The North Sea Regional Advisory Council
Nephrops Focus Group,
Edinburgh 22nd January 2014.
Paper 4.1
For Discussion
A Long Term Management Plan for North
Sea Nephrops
Working Draft 15th January 2014
Revised Nephrops LTMP
Page 1
24/03/2016
Table of Contents
1.
The Scope of the Long Term Management Plan
3
2.
Objectives of the Long Term Management Plan
Objective 1
Objective 2
Objective 3
Objective 4
Objective 5
Objective 6
Objective 7
Objective 8
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
5
3.
Summary of the Long Term Management Plan
5
4.
The Approach adopted by the Management Plan
Achieving sustainability
Functional Units
Economic and business considerations
8
8
9
9
5.
Targets for the Management Plan
Setting overall targets
Wider ecological targets
Economic targets
9
10
11
14
6.
Measures to meet the targets
Biological instruments
Managing fisheries within Functional Units
A draft Fishing Plan for the Farne Deeps
Wider ecological instruments
15
15
16
17
20
1.
2.
3.
21
22
22
Discards: meeting the Landings Obligations
Reducing impacts on endangered, threatened and protected species
Reducing damage to the seabed and vulnerable organisms
Economic instruments
24
7.
Monitoring of the management plan
24
8.
Mixed fishery considerations & linkages with other management plans
25
9.
Future institutional structures
26
10. Research and Monitoring
27
11. Uncertainties
29
12. Timeframe
30
Revised Nephrops LTMP
Page 2
24/03/2016
1.
The Scope of the Long Term Management Plan
This Long Term Management Plan (LTMP) is intended to set out clear objectives and a
range of options for managing the Nephrops fisheries of the North Sea, Skagerrak and
Kattegat. The overall goal is to ensure that further development and improvement in the
Nephrops fisheries can take place in a sustainable way, without affecting natural resources
adversely.
The plan has been prepared at a time when reforms to the CFP have been agreed. Those
reforms are expected to lead to a greater degree of self-management of fisheries within
the North Sea. It is hope that these reforms will lead to the adoption of a “stewardship”
approach; where authorities delegate management responsibilities to stakeholders within
set limits, while retaining the right to intervene if the fishery moves in a damaging direction.
There is also a move towards a regional approach, where fisheries management in
particular regional seas will be led by appropriate member states. This management plan
has anticipated those changes and is intended to work within a new, reformed, regional
CFP, where participation of fishers and other stakeholders in fisheries management has
become accepted.
Individuals and communities must be involved in any management decisions that will
significantly affect them. In developing this plan for the Nephrops fisheries the NSAC has
aimed at a plan that has industry “buy in”. The plan has been developed from discussions
with fishers and other interested parties, including those responsible for accrediting the
Nephrops fisheries.
2.
Objectives of the Long Term Management Plan
The new basic regulation requires that Management Plan objectives are consistent with
objectives set out in Article 2 and with the relevant provisions of Articles 7 and 9. This
Management Plan follows that requirement.
Objective 1
This Management Plan aims to ensure that fishing activities are environmentally
sustainable in the long-term and are managed in a way that is consistent with the
objectives of achieving economic, social and employment benefits, and of contributing to
the availability of food supplies. It aims to meet biological and ecological objectives whilst
ensuring that fishing businesses are prepared for the economic stresses that are inevitable
when exploiting a variable natural resource in an uncertain global economy.
Objective 2
This Management Plan adopts a precautionary approach to fisheries management. It
aims to ensure that exploitation of living marine biological resources restores and
maintains populations of harvested species above levels that can produce the maximum
sustainable yield (MSY). The Plan accepts that the MSY exploitation rate is to be
Revised Nephrops LTMP
Page 3
24/03/2016
achieved by 2015 where possible and at the latest by 2020. Where there are insufficient
data to determine MSY targets it is committed to measures based on the precautionary
approach, ensuring at least a comparable degree of conservation.
The Plan sets quantifiable targets for both fishing mortality rates and spawning stock
biomass, with clear time frames to reach the quantifiable targets. Conservation
reference points are employed, consistent with the objectives set out in Article 2 of the
new basic regulation.
Instruments are set out in the Plan, in terms of conservation and technical measures to
be taken in order to achieve the targets.
Objective 3
This Management Plan is intended to be firmly based on the best available scientific,
technical and economic advice and is committed to the collection of additional scientific
data where that is appropriate.
Objective 4
This Management Plan is aimed at progressively eliminating discards, taking into
account the best available scientific advice, by avoiding and reducing as far as possible
unwanted catches and gradually ensuring that catches are landed. It also emphasises
the importance of making the best use of unwanted catches. The Plan takes full account
of the newly formulated Landings Obligations.
Objective 5
This Management Plan aims to provide conditions for an economically viable and
competitive fishing capture and processing industry. It recognises that there is a real
challenge in developing plans for sustainable fisheries that are biologically and
ecologically orientated but also fleet orientated. The Plan is intended to bring together
biological, ecological and business related factors.
Objective 6
This Management Plan is intended to take full account of the position of coastal
communities and the need for a fair standard of living for those who depend on fishing
activities. It also aims to contribute to an efficient and transparent internal market for
fisheries products and contribute to ensuring a level playing field for the marketing of
fisheries products.
Objective 7
Revised Nephrops LTMP
Page 4
24/03/2016
This Management Plan has adopted the objective of achieving a good environmental
status by 2020, as set out in the Marine Strategy Framework Directive.
Objective 8
The Long Term Management Plan is intended to be multi-annual, and to last for ten years,
with regular review. It is designed to be adaptive and capable of being adjusted to match
any major change in circumstances. It is also intended to be compatible with, and
interdependent on, other management plans. Once the Plan is agreed and put into
operation then progress with implementing it will be monitored.
3.
Summary of the Long Term Management Plan
(NB This is provisional and will be revised once the Plan is nearer completion)
In the table below we summarise the proposals contained within this Long Term
Management Plan for the North Sea Nephrops fisheries. The actual targets and
instruments are set out in more detail later.
The overall goal:
To ensure that further development and improvement in the Nephrops fisheries can take
place in a sustainable way, without affecting natural resources adversely. Fishing must be at
a level that will allow Nephrops and other stocks to renew themselves, whilst ensuring an
economically viable fishing industry.
Biological Targets
Instruments
The Nephrops fisheries as a whole must
move progressively towards lower fishing
mortalities and higher yields.
An F should be set of between F0.1 and Fmax
for each of the Functional Units and the TAC
for the North Sea should be consistent with
that value. The target F would be reached
gradually, through incremental annual
reductions in fishing mortality with the overall
aim of achieving Fmsy by 2020.
Nephrops in the North Sea should be
exploited at rates that are sustainable by
setting a TAC based on a target fishing
mortality (F) consistent with Fmsy and set for
each of the Functional Units
In the absence of an agreed value or proxy
for Fmsy then an F between F0.1 and Fmax
(and an equivalent harvest ratio) should be
used as a precautionary target fishing
mortality
Revised Nephrops LTMP
If stock abundance falls to a level at which
recruitment is likely to be significantly
impaired, then F should be reduced in line
with the reduction in stock size indicated by
the underwater TV surveys. If recruitment
improves and stock size increases, then F
Page 5
24/03/2016
In the absence of immediate biological risk to
any of the stocks assessed by underwater
TV, then the target F should be reached
gradually, in an incremental way
Should stock size fall below a level at which
recruitment is likely to be significantly
impaired then F should be reduced in line
with the reduction in stock size indicated by
the underwater TV surveys
should be increased through agreed
procedures for setting TACs.
A biomass trigger point (Bbuff) would be set
that will prompt a revision of the target value
for fishing mortality in the event of a major
change in stock size.
Advice should be sought from ICES on how
a trigger level might be set and how an
appropriate new value might be arrived at for
circumstances where Nephrops become
substantially less, or more, abundant.
Should stocks increase the F should be
increased in line with the increase in stock
size shown by the UWTV surveys up to the
agreed Fmsy proxy
A trigger point should be established to
enable fishing mortality to be adjusted in the
event of a sudden collapse or increase in the
stocks. The trigger point might be based on
results from the underwater TV surveys and
the size distribution of Nephrops in the
catches. It would not be sufficiently
precautionary to use Btrig as the trigger to
invoke management measures; another
measure above Btrig is needed.
Management at the Functional Unit level
should be achieved through the adoption of
specific management measures for
vulnerable Functional Units. Those measures
should reflect the particular circumstances on
those grounds.
Fishing mortality upon Nephrops must be
properly monitored and controlled
A TAC should be set for the North Sea as a
whole, consistent with the aggregated
assessments for the individual Functional
Units.
Management at the Functional Unit level
should be achieved not through the setting of
individual TACs but through the adoption of
specific management measures for the
Functional Units.
Specific measures for management of the
Functional Units should be dealt with through
Fishing Plans, tailored to each Unit. Each
plan will propose measures for limiting fishing
pressure.
The measures to be adopted for a particular
Functional Unit would be prepared and
proposed by the regional management body,
through a Fishing Plan, with the support and
participation of the fishers who fish that
ground, and other stakeholders, and subject
to evaluation by STECF.
Where there is a lack of information on the
fishery or the stock the Fishing Plan should
include proposals to remedy that deficiency.
Ecological targets
Instruments
Reduce discards of both Nephrops and
whitefish in the fishery
Instruments for reducing discards must be
formulated to meet the new Landings
Obligations. Measures will differ for different
fleets. Use will be made of flexibilities under
Article 15.
Minimise damage to threatened, endangered
and protected species
Minimise impacts on benthic habitats and
associated communities.
Revised Nephrops LTMP
Page 6
24/03/2016
It is for fishers to adopt measures for reducing
discards and by-catches. It will be their
responsibility to:

