FMAC/12/05
FISHERIES MANAGEMENT AND CONSERVATION (FMAC) GROUP
MINUTE OF MEETING HELD ON 20 JANUARY 2012 IN VERITY HOUSE,
EDINBURGH
SUMMARY OF ACTION POINTS:
No.
1.
ACTION POINT
David Anderson (SAFPO) to indicate views on new
draft of remit; revised remit then to be circulated for
agreement.
Finalise inshore static gear representation.
Members to offer comments and suggestions in
relation to the proposed outcomes for 2012
Marine Scotland to convene sub group on buy back
for RTC programme and seasonal closures.
Sub group to review buy back measures and
allocations to be convened.
Marine Scotland to consider whether group of vessels
exempt in terms of 2009 Article 11 application can be
expanded.
Proposals on exempt period for TR2 options to be
circulated in 72 hours following meeting.
Explore proposals to increase Nephrops tails
minimum landing size to 46mm.
Agree date for next meeting.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
1.
RESPONSIBILITY
David Anderson /
Secretariat.
Secretariat.
All.
Secretariat.
Secretariat.
Marine Scotland.
Secretariat.
Marine Scotland
Secretariat.
Welcome and apologies.
1. The Chair welcomed to the meeting Alan Coghill, representing the SFF’s
Inshore Committee; Simon Dryden, representing Marine Scotland Compliance;
Justine Baldicchino from Marine Scotland; Katrina Marsden from the Scottish
Parliament Information Centre; and, Jim Drewery, from Marine Scotland Science.
2. Apologies were received from Sandy Patience, Ian Gatt and Sarah Adcock.
Sandy was represented by Roddy McColl.
3. The Chair noted, in introductory remarks, that the SFF had issued a news
release prior to the meeting. The Chair further noted that, while the Government of
course acknowledged the prerogative of any representative organisation to
communicate its views publicly, its preference was for the business of the group not
to be subject to advance media coverage. Bertie Armstrong, for the SFF, noted that
the purpose of the news release issued was to underline the concern of fishers about
the constraints imposed on them through effort control, and the need for a positive
resolution to these issues. SFF therefore reserved the right to make public
comment.
4. It was noted that item 5 on the agenda, Discussion paper: Review of the Cod
Recovery Plan: 2011 Reports, would be subsumed into item 4.
A2017855
1
FMAC/12/05
2.
Minute of previous meeting held on 3 November 2011.
5. The minutes of the previous were agreed; although there was a request for the
level of effort bought back through the RTC programme to be considered under
item 5.
3.
Matters arising:
3.1
Action points from previous meeting.
6. On action point 1, it was reported that Marine Scotland had met with MMO in
relation to enforcement action connected to entry by English vessels into RTCs.
MMO had noted their intention to enforce penalties in a fashion similar to the
arrangements currently in place in Scotland.
7. With regard to action point 2, a further draft of the remit had been shared with
SAFPO and would be circulated to the group for agreement once a revised form of
words had been agreed.
ACTION POINT 1: Secretariat
8. Action points 3 and 4 would be covered under agenda item 4.
On
action point 5, comments had been received on the 2012 catch quota scheme paper.
Marine Scotland had since decided to roll forward 2011 allocations and participating
into 2012. A reserve list would be created if it is possible to offer any additional
places. Action point 6 had been cleared.
9. On static gear representation, the Chair reported that nominations for three
inshore static gear representatives were being finalised. In response to questions
from members, it was further noted that a number of existing members brought
considerable knowledge of inshore static gear fisheries to the group.
ACTION POINT 2: Secretariat
4.
Conservation Credits Scheme for 2012-13: Implementation of agreements
reached at December Council.
10. In introducing paper FMAC/12/02, it was noted that officials would report the
group’s views to the Cabinet Secretary as part of his consideration of the
Conservation Credits scheme for 2012-13. Once a decision has been reached it will
be disseminated to skippers and the wider industry as soon as possible.
11. The group was invited first to consider what policy outcomes might be agreed
for 2012-13. Marine Scotland noted that, in developing draft outcomes, it had sought
to achieve a balance between socio-economic and conservation objectives. The
group noted the proposed outcomes but did not agree to them, and was particularly
reticent in relation to the quantified outcomes proposed such as in relation to
reducing discards of cod by Nephrops trawlers to one third of catches of cod.
A2017855
2
FMAC/12/05
12. It was also noted by RSPB Scotland and WWF Scotland that fisheries
management outcomes should be described in the context of the Scottish
Government’s wider policies and objectives connected to the marine environment,
and the longer term objectives connected to those policies. In concluding the
discussion, the Chair asked members to offer comments and suggestions in writing
in relation to the proposed outcomes.
