FLEET DYNAMICS IN A CHANGING POLICY CHANGING A IN ENVIRONMENT DYNAMICS FLEET FLEET DYNAMICS IN A CHANGING POLICY ENVIRONMENT J. BATSLEER J. BATSLEER J. FLEET DYNAMICS IN A CHANGING POLICY ENVIRONMENT J. Batsleer THESIS COMMITTEE PROMOTOR Prof. Dr A.D. Rijnsdorp Professor for Sustainable Fisheries Management Wageningen University CO-PROMOTOR Dr J.J. Poos Senior scientist, Wageningen Marine Research OTHER MEMBERS Prof. Dr C. Ulrich, Technical University of Denmark Dr Polet, Institute for Agricultural and Fisheries Research (ILVO), Vlaanderen, Belgium Dr R.A. Groeneveld, Wageningen University Prof Dr A.J. Murk, Wageningen University This research was conducted under the auspices of the Graduate Wageningen institute of Animal Sciences Fleet dynamics in a changing policy environment J. BATSLEER Thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of doctor at Wageningen University by the authority of the Rector Magnificus, Prof. Dr A.P.J. Mol, in the presence of the Thesis Committee appointed by the Academic Board to be defended in public on Wednesday 23 November 2016 at 11 a.m. in the Aula Jurgen Batsleer Fleet dynamics in a changing policy environment, 172 pages. PhD thesis, Wageningen University, Wageningen, NL (2016) With references, with summary in English and Dutch ISBN 978-94-6257-952-1 DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.18174/391925 Dit proefschrift is opgedragen aan mijn ouders en gezin. “Waar je ook bent Ik zou het niet weten Niet in afstand of tijd te meten Maar ik heb je bij me Diep in mij Daarom ben je zo dichtbij” Toon Hermans CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 Introduction _______________________________________________________________ 9 CHAPTER 2 Mixed fisheries management: Protecting the weakest link _________________________ 27 CHAPTER 3 High-grading and over-quota discarding in mixed fisheries ________________________ 53 CHAPTER 4 Mixed fisheries management: Is the ban on discarding likely to promote more selective and fuel efficient fishing in the Dutch flatfish fishery? _____________________ 83 CHAPTER 5 Exploring habitat credits to manage the benthic impact in a mixed fishery __________ 107 CHAPTER 6 General discussion ________________________________________________________ 131 ADDENDUM Summary _______________________________________________________________ 156 Samenvatting ____________________________________________________________ 158 Curriculum Vitae __________________________________________________________ 161 List of Abbreviations ______________________________________________________ 162 Dankwoord ______________________________________________________________ 166 Training and Supervision Plan _______________________________________________ 171 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Chapter 1 1 10 General introduction and outline of the thesis BACKGROUND Human fish consumption has been surging in the past five decades. This increased demand for fish is reflected in the global annual catches of marine fish. Global marine catches- in creased from 20 to 60 million tonnes between the early 1950s and 1970s but stabilized around 80 million tonnes per year since the 1990s (FAO, 2014). In Europe however, annual 1 catches have been declining in the past decade, while the economic performance of the EU fishing fleet shows a positive trend(STECF, 2014). This improved economic situation of the EU fishing fleet can be partially attributed to positive effects of the European fisheries -poli cy (for instance stock recovery and capacity reduction) as well as innovation towards more selective and fuel efficient fishing techniques and favourable market conditions (e.g. higher average first-sale prices). European fisheries policy originates from the Treaty of Rome (1957) where fisheries were regarded as an agricultural product, forming part of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). This policy focused primarily on the social and economic interests of the fishing in- dustry. In the 1970s the European Community expanded with the accession of big fishing nations such as Denmark, Ireland and the UK (Symes, 1997). Enlargement of the European Community entailed the development of an individual policy for fisheries, establishing a common organisation of the market for fish and fish products, and adopting a Community structural policy regulating access and conservation to common resources (Holden, 1994). In 1983 the European Community formally established the European Common Fisher- ies Policy (CFP). The policy adopted a more conservation oriented approach, directed on the sustainable exploitation of fish stocks while ensuring an economic viable European fishing fleet providing employment and opportunities for coastal communities(Holden, 1994). To evaluate policy objectives the CFP would be revised