Ensure that all relevant catches are
landed

Reduce the level of unwanted catches
to the lowest level possible

Ensure that the Landings Obligations
are met
Other management measures include:

Identifying and implementing Marine
Protected Areas. These include
‘real-time’, seasonal and permanent
closed areas

Restricting the range of gears that
can be used in vulnerable areas
(including creel only areas)

Promoting the development of
environmentally friendly fishing
practices, for example gears with
less bottom contact, larger meshes
and better selectivity profiles

Improving data recording systems to
identify capture and damage to
endangered, threatened and
protected species

Safe and speedy return to the sea of
endangered and threatened species
Economic targets
Instruments
Provide incentives for fishers to move the
fishery in the direction of lower fishing
mortality while enabling them to meet their
own business aims and objectives
It is for member states, producer
organisations and fishing businesses to
decide how to deal with changing economic
pressures.
Avoid regulation that makes fleets less
efficient or provides perverse incentives
which act to the detriment of the fishery and
the Nephrops stock
There are no specific economic instruments
that require to be imposed by this
management plan. However, in meeting the
biological and ecological objectives it is
important to avoid regulation that makes
fleets less efficient or provides perverse
Revised Nephrops LTMP
Page 7
24/03/2016
Any change imposed on the fishery to meet
biological and ecological objectives must take
place at a rate that can be absorbed by
individual businesses and communities
incentives that act to the detriment of the
fishery and the Nephrops stock. It is also
important to provide incentives for individual
fishers to change to meet new business aims
and objectives.
Measures imposed on the fishery to meet
biological and ecological objectives must take
place gradually
4.
The Approach adopted by the Management Plan
Achieving sustainability
The Report on Long-term Management of North Sea Fisheries, produced from a workshop
held in Edinburgh in March 2006 by the NSRAC, pointed out that it is only by taking
account of ecological, economic, and social factors within an appropriate institutional
structure that development can continue without exhausting natural resources. The report
went on to point out that the overall goal of achieving sustainable fisheries could not be
achieved by prioritising any one of the components of sustainability to the exclusion of
others – for example targeting a high biomass or making profit maximisation the only goal.
All aspects of sustainability have to be considered together.
This point was also a theme of the Net Benefits Report from the UK Cabinet Office. There
is a management jigsaw, where all the separate issues must mesh together to create the
overall picture:
The main biological objective is to avoid over-exploiting the resource. Nephrops in the
North Sea must remain at or close to their full reproductive capacity and must be kept
away from a state where they would be unable to replace themselves. There must be a
low risk of the stocks showing a reduced production potential. Stocks must be well above
the lowest observed levels of biomass.
Revised Nephrops LTMP
Page 8
24/03/2016
Within the North Sea there is a risk that a recovery of whitefish stocks, and especially cod,
may result in increased predation upon Nephrops, leading to a decline in the available
resource. The management objectives must deal with such multi-species interactions.
Functional Units
Currently, in the North Sea, Nephrops stocks are divided into eight separate Functional
Units (FUs). A major management consideration for Nephrops stocks is whether
management should be at the FU level rather than a North Sea level. Advice from ICES
and STECF has been that current management of Nephrops in the North Sea (both in
terms of TACs and effort) does not provide adequate safeguards to ensure that local effort
is sufficiently limited to avoid depletion of resources in the FUs. Catches can be taken
anywhere in the North Sea and vessels have the flexibility to move between grounds.
They have warned that this freedom, although it permits flexibility for fishing vessels, may
lead to unacceptably high harvest rates from some of the FUs.
A key element of this Long Term Management Plan is therefore the preparation of Fishing
Plans for Nephrops FUs in the North Sea. A fishing plan describes in detail the way in
which FUs are to be managed and exploited. Each Fishing Plan is intended to meet the
management needs of the particular FU.
This Management Plan concludes that management at the FU level through Fishing Plans
will provide the necessary controls to ensure that catch opportunities and effort are
compatible and in line with the scale of the resources in each of the stocks defined by the
FUs. At the same time they also provide flexibility for the fleets to move between grounds.
Economic and business considerations
Fishing fleets should be economically resilient, with an ability to withstand changes in their
circumstances. Economically, fishing businesses must be able to rely on a sustainable
level of profit.
There is currently a need to rationalise and harmonise various fisheries management
measures and regulations, many of which currently make fleets less efficient and threaten
profits. Socially, it is preferable for changes in management to take place at a rate that
can be absorbed by businesses ports and communities, especially if change is imposed
through regulation. It is also important for stakeholders to be involved in any decisions that
will have significant impact upon them.
One important aim of this Plan is to achieve a modern, safe, fishing fleet that is earning
profits. However, this document is a fisheries management plan, not a business plan. The
fleets themselves are very diverse and conditions in member states differ. Although this
plan will set out some general economic guiding principles, it will not be prescriptive in
defining economic measures to be taken by member states, producer organisations or
fishing businesses.
5.
Targets for the Management Plan
Revised Nephrops LTMP
Page 9
24/03/2016
Setting overall targets
An important role of the plan for North Sea Nephrops must be to match overall fishing
capacity to the long-term sustainable yield. Fishing must be at a level that will allow
Nephrops stocks to renew themselves.
Although the long held view was that the Nephrops stocks in the North Sea did not appear
to be over exploited, more recent stock assessments have highlighted evidence of a trend
of decline in two particular FUs (Farne Deeps and Fladen). The Farne Deeps FU has
displayed signs of a reduction in abundance since about 2007 and both underwater TV
surveys and anecdotal evidence from the Fladen ground illustrate a decline since 2012.
One objective might be for the Nephrops fisheries on those stocks to be reduced, reducing
the rate of fishing mortality. In the Fladen, however, this strategy may not deliver an
increase in abundance as fishing pressure has been below Fmsy for the time series; even
under constant fishing mortality, the size of the stock will vary due to fluctuations in
recruitment and the environment, including predator species. The overall objective must
be to match fishing capacity to a longer-term sustainable yield, whilst accommodating
fluctuations in the state of the stocks but it must be acknowledged that fishing pressure is
not the only determining factor on the state of the stock. The most recent assessments for
all units is described in Table 1, below.
Table 1: Status of the North Sea stocks in 2012.
ICES
Division
IIIa
IVb,c
IVb
IVa
IVb
Iva
IVa
IVa
IVb
IVb
FU
Name
3 and 4
5
6
7
8
9
10
32
33
34
Skagerrak and Kattegat
Botney Gut – Silver Pit
Farne Deeps
Fladen Ground
Firth of Forth
Moray Firth
Noup
Norwegian Deep
Off Horn’s Reef
Devil’s Hole
F in relation to
SSB in relation
MSY (Fmsy)
to MSY (Btrig)
Appropriate
Data limited
Above
Below
Below
Below
Above
Above
Above
Above
Data limited
Data limited
Data limited
Data limited
The Nephrops fisheries within the European Union are governed by the key policy goal of
achieving MSY by 2015 and, due to this, advice is presented in terms of the fishing
mortality to achieve MSY (Fmsy) and the spawning stock biomass to reach MSY (Bmsy).
Reliable proxies for these values are available for the key FUs with precautionary data
deficient protocols in use for those with less reliable information. Btrig is used as a biomass
reference point in the same way as Blim in many white fish fisheries, and is the lowest
observed abundance or the abundance of which the stock has considered to be
experiencing reduced recruitment.
Revised Nephrops LTMP
Page 10
24/03/2016
In the North Sea the cod, a species that preys upon Nephrops, is moving from a level of
low abundance to one of higher abundance. It is necessary to take account of species
interactions and other changes to the ecosystem that may have a significant effect in the
future upon Nephrops stocks. Ecological systems are dynamic and unpredictable with
major effects, for example from climate change, which cannot be influenced by man.
Management systems and management plans must be robust in the face of uncertainty.
They must be adaptive and capable of changing with circumstances.
Fishers are sceptical over risks to Nephrops stocks from a recovering cod stock. However,
they accept that there might be other circumstances under which particular stocks become
highly depleted, for example as a result of environmental change. It is acknowledged by
fishers that it would be useful to set a trigger point to enable fishing mortality to be adjusted
in the event of a sudden collapse or increase in the stocks. The trigger point might be
based on results from the underwater TV surveys and the size distribution of Nephrops in
the catches. However, it would not be sufficiently precautionary to use Btrig as the trigger
to invoke management measures; another measure above Btrig is needed. This
Management Plan suggests the designation of different trigger point (Bbuff) for this
purpose.
Taking all the above considerations into account we are proposing the following biological
targets for the North Sea Nephrops fishery:

