Background : the SFA’s discards project
In March 2013, some of the SFA’s whitefish skippers raised the possibility of trialling various management measures under simulated ‘discard ban’ conditions. The purpose of the exercise was to identify the practical problems raised by the new regime and assess the efficiency of management solutions to them. A month later, and following constructive discussions with Marine Scotland, the SFA whitefish committee gave its unanimous backing to the project.
There were two main drivers for this decision: a fear that measures developed in other, less mixed fisheries would not work in Shetland; and a keen awareness that time is very short and it would be better to make a start unilaterally than wait until the entire industry got its act together. SAFPO’s initiative is extremely welcome from this point of view.
Like SAFPO, the SFA recognised from the outset that reliable data on discards is an essential precondition for any trials, whether they concern operational measures at sea or onshore logistics. For this reason, a representative sample of Shetland whitefish vessels has been collecting data on their discards for the past few months. That data is anonymised and analysed at the NAFC Marine Centre in Scalloway. We believe that the data collection effort will have to continue for at least a year if it is to have any real value.
Importantly, and in contrast with FDF CCTV data, the SFA figures can be said to represent discards in ‘normal’ fishing operations. It should also be corroborated by observers, and this was the subject of a FISA application back in July.
Ideally, our project – and now, of course, the SAFPO initiative – would result in clear recommendations on both fisheries management and onshore logistics that would mitigate the negative effects of the landings obligation. In the worst case scenario, it would demonstrate that the proposed framework cannot work, and in which case it would be for the
Member States and Commission to assume their responsibilities.
SFA & SAFPO
Clearly, the more minds at work on this issue, the better, and all the more so if we can all fit together in an industry-wide logic rather than being confined to Shetland. The SFA would be more than willing to blend its efforts with initiatives sponsored by SAFPO or any other competent organisation.
As has already been mentioned, one o f the main reasons for Shetland’s early start on the discards problem was concern that what worked for Scottish vessels as a whole (assuming something could work for Scottish vessels as a whole) would not necessarily work for
Shetland vessels. The opposite may not be true; research going back over a decade shows a far greater diversity of species per haul around Shetland than in neighbouring fishing

grounds. For this reason, the SFA would want trials of management measures to continue in
Shetland waters, and with input from Shetland skippers.
SFA results to date
At this early stage, the data we have collected largely confirm anecdotal evidence of fish abundance and appear to be broadly in line with MSS discard rates. While reliance on detailed figures would be unwise at present – we need a longer, corroborated time series to be able to draw emphatic conclusions – it seems that quota uplift of the magnitude commonly cited could deal with much of the discard problem for certain species, including cod. It comes as no surprise that hake and (to a lesser extent) saithe pose more of a challenge.
In line with the iterative approach we have adopted on identifying management measures that might limit the impact of a discard ban, we would be keen to press on with successive trials that together with the quota uplift might go some way to easing the magnitude of the problem.
Next steps
At the outset, the SFA’s concept was to trial management measures with the appropriate derogations from Marine Scotland and assess their impact on discard patterns. This was to be an iterative process relying on as few preconceptions as possible, and was to be combined with desk exercises focusing on the onshore implications of the resulting discards.
Apart from our bid to secure funding for observers, the SFA has approached Marine
Scotland Science for discards data from its long-running observer scheme. It would be very helpful to know (a) whether MSS data for Shetland vessels are similar to that now being generated by the SFA, and (b) whether the pattern of discards now being observed around
Shetland is similar to that for Scottish waters in general. If (b) is true, it would suggest that management measures to mitigate the impact of the discard ban could be applied right across Scotland; if not, an even more ‘decentralised’ approach would have to be adopted.
Future trials
Many of the measures we would like to trial tie in with themes covered in the SAFPO paper.
They include the following:

Gear trials, notably the reduction of cod-end mesh size (see Proposal 1).

Self-sampling, for which a conditional FISA grant has been approved (see Proposal
2). Ideally, this project would tie in with SAFPO thinking on the subject.

W ith a full year’s data, a meaningful desk-based exercise concerning onshore logistics could be launched. As with sea trials, that could be part of a broader,

Scottish study. We could complement this work with a derogation to run one or more commercial fishing trips where all fish that would normally have to be discarded would be landed at the SFP fishmeal plant here in Shetland. SFP’s feedback on what it could handle and what it could not (and why) would be invaluable.

The use of observers and/or a reference fleet as a means of meeting FDF provisions.
Our members, like the SFF as a whole, are very much opposed to the deployment of
CCTV as part of an FDF solution, and experience from other parts of the world
(notably Alaska and British Columbia) demonstrates the effectiveness of observer programmes.

Norwegian- and Faroese-type combinations of RTCs and move-on rules under which fishermen can make some return from bycatch in excess of quota when it can be shown (e.g. from VMS data) that they have moved on in an effort to avoid subsequent catches.
Shetland’s contribution
Quite apart from the SFA’s interest in ensuring that any management measures found to work in Scotland would also work for our members’ vessels, Shetland has certain advantages in contributing to the Steering Group’s work:

Geography and a close-knit fishing community make the organisation of trials relatively easy.

Shetland whitefish skippers are not only willing participants in trials but took the initiative in data collection, and on a purely voluntary basis.

The industry has an extremely close relationship with the NAFC Marine Centre.
Note also that NAFC could act as the scientific coordinator of any industry-wide discards research effort.