ACTION POINT 3: All
13. In relation to TR1 basic allocations, it was proposed that the basic allocation
be the greater of 90 days and 56% of average annual kW days between 2004-06.
These numbers are proposals subject to information gathered from applications.
The group considered, but rejected, the possibility of removing the track record
allocation option.
14. There was discussion about what increase in basic rates could be achieved if
the RTC programme was expanded. It was noted that, if a further 5% reduction in
cod mortality was sought through the RTC programme, the control total could
increase enough to offer a flat rate of 100 days. It was agreed that the level of buy
back for the present RTC and seasonal closure programme, as well as any buy back
for an expanded programme, should be considered by a sub group.
Marine Scotland (Allan Gibb) would convene this group.
ACTION POINT 4: Secretariat
15. The allocation for vessels participating in the Fully Documented Fishery (Catch
Quota) NS cod scheme would be the greater of the number of days fished in the
2011-12 management period and 100% of average annual kW days between
2004-06. This allocation could be amended in the course of the year if proposals for
a legal exemption from effort control for FDF vessels was secured, and there could
be wider ramifications if the Article 12 baseline was not adjusted subsequent to a
exemption.
16. In discussing the TR1 proposal, SFF representatives noted that their principal
objective would be to ensure the fleet had enough days to catch legitimate quotas
without undue changes to business models and fishing patterns. It was further
stated that the Government should review quota uptake throughout the year and, if
necessary, revert to the Commission to seek sufficient effort to land quotas.
17. Marine Scotland noted in relation to this issue the commitments made by the
Cabinet Secretary in the Parliament in relation to access to catching opportunities in
2012. It was further noted that the European Commission could be expected to
receive with some scepticism any request for additional effort, and was likely to take
the view that the overall effort allocation was sufficient for realising catching
opportunities (notwithstanding how this effort pot was then distributed.) It was also
noted that, under the 2011 effort control totals, none of NS cod, haddock, whiting
and saithe had recorded an uptake in 2011 of less than 94%. Marine Scotland also
noted that the UK had written to the Commissioner to seek clarification and
reassurance about the timing of a new CRP, on which the Commissioner had
committed to bring forward proposals in the spring.
A2017855
3
FMAC/12/05
18. With respect to buy backs, Marine Scotland re-stated its willingness to consider
ideas for new options, including amendments to those connected to the deep water
line in ICES Areas IVa and IIa. Marine Scotland proposed, and there was
agreement to, the establishment of a sub group to review the existing matrix of buy
backs and to consider new gear and other buy backs. Marine Scotland will convene
this group and provide a remit.
ACTION POINT 5: Secretariat
19. In conclusion, the group acknowledged that the proposals for TR1 basic
allocations were those that could be provided within the known limits of effort
ceilings, although a number of members re-stated a view that the general approach
of the CRP in relation to effort was faulty.
20. Marine Scotland noted that the proposal for basic TR2 allocations was made
in the context of UK commitments made at the December Fisheries Council that the
UK Nephrops fleet would, from 1 July 2012, achieve exemption from effort control for
part of the year.
21. Marine Scotland proposed that this be achieved by offering vessels a basic
allocation that could be used during 10 months. Control totals permit in this
approach a basic allocation that would be the greater of 90 days and 45% of average
annual kW days between 2004-06. These basic allocations could be increased if the
group was willing to agree new proposals for fleet selectivity measures, resulting in
an increase to the greater of 113 days and 56% of average annual kW days between
2004-06.
22. Marine Scotland further noted that the alternative basic TR2 allocation for
catching less than five per cent cod could not continue as in previous years. In
future it would only be available to vessels fishing exclusively outside Area IVa and
the ‘Farn Deeps’ that land less than 2.5 per cent during each of the preceding two
effort management years. Marine Scotland proposed that this allocation be the
greater of 180 days and 83% of average annual kW days between 2004-06.
23. Vessels applying for a TR2 basic allocation would be also required to select two
calendar months during the entirety of which they would be required to undertake
specified exemption measures. Marine Scotland considered that a two month period
would be thought the minimum reasonable period for exemption by the Commission.
24. Lastly, it was noted that commitments made by the UK included the
achievement of exemption by all TR2 vessels fishing in Area VIIa from 1 July
onwards. Marine Scotland would discuss approaches to this exemption with other
UK FAs to inform the group how this would be achieved.