To maintain the biomass of each functional unit at a sustainable level, above Btrig

To exploit Nephrops in the North Sea at a rate that is sustainable and consistent
with Fmsy.

A biomass trigger point (Bbuff) should be set that will prompt a revision of the target
value for fishing mortality in the event of a major change in stock size

A TAC should be set for the North Sea as a whole, consistent with the aggregated
assessments for the individual FUs

Management at the functional unit level should be achieved not through the setting
of individual TACs but through the adoption of specific management measures for
vulnerable FUs or for FUs for which there are few data. Those measures should
reflect the particular circumstances on those grounds.
Measures for the individual FUs would be developed through the preparation of Fishing
Plans for vessels and fleets fishing the designated FUs.
Wider ecological targets
Ecological sustainability is an important aspect of this Management Plan. Management
practices must be set so as to maintain ecological processes and minimise impact on other
species and on habitats for the benefit of future generations. This aspect of the plan
should be complementary to the other aspects of the plan. Ecological objectives must be
part of the overall strategy.
Revised Nephrops LTMP
Page 11
24/03/2016
The Marine Strategy Framework Directive establishes a framework for member states to
take steps to achieve or maintain good environmental status in their marine waters by
2020 at the latest. Good environmental status is to be determined on a regional seas basis
– in this case for the Greater North Sea. The Member States sharing a marine region or
sub-region are obliged to cooperate to ensure that the Directive’s objectives are achieved.
The overall goal of the Directive is to conserve marine ecosystems and, where practicable,
restore marine areas that have been damaged by preventing and eliminating pollution and
by protecting our waters from any adverse effects of human activities.
The Directive was transposed into Member States’ legislation in 2010. It required there to
be:

An assessment of the current state of the seas by July 2012

A detailed description of what Good Environmental Status means, and the
development of targets and indicators by July 2012

Establishment of a monitoring programme to measure progress towards GES by
July 2014

Establishment of a programme of measures for achieving GES by 2016
In September 2010 the Commission adopted a series of criteria for maintaining GES.
From a fisheries standpoint these criteria require:

Descriptor 1: Biological diversity is maintained. The quality and occurrence of
habitats and the distribution and abundance of species are in line with prevailing
physiographic, geographic and climatic conditions.

Descriptor 3: Populations of all commercially exploited fish and shellfish are to be
within safe biological limits, exhibiting a population age and size distribution that is
indicative of a healthy stock.

Descriptor 4: All elements of the marine food chain are to occur at normal
abundance and diversity and at levels capable of ensuring the long-term
abundance of the species and the retention of their full reproductive capacity

Descriptor 6: Sea-floor integrity is to be at a level that ensures that the structure
and functions of the ecosystems are safeguarded and benthic ecosystems, in
particular, are not adversely affected.

Descriptor 9: Contaminants in fish and seafood for human consumption are at
levels not giving rise to pollution effects
For all these descriptors, member states are proposing their own monitoring programmes
to measure progress towards achieving and maintaining Good Environmental Status
(GES) in their seas by 2020. The final stage is the implementation of management
measures to achieve GES by 2020. These have to be developed by 2015 and
Revised Nephrops LTMP
Page 12
24/03/2016
implemented by 2016. Each stage of the implementation process then has to be reviewed
every 6 years, and if necessary updated.
A key requirement of the Directive is that European Member States must take a
coordinated approach to implementation, cooperating with other Member States in the
relevant Marine Region or sub region to ensure each element of their marine strategies is
coherent and coordinated. One of the sub regions is the Greater North Sea, including the
Kattegat and the English Channel.
It is clear that with implementation of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive there is a
need to reduce the impact of the Nephrops fishery on threatened endangered and
protected species, as well as the effects of bottom disturbance from Nephrops trawls upon
habitats and sensitive benthic communities. Parts of the seabed with a soft substrate,
where Nephrops are found, are highly diverse, productive and of high ecological value.
An important aspect of this Nephrops fishery Management Plan must therefore be to
minimise impacts on the ecosystem. Steps will need to be taken to protect vulnerable
species and habitats. The seabed must receive particular attention, and animals that are
not being fished for, but which might be badly affected by the fisheries, will need to be
protected. Achieving overall ecological sustainability is also important. Management
practices must be set so as to maintain ecological processes and minimise impact on other
species and on habitats for the benefit of future generations.
ICES has already stressed that it is important that emerging year classes of other species
of fish should not be subject to mortality as by-catch in the Nephrops fishery. The
imposition of catch composition rules and the application of measures to improve the
selection of Nephrops gears is currently intended to reduce the risk of catching whitefish
unnecessarily. Vessels legitimately targeting Nephrops may catch quantities of haddock,
whiting and cod but they may be forced to discard marketable fish to comply with catch
composition rules. Catch composition rules are seen by fishers as unnecessarily
restrictive. Fish are not caught in neat numerical proportions and the setting of catch
composition rules leads inevitably to discarding. Fishers and others have asked that
consideration be given to alternative solutions.
Recently, the European Commission has established Landings Obligations (a discard
ban) to be implemented in three steps: pelagic species in 2014 (including in the
Mediterranean), most valuable demersal species (cod, hake and sole) in 2015, and other
species in 2016. The Commission has also put forth a proposal regarding how fishing in
the Skagerrak should be regulated, including a ban on the discarding of fish. It will be
necessary for this NSRAC management plan for Nephrops to be adjusted as these
initiatives develop.
This Management Plan identifies three targets to achieve these ecological goals:

