Draft NEF working paper Restoring EU bass stocks Written by: Chris Williams & Griffin Carpenter New Economics Foundation www.neweconomics.org [email protected] +44 (0)20 7820 6300 @NEF Registered charity number 1055254 © 2015 The New Economics Foundation 2 New Economics Foundation (NEF) Working paper on bass Contents Contents ..................................................................................................................... 2 Summary .................................................................................................................... 3 Fisheries Context ...................................................................................................... 5 State of bass stocks ........................................................................................ 5 Political Context ............................................................................................... 7 EU Emergency measures ................................................................................ 8 What further action is needed? ........................................................................ 8 Seven key steps to bass stock recovery ............................................................... 10 1. Follow scientific advice ......................................................................... 10 2. Increase the Minimum Landing Size to 42cm ....................................... 11 3. Regulating netting for bass ................................................................... 12 4. Limit landings ........................................................................................ 13 5. Expanding the level and extent of protection of nursery areas ............. 15 6. Permanent prohibition of pair trawling during spawning season ........... 16 7. Adequate resourcing ............................................................................ 16 Discussion: From Emergency Measures to long-term sustainable and equitable management ........................................................................................... 19 Using TACs and Quota (Article 17) as a solution ................................................. 21 ‘Best value’ .............................................................................................................. 23 Commercial fishing ........................................................................................ 23 Recreational fishing ....................................................................................... 24 Distribution of access to the resource .................................................................. 24 Notes ........................................................................................................................ 26 Appendix .................................................................................................................. 28 Glossary (MMO, 2013) ............................................................................................. 34 Endnotes .................................................................................................................. 38 2 3 New Economics Foundation (NEF) Working paper on bass Summary The European Commission has agreed emergency measures, a ban on pelagic trawling for bass, to halt the severe decline of bass stocks (EC press release – 26/01/2015). Following this announcement, we are providing an outline of the necessary change1 to ensure the future of the species in UK and European waters. The EU measures ban pelagic trawling for bass in the Channel, Celtic Sea, Irish Sea and southern North Sea. Our suggestions make the case for a range of measures which can inform a UK management plan for bass (a legal obligation under CFP Art 2(2) with Member States and the Commission both responsible). We also call for investment in fish stock restoration and ensuring best value for society by adequately resourcing our regulators and fisheries managers. Only these measures will enable us to rebuild and ensure resilient, sustainable bass stocks for future generations. As the Natural Capital Committees 3rd report states: ‘… the long-term gains [of restoring commercial fish stocks] are potentially large, securing jobs in the industry for generations to come. Investing in measures to restore certain stocks of shellfish could deliver benefit cost ratios in excess of 6:1’ 2 The EU emergency measure explains clearly that ‘…Seabass is a late maturing and slow growing species whose fishing mortality [is four times] the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) levels. It is therefore appropriate to establish fishing opportunities for this stock in the form of fishing effort and catch limits, which should target the main sources of fishing mortality, i.e. pelagic trawling and recreational fishing.’3* While our recommendations are based on the needs of the UK, many are equally applicable to other EU member states involved in bass fishing (FR, IRL, UK, BEL, and NL). We recommend seven key steps to bass stocks recovery which the UK can adopt and present to the EU as the most effective and equitable and proportionate** way forward: 1. Follow scientific advice – natural limits cannot be negotiated. 2. Increase the Minimum Landing Size to 42cm for commercial and recreational fishers. 3. Regulate netting for bass by increasing the mesh size of nets and decreasing the length of nets used. 4. Limit the commercial weekly landings per vessel to 1.5 tonnes – a necessary reduction from the current 5 tonnes and introduce a recreational bag limit (with mandatory fin clipping).*** 5. Better protect nursery areas for bass around the UK coastline. 6. Make the pelagic trawl ban permanent, not a one-off measure, and extend the duration of the ban from December 1st – April 30th. 7. Adequately resource regulatory bodies tasked with fisheries management so they can extend effective regulation to other fisheries which have a significant impact on bass. 3 4 New Economics Foundation (NEF) Working paper on bass * The pelagic trawl fishery is almost entirely (96%) French, while the recreational mortality comprises four member states (France, Ireland, the UK and Holland). When looked at on a member state basis, the commercial fisheries are responsible for higher mortality than recreational fisheries. **’Proportionate’ in terms of favouring those fisheries/fleets/stakeholders that create ‘best value’ to society. Numerous fleets may have the same overall impact on the stock/F, but the level of discarding (waste) and wider value created or destroyed (e.g. fossil fuel use) should be considered when allocating access to the resource.’ Emergency measures to be taken are not directed “against” a specific fleet segment. The justification for emergency measures is to protect the spawning stock of sea bass and its capacity to reproduce against an imminent serious threat.’ 4 *** CEFAS’s examination of the profile of the UK commercial bass fishery 2010 as described by Walmsley & Armstrong, shows that of the 1,344 vessels (combined under and over 10 metres fleet) that landed bass in England: Number of vessels (percentage Quantity of bass landed (2010) of overall total) 788 (59%) landed less than 100 kilos for the year 195 (15%) landed less than 100 kilos for the year 129 (9%) landed less than 100 kilos for the year 89 (6%) landed 500 – 1000 kilos for the year 61 (4.5%) landed 1 – 2 tonnes for the year 77 (6%) landed 2 – 10 tonnes for the year 6 (0.5%) landed over 10 tonnes for the year The 1.5 tonne limit would by itself have a negligible impact on bass mortality. This measure is being proposed alongside other measures for their cumulative impacts on stocks and considering the socio- economic impacts they would entail. 4 5 New Economics Foundation (NEF) Working paper on bass Fisheries Context State of bass stocks The bass mortality as a result of fishing (F) on Figure 1 below indicates harvesting pressure on the bass stock. Mortality has been rising since the new millennium and even more steeply since 2011. ‘The most common target in fisheries management is achieving FMSY, i.e. the rate of fishing mortality that ensures the maximum sustainable yield (MSY - see below). A fishing mortality rate above this threshold is indicative of overfishing’5. For the entire 28 year record available from ICES (the International Council for the Exploration of Sea), we have been fishing bass above levels that would lead to a stock size with the maximum sustainable catch levels (Fmsy on the graph below). ICES advise a reduction of (F) to 0.13, a level we have not seen since before 19856. There are multiple reasons for this alarming trend, ranging from biological to socio-economic and political. Bass numbers have, until a recent spell of cold winters been increasing,7 growing rapidly from the mid-1990s and reaching a high point in 2010.8 This has driven increased exploitation as the availability of the resource has increased. ‘However, the stock is being fished harder than is appropriate for such a slow growing, late maturing fish. To make matters worse, the number of young bass surviving from spawning in the years 2008 to 2012 appears to be well below average, probably due to unfavourable environmental conditions’9. Additionally, there has been increased pressure as small-scale (inshore) fisheries have shifted to bass and other non-quota species because of a lack of access to other quota, all as demand grew and prices remained high10. Figure 1: EU Bass Fishing Mortality. Source: ICES, 2014 EU Bass Fishing Mortality 0.45 0.4 0.35