25. The group then discussed proposals for basic TR2 allocations.
26. The group did not wish to adopt new mandatory selectivity measures to
increase the basic allocation. Rather, it favoured including these measures as a buy
back option. This was agreed, subject to the requirements of the December Council
agreement It was also agreed that TR2 buy back options would be considered by
the group to be convened in terms of Action Point 5 above.
A2017855
4
FMAC/12/05
27. The group sought clarification about whether vessels could conform to the two
month exemption requirement by tying up for that period. Marine Scotland
acknowledged that the text of the statement was not explicit on this point but
highlighted that exemption was to be achieved while targeting Nephrops. Tie-up
would not achieve this requirement. It was noted, however, that vessels already
exempt under the terms of the existing Article 11 application made in 2009 need not
undertake additional measures. Marine Scotland also undertook to assess whether
the group of vessels so exempt could be expanded.
ACTION POINT 6: Marine Scotland
28. The group was not attracted to the option of vessels nominating two months
during the entirety of which they would be exempt from effort control. Members
suggested alternative approaches whereby vessels would achieve exemption for a
set number of days over the course of the year, with between 20 and 30 days being
suggested as an appropriate period. As a consequence of this discussion
Marine Scotland noted that it would circulate further, revised proposals offering the
group alternative means by which exemption could be achieved for a specified
period, and the basic allocations that would accompany the different approaches.
Marine Scotland would circulate proposals on 23 January and seek views from
members not later than 27 January.
ACTION POINT 7: All
29. There was also discussion about the measures that could be specified as those
that would achieve exemption from effort control. It was noted that use of separator
grids would provide exemption. A number of representatives suggested that other
methods to achieve exemption should be investigated and, where appropriate,
specified. This was agreed as an item to add to the remit of the group convened in
terms of Action Point 5 above.
4.1
SFF proposal for trial that reduces discards and allows entry into
jRTCs.
30. The paper was introduced. It was noted that the proposal attempted to reduced
discards by seeking fleet wide, or corporate, commitment to the employment of more
selective fishing gear. The proposals involve a scientific trial that will both receive a
high minimum allocation of days at sea and access to jRTCs as a reward for change
in a significant number of vessels. Work continues to reduce unwanted catches of
cod and this scheme hopes to provide more discard data. The positivity of this paper
was noted. Further discussion would be required to discuss the integration of any
trial with the days at sea scheme and its relationship with EU legislation that requires
closures.
5.
Any other business:
5.1
Nephrops Tails MLS
31. It was agreed that the suggestion to increase minimum landing size to 46mm be
considered and explored further, in consultation.
ACTION POINT 8: Marine Scotland
A2017855
5
FMAC/12/05
5.2
Aquaculture and Fisheries Bill consultation document
32. It was noted that there will be consultation on the legislative changes proposed
by the Bill.
5.3
Community/New Entrants
33. It was noted that Marine Scotland were considering this particular issue and
others were welcome to contribute. It was further noted that funding was available
for anyone interested in attending an Introduction to Fishing course.
Marine Scotland would consider establishing a New Entrants sub group of FMAC.
5.4
Implementation of the Control Regulation
34. It was noted that under the forthcoming legislation on implementation of the
control regulation, greater resources would be required to verify weight of boxes. It
was explained that there would be a series of meetings to discuss a sampling plan
and Marine Scotland would discuss this with affected areas of the industry, but that
the lead for implementing the legislation would lie primarily with the industry. A
meeting had been scheduled for 1 February 2012.
5.5
Net tagging/shrinkage trial
35. It was reported that five volunteers were being sought to trial tagging of gear to
record shrinkage and use of gear that has shrunk. Volunteers were sought for all
fishing types for an eight month trial.
5.6
Inshore Fisheries Groups
It was noted that a Scottish Government announcement would soon be made on the
next stage of inshore fisheries and the future of Inshore Fishery Groups (IFGs.)
There was some concern raised about the fact that IFG Chairs had been given some
advance information on this announcement, which had subsequently circulated
among a number of stakeholders. The Chair explained that this had been done as a
courtesy, given the Chairs’ pivotal role in taking the IFGs through the forthcoming
transition period. Marine Scotland would provide full information on the way ahead
for IFGs imminently. [Post meeting note: a press notice on the matter was issued
in the following week.].
6.
Date of next meeting.
36. The date of the next meeting would agreed by correspondence.
ACTION POINT 9: Secretariat
FMAC Secretariat
Marine Scotland
February 2012
A2017855
6