Reduce discards in the Nephrops fishery and observe the Landings Obligations

Minimise damage to endangered, threatened and protected species

Minimise impacts on benthic habitats and associated communities.
Revised Nephrops LTMP
Page 13
24/03/2016
Common to each of these objectives is a long-term aim of reducing fishing pressure on
non-target species by whatever means are available.
The development and
implementation of environmentally friendly fishing gear and fishing practices must be
encouraged to minimise impacts on the ecosystem.
An important requirement is to Improve data recording systems to identify capture and
damage to endangered, threatened and protected species and also to define the spatial
footprint of the fishery as a whole.
Economic targets
One of the starting points for the fishers consulted in the preparation of this plan was what has this plan got to do us, and what will it do to keep fishing communities alive? If it
results in still more restrictions upon fishing then there will be no fishing communities.
The main economic aim for any fishery must be to achieve economic resilience based on
a sustainable level of profit; to provide increased revenue and profits for vessels operating
in the Nephrops fishery. Profitability is also a necessary precondition for higher
compliance with fishery regulations. In economic terms the Nephrops plan should aim in
the long term (say over the next 10 years) to provide for a modern, safe fishing fleet, able
to renew itself, and capable of providing a stable supply of fish matched to the needs of
the market at reasonable prices. Essentially the plan must provide conditions where all
those involved in the industry can achieve the best possible outcome for their businesses
– but without specifying in detail how those individual businesses should operate.
Failure to match fleet capacity to the future state of the resource will both reduce longterm profitability and undermine compliance with the regulations.
It is recognised that there is a problem with technology creep and that fishing capacity will
tend to increase in a progressive way with time. Failure to match fleet capacity to the
future state of the resource will both undermine compliance and mean that revenues are
flowing into businesses with no chance of long-term profitability.
Under a more accountable system of quota and effort management any increase in
capacity will have adverse effects not on the Nephrops stocks but upon the fleets
themselves. It is for Member States and fishing business to decide how to reduce those
economic pressures.
There are already heavy additional costs placed upon fishers as a result of current
regulations, and the need to lease quota and days at sea. Effort restrictions imposed
under the cod recovery plan have had a profoundly negative effect upon profitability.
There is also a need to rationalise and harmonise various management measures and
regulations that make fleets less efficient.
The economic targets of the plan are:

To provide incentives for fishers to move the fishery in the direction of lower fishing
mortality while enabling them to meet their own business aims and objectives
Revised Nephrops LTMP
Page 14
24/03/2016
6.

To avoid regulation that makes fleets less efficient or provides perverse incentives
which act to the detriment of the fishery and the Nephrops stock

