius senegalensis Teleost demersal high Red pandora Pagellus bellottii Teleost demersal high Pandora Pagellus spp. Teleost demersal high Blue spotted seabream Pagrus caeruleostictus Teleost demersal high Bastard grunt Pomadasys incisus Teleost demersal medium Grunt Pomadasys spp. Teleost demersal high West African croakers Pseudotolithus spp. Teleost demersal high cuttlefishes Sepia spp. Mollusc demersal medium Seabream Sparidae Teleost demersal high

Anchovy Engraulis encrasicolus Teleost pelagic high Sardine Sardina pilchardus Teleost pelagic high Round sardinella Sardinella aurita Teleost pelagic high Short-body sardinella Sardinella maderensis Teleost pelagic high Chub mackerel Scomber japonicus Teleost pelagic high Other Mackerel Scomber spp. Teleost pelagic high Atlantic horse mackerel Trachurus trachurus Teleost pelagic high Small pelagic species pelagic Small Cunene horse mackerel Trachurus trecae Teleost pelagic high

47

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

Table A.8.3 - Species indicated by CECAF to be included in the EU MAP. FAO division 34.3.1.

Species (Engl.) Species (Latin) Classification Habitat Priority Southern pink shrimp Farfantepenaeus notialis Crustacean demersal high Deepwater rose shrimp Parapenaeus longirostris Crustacean demersal high Common squid Loligo vulgaris Mollusc demersal high Common octopus Octopus vulgaris Mollusc demersal high Cuttlefish Sepia hierredda Mollusc demersal high Common cuttlefish Sepia officinalis Mollusc demersal high Cuttlefish Sepia spp. Mollusc demersal high Other hake Merluccius spp. Teleost demersal medium Grunt Brachydeuterus spp. Teleost demersal high Tongue sole Cynoglossus spp. Teleost demersal high

Canary dentex Dentex canariensis Teleost demersal medium Congo dentex Dentex congoensis Teleost demersal medium Large-eye dentex Dentex macrophthalmus Teleost demersal high Morocco dentex Dentex maroccanus Teleost demersal medium Dentex Dentex spp. Teleost demersal high White grouper Epinephelus aeneus Teleost demersal high Demersal species Demersal Lesser African threadfin Galeoides decadactylus Teleost demersal high Black hake Merluccius polli Teleost demersal high Black hake Merluccius senegalensis Teleost demersal high Red pandora Pagellus bellottii Teleost demersal high Pandora Pagellus spp. Teleost demersal high Blue spotted seabream Pagrus caeruleostictus Teleost demersal high Bastard grunt Pomadasys incisus Teleost demersal medium Grunt Pomadasys spp. Teleost demersal high West African croakers Pseudotolithus spp. Teleost demersal high Cuttlefishes Sepia spp. Mollusc demersal medium Seabream Sparidae Teleost demersal high Anchovy Engraulis encrasicolus Teleost pelagic high

Round sardinella Sardinella aurita Teleost pelagic high Short-body sardinella Sardinella maderensis Teleost pelagic high Chub mackerel Scomber japonicus Teleost pelagic high Other Mackerel Scomber spp. Teleost pelagic high Atlantic horse mackerel Trachurus trachurus Teleost pelagic high Cunene horse mackerel Trachurus trecae Teleost pelagic high Bonga shad Ethmalosa fimbriata Teleost pelagic high Small pelagic species pelagic Small Jack Caranx spp. Teleost pelagic high Scad Decapterus spp. Teleost pelagic high

48

RCM LDF 2015 Report - Final

Table A.8.4 - Species indicated by CECAF to be included in the EU MAP. FAO division 34.3.3-6.

Species (Engl.) Species (Latin) Classification Habitat Priority Southern pink shrimp Farfantepenaeus notialis Crustacean demersal high Deepwater rose shrimp Parapenaeus longirostris Crustacean demersal high Common squid Loligo vulgaris Mollusc demersal high Common octopus Octopus vulgaris Mollusc demersal high Cuttlefish Sepia hierredda Mollusc demersal high Common cuttlefish Sepia officinalis Mollusc demersal high Cuttlefish Sepia spp. Mollusc demersal high Other hake Merluccius spp. Teleost demersal medium Grunt Brachydeuterus spp. Teleost demersal high Tongue sole Cynoglossus spp. Teleost demersal high Canary dentex Dentex canariensis Teleost demersal medium Congo dentex Dentex congoensis Teleost demersal medium Large-eye dentex Dentex macrophthalmus Teleost demersal high Morocco dentex Dentex maroccanus Teleost demersal medium Dentex Dentex spp. Teleost demersal high White grouper Epinephelus aeneus Teleost demersal high

Demersal species Demersal Lesser African threadfin Galeoides decadactylus Teleost demersal high Black hake Merluccius polli Teleost demersal high Black hake Merluccius senegalensis Teleost demersal high Red pandora Pagellus bellottii Teleost demersal high Pandora Pagellus spp. Teleost demersal high Blue spotted seabream Pagrus caeruleostictus Teleost demersal high Bastard grunt Pomadasys incisus Teleost demersal medium Grunt Pomadasys spp. Teleost demersal high West African croakers Pseudotolithus spp. Teleost demersal high cuttlefishes Sepia spp. Mollusc demersal medium Seabream Sparidae Teleost demersal high Canary drum Umbrina canariensis Teleost demersal medium Anchovy Engraulis encrasicolus Teleost pelagic high

Round sardinella Sardinella aurita Teleost pelagic high Short-body sardinella Sardinella maderensis Teleost pelagic high Chub mackerel Scomber japonicus Teleost pelagic high Other Mackerel Scomber spp. Teleost pelagic high Atlantic horse mackerel Trachurus trachurus Teleost pelagic high Cunene horse mackerel Trachurus trecae Teleost pelagic high Bonga shad Ethmalosa fimbriata Teleost pelagic high Small pelagic species pelagic Small Jack Caranx spp. Teleost pelagic high Scad Decapterus spp. Teleost pelagic high

49