every 10 years. Hence, during the first two terms of the CFP (i.e. 1983 and 1992) a set of measures, including annual total allowable catches (TAC), multi-annual guidance programs (MAGPS) (i.e. to find a balance between the fleets fishing capacity and the available fishing opportunities) and technical measures (for instance area or mesh size restrictions) were introduced for the conservation and manage- ment of fish stocks (Daan, 1997). Especially implementation of the TAC-system, providing access to the resources, had a big impact on fisheries as shared resources had to be divided among EU Member States (national quota). To prevent arguments between Member States over how national quota should be allocated, quota were based on a historical proportion of the catches and special provisions for communities depending on fishing, i.e. relative sta- bility (Holden, 1994). At the turn of the 21th century it became clear the CFP regulations had not met expec- tations. Many stocks were being exploited at unsustainable levels and fishing fleets still had an overcapacity, producing a negative economic effect in the fishing industry (Daan, 1997, Frost and Andersen, 2006). This failure was attributed to the lack of long-term strategies, the political decision process, low enforcement and non-compliance with management meas- ures (Arts and Tatenhove, 2004, Daw and Gray, 2005). This critical situation required a major 11 Chapter 1 reform of the CFP in 2002 which introduced four fundamental changes: (1) multi-annual recovery and management plans, (2) the opportunity to restrain fishing pressure by limit- ing the days-at-sea, (3) creation of the Regional Advisory Councils (RACs) giving stakehold- ers (i.e. fishing industry and environmental groups) a greater say in the decisions making process and (4) a progressive implementation of an ecosystem-based approach to fisheries 1 (Symes, 2005). When the ecosystem-based approach to fisheries was introduced in the CFP reform in 2002, it was unclear how it could be made operational. There was a clear gap between theo- ry (i.e. knowledge) and practice (i.e. management plans) (Arkema et al., 2006). Parallel to the changing CFP a myriad of secondary legislations, including the Habitat Directive (HD, 92/43/ EEC) and the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD, 2008/56/EC) have been adopted. These directives are oriented towards nature conservation and comprise of a framework to manage human impact on vulnerable habitats and sensitive species, biodiversity and the in- tegrity of marine ecosystems. While the HD and MSFD adopted ecosystem-based consider- ations, the CFP failed to integrate the wider ecosystem effects of fishing into policy making such as reducing pressure on non-target species and habitats. The latest CFP reform was adopted in December 2013 and came into force in January 2014. This reform adopted an ecosystem-based approach and includes ambitious measures to achieve long term environmental, economic and social sustainable fisheries. These meas- ures include restoring and maintaining all fish stock to sustainable levels by 2020, phasing out discarding (i.e. throwing back unwanted catches at sea) by introducing a discard ban, and implementing multi-annual fisheries plans which includes establishing marine protect- ed areas. In addition, the CFP will need to be harmonised with the objectives of environmen- tal legislation such as the MSFD. Recognizing European fisheries policy went through some profound changes in the past decades, it is vital to explore how policy decisions may influence the dynamics of the fleet(Hilborn, 1985). The dynamics of a fleet is a result of individual skippers making choices on when and where to fish, while competing for similar resources. An individual’s choice will predominantly depend on the spatio-temporal distribution of the resources, the costs exploiting different fishing grounds, market value of the resources, and constraints imposed by management (Gillis et al., 1995a, Rijnsdorp et al., 2008, Poos et al., 2010). All too often, pol- icy makers assume management decisions will deliver the obvious results (Walters, 2007), ignoring the potential influence of fleet responses to uncertainty associated with manage- ment. This thesis will study how location choice and discard decisions made by individual fishers in a mixed fishery are influenced by management, (uncertainty in) resource distribu- tion and technological innovations. This knowledge will provide a basis for predicting the response of the fleet to management measures attempted to reduce the ecosystem impact of fisheries and improve the sustainable use of marine ecosystems. 12 General introduction and outline of the thesis DISCARDS IN MIXED FISHERIES A target species is a species which is intentionally caught by a fishery. Most gears,