Any change imposed on the fishery to meet biological and ecological objectives
must take place at a rate that can be absorbed by individual businesses and
communities.
Measures to meet the targets
Biological instruments
Need to input additional info from Ana
To ensure that the Management Plan is effective in ensuring stock sustainability, a point
for invocation of the measures within the plan must be agreed. Currently, it appears that
using terms related to exploitation and/or abundance would be most sensible, as the limit
and target reference points are expressed in these terms. The use of an MSY Btrig and
Fmsy as the defined trigger, however, should be avoided, as this approach would not be
sufficiently precautionary. Alternative terms need to be agreed to provide a buffer zone
above MSY Btrig and/or below Fmsy to reduce the risk of breaching the reference points
and placing the stock at risk. This buffer point is mentioned above and will be referred to
as Bbuff.
It is proposed that a term relating to abundance would be preferable to a term relating to
exploitation. This is for a number of reasons, including the lack of confidence levels on the
fishing mortality measures, the resultant difficulty in F measurement in absolute terms,
and the more consistent nature of the abundance estimates.
Need to assess what options should be used. JS and AL. What options are appropriate
on different grounds with different characteristics? Take to working group on nephrops
surveys (study group). Carlos to consider what options are for different areas. Test options
for a number of areas which might be out with NS area. ICES take to working group initially
rather than formal approach to ICES.
There are several possible ways of expressing a precautionary buffer point in terms of
abundance, although relating any point to the confidence limits associated with Btrig
appears to follow logically. A direct relationship comparing the confidence limits of an
individual assessment breaching Btrig may not be the most consistent as it depends on a
number of variable including the level of sampling which, is in turn, dependent on
resources and weather. As a result, it is proposed that the abundance assessment (from
underwater TV surveys) of any individual year should be compared to the 95% confidence
limit of the lowest observed abundance (the proxy for Btrig) and, if it is found to fall within
the limit, should serve as the trigger to ‘switch on’ any agreed measure. The converse
would also be true. This methodology has some consistency with whitefish assessments
and the use of lowest observed biomass for Blim and the upper confidence limit of this for
Bpa. Thus, the adoption of this trigger would appear to be sufficiently precautionary.
For stocks without underwater TV surveys but with catch length frequency information,
such as FU 5 (Botney Gut – Silver Pits), the data can be used to define both recruitment
(% of catch in numbers below a particular cut off) and exploitation (slope of the declining
Revised Nephrops LTMP
Page 15
24/03/2016
right hand portion of the curve) proxies which, can, in turn, be used to make an assessment
of the state of the stock. Although the measurements would be to a certain extent relative,
the comparative states of each indicator can be compared. This methodology was used
by EAPO and NWWRAC to derive a simple rule to determine the length of time for the
closure in FU 16. The rule would be applied through the use of a matrix – below is the
matrix used in the Porcupine Bank and a proposed matrix for use in the invocation of the
LTMP.
Jane to provide matrices.
We need to insert both Matrices here
This methodology assumes accurate catch data and there may be some areas where it is
appropriate to apply some level of precaution due to uncertainties. Examples of this
include the Noup, where the assumed density is ‘borrowed’ from other areas, and Off
Horns Reef where the landings are very low. The methodology does, however, give the
potential for added precaution in cases where the information is uncertain and there are
concerns about the state of the stock through simple ‘tweaks’ of the model.
The above proposals require testing and although some very light touch analysis may be
possible, comprehensive modelling is unlikely to be possible until 2014.
This Management Plan has proposed above the adoption of specific biological objectives
for the North Sea Nephrops fishery, with a target fishing mortality consistent with Fmsy
being set for each of the FUs. It is suggested that a TAC should be set for the North Sea
as a whole, as at present, and that this TAC should be consistent with the aggregated
assessments for the individual FUs.
The Management Plan proposes that management at the functional unit level should be
achieved through the preparation of Fishing Plans for vessels and fleets fishing the
designated FU.
Managing fisheries within Functional Units
It is evident that some of the Nephrops FUs within the North Sea are vulnerable to overexploitation. If the Long Term Management Plan is to be consistent with ICES and STECF
advice, then management at an FU level must be introduced with the aim of safeguarding
individual FUs against depletion.
Thus, this Management Plan for Nephrops must set out how potential damage to FUs
might be limited and how stocks within FUs will be restored to sustainable levels. Setting
a harvest rate will go a long way in guarding against depletion; nevertheless it is important
that local plans are agreed which will recover a stock in the event that it requires rebuilding.
There was no support within the NSRAC for the allocation of quotas to each of the FUs
through separate TACs. The concept of quotas specific to each of the FUs raises a
number of rather difficult questions in relation to quota allocation. Management of the FUs
by setting individual TACs or catch limits is therefore not favoured in this Long Term
Management Plan.
Revised Nephrops LTMP
Page 16
24/03/2016
Instead this Management Plan suggests that Fishing Plans be developed for each FU.
The first step in preparing such a plan is to ensure that full information relating to the state
of the fishery, and the state of the resource the fishery depends upon, is provided. The
plans then consider how the Nephrops stock could be rebuilt; in a manner that is fair and
equitable to all fishers. The plans relate only to a particular FU and they do not
discriminate against any fishers. An important element of the plans is the detailed
information on how the FU has been fished in the past and is being fished in the present.
The main elements of each Fishing Plan are concerned with protecting and rebuilding the
Nephrops resource.
Where insufficient data are available for particular vulnerable FUs, either in terms of poor
landings data, a lack of underwater TV survey data or lack of information on discarding
then the plan proposes that an essential feature of the Fishing Plan for that FU would be
proposals for improving evaluation of the state of the stock. Where it is not feasible to
conduct full underwater TV surveys then alternative methods should be considered. There
is a strong case for the ICES Assessment Working Group to consider ways of conducting
more comprehensive surveys of Nephrops stocks in the North Sea, and seeking indices
for those stocks that are not currently surveyed.
All the FUs are intended to have Fishing Plans, although their application only takes place
once the agreed trigger point is reached. The plan remains in place during the rebuilding
phase. The restrictions of the plan are lifted once the FU moves back above the trigger
level.
Fishing Plans under this Management Plan will be prepared first for the FUs thought most
likely to become vulnerable, and those units for which data are available. By the time a
unit was really vulnerable it would be too late to implement a successful plan.
A draft Fishing Plan for the Farne Deeps
Overall the Nephrops stocks in the North Sea do not appear to be over exploited. However,
even with the adoption of a more sustainable approach towards the total Nephrops stock
in the North Sea, through the development of a Long Term Management Plan, there may
still be a risk of over-exploitation of Nephrops in some of the FUs. The Farne Deeps has
already shown evidence of over-exploitation.
The Farne Deeps provides a winter fishery. The ground is close to shore and it enables
vessels to land daily and return to port more often. However, there are currently many
vessels fishing that ground. It is appreciated that some of the local fishermen do not have
the option of fishing elsewhere because of their small vessels. Although some flexibility
in the ability to roam between different areas is considered advantageous and is provided
for under the CFP, in the case of the Farne Deeps heavy effort is being concentrated into
a small area and this is affecting the Nephrops adversely in that FU.
The preparation of a draft Fishing Plan for the Farne Deeps Nephrops fishery has been
undertaken by the NSAC to provide a test bed for the principles identified in the draft Long
Term Management Plan, tailored to suit the unique characteristics of the Farne Deeps
Nephrops fishery.
Revised Nephrops LTMP
Page 17
24/03/2016
The area of the Nephrops fishing grounds within the Farne Deeps FU boundary is very
small and highly localised. A marked increase of landings from this area was noted in
2005. Subsequently, a significant increase in fishing effort was observed on these
grounds from 2006 to 2008. The increase in effort was attributed to the number of vessels
with twin rig gear visiting the grounds from distant ports. Many of the visiting vessels were
larger or more powerful than the local fleet that is characterised by a <10 m fleet towing
single rig trawls.
One of the reasons for the influx may have been the days-at-sea regulations introduced
under the cod recovery plan. Division of the fleet into whitefish vessels, with large mesh
nets and fewer days at sea (TR1), and Nephrops vessels, with smaller mesh nets and
more days at sea (TR2), resulted in a transfer of effort into the Nephrops fleet in the North
Sea.
In recent years the annual landings of Nephrops from the Farne Deeps have become
erratic and changes have been observed in the sex ratio of the animals. It is likely that
such changes have resulted from overexploitation.
An initial report on a Sustainable Fishing Plan for the Farne Deeps Nephrops fishery was
prepared by Newcastle University and submitted to the English Marine Management
Organisation (MMO). It listed the different management options and summarised the
views of some fleet sectors on these.
As part of that project, in order to identify the concerns of those operating within the Farne
Deeps fishery a consultation of fishers was undertaken during the 2011 – 2012 Nephrops
season. Twenty interviews were undertaken with fishers at venues from Edinburgh to
Hartlepool and visits seeking the opinions of fishers were made to Hartlepool, North
Shields, Blyth, Amble, Seahouses, Berwick upon Tweed, Eyemouth, Edinburgh and
Fraserburgh. Fishers from North East England, Scotland and Northern Ireland who
participated in the one to one interviews were subsequently invited to comment on the
conclusions of the consultation.
There was a common concern amongst the fishers interviewed that fisheries management
in the North Sea had become too complex and that there was a clear need for simplicity
and clarity in any regulations to be applied. All skippers regardless of gear type were also
of the opinion that by-catch and subsequent discard of marketable whitefish for which
there was no quota was a significant issue in some FUs. Whiting and cod in particular
were more abundant on the Farne Deeps Nephrops grounds than the stock assessments
would suggest. There was support from some fishers for reducing discards by adopting a
policy of land all you catch.
In relation to future plans for the Farne Deeps, however, there were differences of opinion
between fishers registered at local ports in North East England and those from elsewhere.
The main concern of those registered at ports close to the grounds was that the twin rig
gears preferred by many visiting skippers were damaging the seabed and taking too much
from the fishery. Concerns were also expressed that the Farne Deeps was a mixed fishery
(for Nephrops and whitefish) and that twin rig gear was too efficient at catching both fish
and Nephrops. Those operating single rig gear regarded it as better suited to the mixed
fishery and seabed conditions found on the fishing grounds. There was a strong call from
many of the local fleet to ban twin rigging on the Farne Deeps Nephrops grounds.
Revised Nephrops LTMP
Page 18
24/03/2016
In contrast, those using twin rig gear were of the opinion that claims of seabed damage
were unfounded and that bottom contact by the heavy weights used by twin rig gear was
minimal if the gear was set up correctly. They also argued that the effects of much larger
twin rig gears on offshore Nephrops grounds in other Functional Units had not had a
significant detrimental effect on those fisheries, and that it was the trawl doors common to
both single and twin rig gears that were likely to have the greatest effect on the seabed.
There was general support from fishers for the adoption of selective measures tailored to
particular fishing gears and capture species. Scottish skippers pointed out the measures
already being taken by the Scottish industry with regard to improving gear selectivity by
allowing escape of undersize whitefish through large mesh panels and net grids.
Having discussed various measures within the Farne Deeps the NSRAC Management
Plan Development Group recommended that the most effective means for promoting the
recovery of the Farne Deeps Nephrops fishery was by the application of an “of which no
more than” measure. That is, the temporary imposition of a landings quota to the Farne
Deeps until such time as the Nephrops stock there was no longer vulnerable. Allocation
of quota on the basis of usage (track record) measured over the past 3, 5 and 10 years
was considered. Should allocation by Fixed Quota Allocations (FQAs) be required then
invocation of a mechanism like the Hague Preference might be necessary to defend the
dependence of the local fleet upon the fishery.
Initial discussions within the NSRAC focused on the development of what was initially
called a sustainable fishing plan for the Farne Deeps. It was later recognised that
achieving sustainability was the principle objective of the overall Long Term Management
Plan, and that what was required for the Farne Deeps Functional Unit was essentially a
rebuilding plan. Later this was changed to the more neutral term “Fishing Plan”
Although Nephrops fishing only takes place within a very small part of the area known as
the Farne Deeps it was decided that the area to which the Fishing Plan would apply would
be that defined for the Farne Deeps Functional Unit by ICES.
Measures to be selected had to be:






Relevant for the Farne Deeps fishery
Practical
Understandable
Enforceable
Meet the needs of all those vessels engaged in the Farne Deeps fishery.
Take account of proposals for MPAs in this and adjacent areas
The Fishing Plan should have as its primary aim the reduction of fishing pressure on
Nephrops. In initial discussions, the measures included:
1. Limitations of gear and/ or vessel types;
2. Imposition of area restrictions; and
3. Application of quota management measures.
Consideration was also given to how potential damage to the FU benthic habitat and
ecosystem might best be managed and avoided, together with measures for reducing by-
Revised Nephrops LTMP
Page 19
24/03/2016
catch. However, it was decided that these latter issues concerned all the FUs for the North
Sea and were best dealt with as part of the main Long Term Management Plan.
A focus group established to consider the different options identified three steps to be
taken as part of a Fishing Plan for the Nephrops fishery within the Farne Deeps Functional
Unit:

To exploit Nephrops at a rate which is sustainable by setting a target fishing
mortality (F) consistent with that of maximum sustainable yield (Fmsy),

Set a trigger level for biomass (Bbuff) at which Fmsy and the harvest rate must be
reviewed, and

Set an overall TAC at North Sea level but allocate that part of the quota pertaining
to the Farne Deeps through an “…of which no more than …” provision.
The latter measure effectively imposes a restriction in landings for the Farne Deeps. Such
a provision would protect the Farne Deeps Nephrops stock, while allowing the fleet to
continue to move freely between other FUs within the confines of the overall TAC for the
North Sea. This provision has the advantage of allowing the fleet to retain flexibility, whilst
protecting a vulnerable stock.
It is emphasised, however, that the ‘of which no more than’ solution is specifically being
advocated for rebuilding stocks in the Farne Deeps Functional Unit. It does not
necessarily offer the right solution for all FUs. The measures proposed would:

Come into effect for the Farne Deeps when defined trigger points were met for the
Nephrops stock

Be an alternative to Functional Unit TACs

Provide additional, targeted protection when the Nephrops stock within the Farne
Deeps Functional Unit was assessed to be vulnerable

Be maintained in position until such time as the fishery indicators showed that the
stock was restored to an acceptable level

Ensure equity in the distribution of quota.
The introduction of additional accompanying measures, including the adoption of more
selective fishing gears or area restrictions, would contribute much less to the overall aim
of reducing fishing pressure on Nephrops. There may be by-catch and discarding issues
in this and other FUs but these are best dealt with in the context of the overall Long Term
Management Plan for North Sea Nephrops. There are already pressures in terms of both
cod recovery and the move towards more fully documented fisheries that will place
pressure on fishing fleets to adopt more selective fishing methods.
Wider ecological instruments
Revised Nephrops LTMP
Page 20
24/03/2016
This Management Plan sets three ecological objectives. It proposes that there should be
a reduction of discards in the fishery; minimisation of damage to threatened, endangered
and protected species; and minimisation of impacts on benthic habitats and associated
communities.
1.
Discards: meeting the Landings Obligations
ICES advice notes that in some FUs, where many small Nephrops are encountered,
Nephrops discard rates are high. Mortality of Nephrops after discarding is considered to
be high by some scientists (75%: Wileman et al., 1999). However, recent examination of
discards by observers in the UK has indicated that few small Nephrops are now being discarded,
as processors will take even the smallest animals.
However, there are a number of data discrepancies with respect to discarding in the
Nephrops fisheries that will need to be rectified to meet the landings obligations. In
particular there are discrepancies between observer data and the data used by ICES in
the stock assessments.
One of the problems is the discarding of whitefish, which may form choke species and
result in early closure of the Nephrops fisheries. Species of fish being discarded are
predominantly whiting, plaice, cod and dab. This reflects the higher abundance of these
species than is shown in the TAC and subsequent quotas.
Much is being done through technical measures to reduce unwanted catches, including
small haddock and whiting. Fishers have been innovative in developing a range of
selectivity measures that go way beyond what they thought possible.
Reducing discards in the Nephrops fishery is an important objective especially as we move
toward meeting the landings obligations. There are many instruments available for
achieving this reduction, although optimum measures vary across vessel size and power.
There are also flexibilities under Article 15 of the new basic regulation including:

Species for which scientific evidence demonstrates high survival rates, taking into
account the characteristics of the gear, of the fishing practices and of the
ecosystem. There is a need for more research on the survival of discarded
Nephrops.

Catches falling under de minimis exemptions of up to 5% of total annual catches
of all species subject to an obligation to land, applicable:
o
o

Where scientific evidence indicates that increases in selectivity are very
difficult to achieve; or
To avoid disproportionate costs of handling unwanted catches, for those
fishing gears where unwanted catches per fishing gear do not represent more
than a certain percentage, to be established in the plan, of total annual catch
of that gear.
Year-to-year flexibility of up to 10% of permitted landings
We may need to set down a comment on each of these listed flexibilities
Revised Nephrops LTMP
Page 21
24/03/2016
The adoption of measures to reduce discards would allow catch composition rules to be
removed. However, it is evident that quota uplift will be required for some whitefish
species to allow the landing of the fish that are caught. It will also be necessary for fishers
to reduce unwanted catch through greater selectivity of fishing gears and spatial
measures.
Under this Management Plan it is for fishers to adopt measures for reducing discards and
by-catches. It will be their responsibility to:

Ensure that all relevant catches are landed

Reduce the level of unwanted catches to the lowest level possible

Ensure that the Landings Obligations are met
There may be no need to specify mesh size or alternative measures for making nets more
selective within the framework of a discard ban. The specific measures could be left for
fishers to decide under a system of results-based management. In those circumstances
the Fishing Plan should describe the required output rather than specify the detailed
measures by which the output would be achieved.
2.
Reducing impacts on endangered, threatened and protected species
In terms of the capture of ETP species, fishers opined that the main problems were likely
to be through the catching of sharks, skates and rays. Few of these were being caught
but it was recognised that this may be a consequence of their current low abundance.
There are major provisions in place to prevent such protected species from being landed.
There are also gear options for permitting the escape of particular threatened or
endangered species, although these are not applicable to all types of vessel.
It is important to monitor the capture of any endangered or threatened species as part of
this Management Plan. It is proposed that the capture of such animals should routinely
be recorded in the electronic logbooks. They should be recorded by species; as not all
skates and rays, for example, are classed as endangered. In terms of improving the
survival of live specimens returned to the sea, the Fishing Plan could set out procedures
for best practice. Tagging of specimens might also be undertaken as a voluntary measure.
Advice on handling these fishes with minimal damage can be obtained from Seafish and
the Shark Trust. If there are severe problems with the capture of endangered species
then the Fishing Plan should specify additional measures. The inclusion of such measures
will ensure that this Management Plan is compatible with the Marine Strategy Framework
Directive.
3.
Reducing damage to the seabed and vulnerable organisms
Nephrops grounds are often on very fine mud that may be susceptible to damage. It is
said by some fishers that if there is any damage to the seabed then it is likely to come
from the heavy ‘clumps’ associated with twin rigging. However, here is a lack of evidence
Revised Nephrops LTMP
Page 22
24/03/2016
on the damage done to the seabed by the different gears used to catch Nephrops. This
deficiency needs to be addressed by scientists. Provision for implementing more
environmentally friendly fishing gears would then be possible within this Management Plan
and the Fishing Plans for individual FUs.
Fishers accept the need to limit the overall environmental footprint of the fishery. However,
they are not supportive of the idea of closing additional areas to fishing. They suggest
that areas already set aside for oil and gas platforms, pipelines, renewable energy
installations and conservation areas already serve the purpose of providing areas free
from the effects of fishing. There are already major plans for protected areas and for large
wind farms in areas like the Moray Firth where large areas will be closed to fishing because
of these developments.
Marine Protected Areas can provide a solution to conserving vulnerable sea life and
habitats. There has been pressure for member states to move in this direction from the
Commission through various Directives. In addition, some member states are taking their
own initiatives. Fishers are concerned at the current procedures for identifying these
areas, where areas appear often to be selected before the consultation process has
begun. There are some existing proposals for MPA’s on Nephrops fishing grounds. There
is little support for closed areas as a management tool if they are going to be imposed
upon fishers without full consultation.
Fishers are currently reluctant to ‘volunteer’ areas for designation or to collaborate with
conservation agencies. They are concerned that cooperation with those seeking to
declare MPAs would simply lead to very large areas being designated.
The development of indicators for ‘sea floor integrity’ under the Marine Strategy
Framework Directive is of importance to all fisheries. Disturbance must be minimised and
therefore it is of great importance to include measures within this Management Plan for
Nephrops fisheries, aimed at reducing bottom impact by trawl doors as well as bottom
contacting gears. Or such a programme must be developed alongside this Management
Plan. It must also be recognised that bottom contact, albeit minimised, is essential in some
demersal fisheries.
4.
Summary of ecological instruments
The instruments proposed in this plan for reducing damage to the seabed and vulnerable
organisms will include:

Identifying and implementing Marine Protected Areas in consultation with
fishers. These include ‘real-time’, seasonal and permanent closed areas.
There are already programmes for identifying and implementing these areas.

Restricting the range of gears that can be used in vulnerable areas (including
creel only areas).

g the development of environmentally friendly fishing practices, for
example gears with less bottom contact, larger meshes and better selectivity
profiles.
Revised Nephrops LTMP
Page 23
24/03/2016

Improving data recording systems to identify capture and damage to
endangered, threatened and protected species.

Safe and speedy return to the sea of endangered and threatened species
To ensure that problems of damage are identified and that the measures adopted
effectively address these problems the plan will need to set out a research & monitoring
programme to address data gaps within the fishery and on its wider environmental impact.
Monitoring should include fishery dependent and independent data collection, including
the material that is currently provided by the various research institutes. It will be
especially important to assess impacts on habitat and associated species communities,
including benthic communities, by different fishing gears. It is also important to identify
the distribution of especially vulnerable habitats and species.
Economic instruments
It is for member states and fishing businesses to decide how to deal with changing
economic pressures. There are no specific economic instruments that require to be
imposed by this Management Plan. However, it is sensible to add the proviso that in
meeting the biological and ecological objectives it is important to avoid regulation that
makes fleets less efficient or provides perverse incentives which act to the detriment of
the fishery and the Nephrops stock. It is also important to provide incentives for individual
fishers to change to meet new business aims and objectives. Moreover, any change
imposed on the fishery to meet biological and ecological objectives must take place at a
rate that can be absorbed by individual businesses and communities.
The newly adopted (July 2013) Common Fisheries Policy includes a new regulation for
the Common Organisation of the markets (CMO), as well as a new European Maritime
and Fisheries Fund. These new regulations offer opportunities to regulate fisheries in line
with the market, as well as promoting market development. Producer Organisations are
compelled to make Production and Marketing Plans (PMP’s) to stimulate markets and
adapt operations of its PO members towards market requirements and optimise the
economic proceeds from catches. The positive effects of these measures rely however
on their application within fleets. Their effects can be limited where fishers who are not
member of PO’s take part in the fishery, although this can be mitigated when member
states declare such measures binding on all fishers.
7.
Monitoring of the management plan
An important feature of any Management Plan should be to track its successes and
failures against the objectives set. The extent to which this Management Plan is achieving
the range of stated goals and objectives would be assessed using a combination of
indicators designed to measure performance of the fishery. These performance indicators
may be biological or non-biological. Possible performance indicators are:

Level of fishing mortality (with respect to the target F)
Revised Nephrops LTMP
Page 24
24/03/2016

Abundance trends obtained through underwater TV surveys (with respect to a
means for assessing deterioration in the stock

Levels of discarding and success in meeting the landings obligations

Uptake of environmentally friendly fishing practices

Number and extent of Marine Protected Areas

Economic indicators, including revenue, profitability, average prices etc.

Social Indicators – number of businesses (vessels), numbers employed, average
earnings, quota prices (linked to ability to access the fishery), number of new
entrants etc.
This Management Plan is intended to be adaptive. If things go wrong the plan will be
adapted to meet the new circumstances.
8.
Mixed fishery considerations
management plans
&
linkages
with
other
Much of the North Sea Nephrops trawl catch was originally taken in mixed fisheries, and
that is still the case in many areas like the Fladen ground, the Skagerrak and Kattegat and
in the Scottish, Dutch and Danish fisheries. Most of the FUs were fished seasonally in the
past. They formed part of a network of grounds that were explored at different times of
the year and under different weather conditions.
Many vessels catch Nephrops whilst targeting other species like plaice, cod, whiting or
haddock at other times of the year. Even where Nephrops is the main target a significant
income may be obtained from the whitefish species caught.
The Commission has now recognised that one of the core realities of the demersal
fisheries is that they are mixed fisheries, exploiting multi-species complexes. It is now
accepted that the management regime needs to take this fully into account. Mixed fisheries
and multi-species interactions are central considerations within the reformed Common
Fisheries Policy.
ICES scientists have traditionally given fishery management advice on an individual stock
basis. For each assessed stock, catch options corresponding to the formal ICES advice
are provided for the following year and form the basis of the Total Allowable Catch (TAC)
for that stock. Now, both ICES and the European Commission are investigating ways to
advise on and manage mixed fisheries. ICES scientists are providing tentative mixed
fisheries advice, although the process for refining that advice is still developing. Currently,
the advice is presented to fisheries managers as a set of potential outcomes.
It is evident that a mixed fisheries approach will have implications for this Management
Plan for Nephrops. At this stage, however, it is not clear how the plan should take account
of mixed fisheries management, or multi-species interactions.
Revised Nephrops LTMP
Page 25
24/03/2016
It is also important that any plan for the Nephrops fisheries should take account of the
existence of other management plans for particular stocks or for other fisheries. There
must be interdependence between plans. Many of the main commercial stocks in the
North Sea are already under some form of management plan. Currently, the fishery for
Nephrops in the North Sea is greatly affected by the Cod Recovery Plan. Days at sea
restrictions, together with real-time closures have restricted the range of fishing
opportunities and disrupted traditional fishing patterns. Additional effort has in the past
been transferred into the Nephrops fleet as a result of the heavy restrictions placed on
vessels fishing for whitefish. Indeed, it is currently not possible to tackle the problem of
discards by 80 mm Nephrops vessels through an increase overall mesh size if the
requirement was to move above 100mm because that would render the vessel liable to
classification as a whitefish vessel. This is a most unsatisfactory situation, which acts
against the adoption of some conservation measures.
Fishers have suggested that it is not possible to separate management of prawns from
management of haddock and other species. There is now an acceptance by fishers that
a multi-species approach must be applied to the whole fishery, rather than a species by
species approach. There are management plans for haddock and saithe already in place
and a plan for whiting is under consideration. Somehow, all these plans need to be
brought together.
Some fishers have suggested that Nephrops quotas should be interchangeable with
quotas for other species. Essentially, fishers catch what is actually present on the fishing
grounds. Setting immutable quotas for single species fails to recognise this fact of nature,
and inevitably leads to unwanted catches. A major effort will be required to further develop
innovative management measures that recognise the diverse nature of the fisheries.
In preparing this draft management plan we have recognised that the fleets catching
Nephrops are very diverse. A few vessels catch only Nephrops but many more are
dependent on a wide range of species. Dealing with the mixed fisheries aspects presents
a major challenge for the future.
9.
Future institutional structures
The philosophy behind the preparation of this Long Term Management Plan is that
management planning is likely to be more successful if it involves those people whose
activities are to be managed. This plan has been prepared with strong stakeholder
involvement, whilst also drawing upon the advice of fisheries scientists and fishery
managers. The overall aim has been to develop a sense of stewardship on the part of the
industry and to move towards full ‘co-management’ with others.
We have to be aware, however, that preparation of the plan has taken place against a
background of changes to the regulatory structure. In particular, as a result of the coming
into force of the Lisbon Treaty, the European Parliament is now involved in the preparation
of management plans through the process of co-decision taking. The extent of the
Parliament’s involvement is currently controversial, and although it has been agreed that
Revised Nephrops LTMP
Page 26
24/03/2016
management plans should be adopted jointly by Parliament and Council there is currently
inter-institutional deadlock over the precise extent of the Parliament’s role. The Council
wishes to exclude the Parliament from the decision-making process for some elements of
the multi-annual management plans As a result, a number of management plans are now
obsolete but their revision has been delayed – to the great detriment of fish stocks and the
fishing industry.
New institutional structures for implementation of this and other Management Plans are
currently still being discussed in the context of reforms to the Common Fisheries Policy. It
is expected that Management Plans will be prepared and agreed for a particular region by
the relevant Member States, with advice from the Advisory Councils.
There is currently strong criticism from fishers of the over-detailed central regulation that
characterises the CFP, and this move to allow Member States to work together regionally
to implement appropriate management measures has much to commend it. It will be
critical for this management plan to be discussed, endorsed, adopted and monitored by
such a regional management body for the North Sea, on which it is hoped that fishers and
other interests will be fully represented.
10. Research and Monitoring
There is insufficient information available on some of the Nephrops fisheries, and this
deficiency must be addressed as part of this Long Term Management Plan. Although
some of the FUs are regularly surveyed by means of underwater television, others are not,
and information on the distribution and numbers of Nephrops in these un-surveyed areas
is limited. For some of the FUs with lower levels of landings (e.g. Botney Gut), there are
no underwater TV abundance estimates. This problem must be addressed. Further
development and extension of fishery independent surveys, including underwater TV
surveys, are an important feature of the plan, not only to aid the assessment of Nephrops
stocks, and aid the overall fishery management process, but also to play a crucial role in
monitoring the fishery's broader ecological performance.
It is also important that there should be no incentive to withhold information on the fishery
in particular FUs.
Nephrops are also caught in areas outside the FUs. The advice from ICES is that the
definition of additional FUs should be considered, particularly for the Devil’s Hole. Further
work is needed to ascertain whether the current division into FUs adequately reflects the
distribution of Nephrops.
The Nephrops assessments are not currently presented in a form that can readily be
understood by non-specialists, including fishermen. As part of this Management Plan we
believe that in future it will be important to express the results of the scientific assessments
and the management objectives in clear every-day language, so that they may be
understood by those responsible for stewardship of the fishery.
Revised Nephrops LTMP
Page 27
24/03/2016
There is a general lack of effort data, especially for the under-10m fleet. National
authorities should provide information on the numbers and types of vessels and their
capacity, from all nations, operating within the different FUs.
A case can be made for mapping of fishing effort for Nephrops in the North Sea, using
VMS and other sources, for protective purposes, to monitor the distribution of effort
between Functional Units and to ensure that any displacement of effort as a result of MPA
and wind-farm proposals can be evaluated
We have already identified in this plan the need to monitor the discarding of fish for which
a vessel has insufficient quota and to monitor the capture and discarding of undersized
species including other crustaceans, fish and small Nephrops. There is also a need to
improve data recording systems to capture fishing interactions with endangered,
threatened and protected species.
Some small Nephrops are discarded within particular FUs, although this may change as
landings obligations are introduced. The advantages of taking away MLS restrictions and
landing all Nephrops need to be investigated further. Landing small Nephrops would
provide scientists with valuable information.
It is important to monitor the capture of any endangered or threatened species, including
skates and rays. It will also be important to determine whether there are particular areas
in the North Sea where threatened endangered and protected species and habitats are
likely to be adversely affected by trawling for Nephrops. This is a task for national
authorities under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive.
There is a lack of evidence on the damage done to the seabed by the different gears used
to catch Nephrops and this needs to be addressed by scientists.
There are undoubted advantages from the closure of areas to fishing in terms of enabling
comparisons to be made between fished and un-fished areas and assessing impacts on
the seabed and the fragile animals that live there. However, the choice of areas to intend
vulnerable organisms and habitats must be based on sound scientific evidence. There is
deep distrust by fishers of those bodies responsible for defining such areas.
Fish are not caught in neat ratios and management through a series of quotas for
individual species does not recognise the reality of conditions on the fishing grounds. The
mixed species aspects of managing fisheries have received insufficient attention. Major
efforts are required to develop innovative management measures that recognise the
diverse nature of the fisheries. Many fishers are interested in initiatives which would allow
them to land all their catch and have said that this would influence both gear design and
fishing behaviour. Such initiatives should be explored further.
To summarise, there are a number of research and monitoring requirements for the
Nephrops fishery to achieve the objectives of this Management Plan.

The development and extension of fishery independent surveys, including
underwater TV surveys, is an important feature of the plan, not only to aid the
assessment of prawn stocks, and aid the overall fishery management process, but
also to play a crucial role in monitoring the fishery's broader ecological
performance.
Revised Nephrops LTMP
Page 28
24/03/2016

If full analytical assessments are to be made (and this may or may not be
necessary) then further research will be required either to enable the age of
Nephrops to be determined, or to employ suitable length-based techniques

It will be important to express the results of the scientific assessments and the
management objectives in clear every-day language, so that they may be
understood by those responsible for stewardship of the fishery.

Further work is needed to ascertain whether the current division into FUs
adequately reflects the distribution of Nephrops. Should other areas containing
Nephrops be incorporated into the assessments? Are there small pockets of
Nephrops at different locations that should also be taken into account?

There is a need for an analysis of the numbers and types of vessels and their
capacity, from all nations, operating within the different FUs. There is a general
lack of effort data, especially for the under-10m fleet.

Data gaps within the fishery and on its wider environmental impact must be
addressed. It will be especially important to evaluate the impacts of the fishery,
including different gear types, on habitat and associated species communities,
including benthic communities.

Wider information is required on the distribution of vulnerable and protected
species and habitats in the North Sea in relation to the Nephrops fishing grounds.

There is also a need to improve data recording systems to capture fishing
interactions with endangered, threatened and protected species.

Many fishers are interested in initiatives which would allow them to land all their
catch and have said that this would influence both gear design and fishing
behaviour. Such initiatives will need to be explored further.
11. Uncertainties
Differences in the importance of Nephrops to different member states means that there
are differences in the level of commitment to scientific research into Nephrops and in the
collection of data to support scientific assessments. In the main, scientific studies of
Nephrops are confined to the UK and Denmark. There are few data available for some of
the FUs. For example, for some of the FUs with lower levels of landings (e.g. Botney Gut),
there is no underwater TV abundance estimate and in addition, commercial sampling data
(length frequency information) have often only been gathered in recent years. A full and
complete management plan will need to consider whether additional information is
required for management to be effective, and how that additional information might be
obtained. Where there is uncertainty about the status of a FU there should be no
incentives for continuing to maintain uncertainty.
An important feature of any Management Plan is that it should be adaptive; the plan should
be based on a learning process. If management goes wrong in some way, or deviates
Revised Nephrops LTMP
Page 29
24/03/2016
from the objectives laid down, then there should be recourse to means of putting the plan
back on track. It will be important to monitor the outcomes of this Management Plan, to
take account of uncertainties, and to steer the plan back on course when it has deviated
from the desired course.
Multi-annual plans for North Sea Fisheries, including the Cod Management Plan, have not
been adaptive. STECF reported in 2011 that the current Cod Management Plan was failing
to meet its objectives, and was flawed in some quite fundamental ways. However, the
arrival of co-decision-taking, under the provisions of the Lisbon Treaty, meant that full
review and revision of the plan and its replacement by a better plan was delayed. Member
states and the Regional Advisory Councils called for an interim regime to address the most
immediate problems associated with the dysfunctional plan. These problems have still
not been resolved.
Experience points to the need for a more flexible, regionalised CFP, with adaptive
Management Plans that can be revised quickly in the event of failure.
12. Timeframe
The NSRAC sees the LTMP for Nephrops fisheries as a gradual sequential development
operating over a period of about 10 years. The plan needs to be responsive and adaptive,
changing as circumstances change.
It is suggested that the plan should be reconsidered at 5-year intervals.
Revised Nephrops LTMP
Page 30
24/03/2016