Although it appears counter-intuitive, it may be that in the mixed whitefish fishery increases in cod-end mesh size have increased cod discards because of reduced catch rates of smaller species such as haddock and whiting. If correct, this suggests that reducing the codend mesh size in this fishery could decrease levels of cod discarding.
Background
Increases in cod-end mesh size over the last decade have almost entirely eliminated catches of undersized whitefish (i.e. fish below the legal minimum landing size) by the
Scottish TR1 sector. The fish currently being discarded are almost entirely of marketable size, and the primary reason for their discards is a lack of quota.
A central problem in the mixed whitefish fishery is imbalances between the relative sizes of quotas for different species and the varying abundance and catchability of those species on the fishing grounds.
Cod, haddock and whiting are among the main species caught by Shetland whitefish vessels. Cod are substantially larger than haddock or whiting, frequently reaching up to
100 cm in length, while lengths of 30 to 50 cm are more common for haddock and whiting.
Hypothesis
We assume that the current cod-end mesh size (nominally 120 mm, but probably closer to
130 mm by pre-Omega gauge measurements) allows a significant proportion of marketable haddock and whiting to escape. This reduces the catch rates for these species (the numbers caught per unit of fishing time), meaning that a fisherman has to fish for longer to catch the same quantity of fish. But as cod are larger they are less likely to escape; their catch rate is affected less by increases in mesh size.
It follows that increases in cod-end mesh size have probably lowered the catch rates of haddock and whiting and left the catch rate for cod largely unchanged. Fishermen therefore have to fish for longer to catch the same amount of haddock and whiting, and consequently catch (and discard) more cod.
In these circumstances, a reduction in cod-end mesh size (to 110 mm, for example) could result in less cod being discarded. The smaller cod-end mesh size would increase the catch rates of haddock and whiting, allowing fishermen to catch their quotas of these species in less fishing time. And less fishing time would result in fewer cod being caught and discarded.
This effect might be particularly pronounced in the seine net fishery, where the impact of larger mesh sizes on haddock and whiting catch rates are known to have been greatest. It

could also be appropriate to limit any reduction in cod-end mesh size to vessels using particular types of fishing gear and/or fishing in particular areas.
Additional advantages of higher catch rates would be reduced fuel costs and better use of limited time at sea.
Proposal
Sea trials could be carried out to test the hypothesis that reducing the cod-end mesh size could reduce discards of cod in the Shetland whitefish fishery.
In general terms this would involve allowing a suitable vessel to fish commercially with (say) a 110 mm cod-end, and comparing the catch rates of different species to those with a normal 120 mm cod-end.
The ultimate aim of these trials should be to try and establish whether a fishing vessel discards less cod when using a smaller-mesh cod-end than the current 120 mm standard.

The SFA and NAFC applied to FISA this year for a project to collect additional data on discarding in the mixed whitefish fishery around Shetland, to trial a discards self-sampling programme (based on methods developed and used in the Netherlands), and to assess the practical implications of implementing a discard ban on vessels in this fishery.
The FISA selection panel was concerned that additional at-sea data on discards might not substantially change existing perceptions of discard levels, but felt that the self-sampling element of the SFA/NAFC proposal should be supported.
Background
T he FISA panel concluded that “as a first step, Shetland should seek to integrate their proposa l into the wider [SAFPO] scheme”. Moreover, and “subject to discussions taking place with the steering group dealing with the SAFPO proposal and a fruitful outcome arising ”, FISA agreed to “allocate monies to Shetland as a contribution to the overall work – a sum of the order of £30,000 was discussed to be decided later”.
It follows, therefore, that progression of the SFA/NAFC proposal (the self-sampling part) is dependent on acceptance of this as an element of the wider SAFPO scheme, and on the successful development of that scheme.
This proposal for the implementation and trial of a discard self-sampling programme reflects this logic.
Purpose
We lack the basic information needed for a practical and proportionate discard management regime for the Scottish mixed whitefish fleet, including information on the quantities and nature of the fish being discarded.
A significant obstacle to the collection of discards (and other fisheries) data is the expense of deploying scientific observers aboard commercial fishing vessels, and the difficulty of recruiting suitably qualified and experienced people willing to undertake this work.
The main objective is to implement and evaluate a discard self-sampling programme in this fishery, based on methods developed and used in the Netherlands. It could become a costeffective means of collecting discards data from Scottish whitefish fisheries.

Proposal
The self-sampling programme would be developed from the model used successfully in
Dutch fisheries by the Dutch Institute for Marine Resources and Ecosystem Studies
(IMARES; see, for example: edepot.wur.nl/181217). Essentially, that programme involves fishermen on selected fishing vessels - a reference fleet - retaining representative samples of the discards from randomised and pre-determined hauls during agreed fishing trips.
The samples (~80kg per haul in the Dutch programme) are boxed, iced and landed with the commercial catch for analysis in an onshore laboratory, following the same protocols used by at-sea observers. Statistical analyses are used to the screen the resulting data for any sampling biases or other unusual data.
Adapted as appropriate, this programme would be implemented aboard selected whitefish fishing vessels. It would involve the development of suitable protocols and the instruction of vessel crews in the sampling procedures to be followed. Appropriate derogations would be obtained from Marine Scotland Compliance for these vessels to retain the discard samples and land them. As in the Dutch programme, the discard samples would be analysed onshore, including the identification of species and measurement of size distributions.
The data collected in this way would be screened using the statistical methods developed for the Dutch programme. They would also be compared with the data collected by at-sea observers.
An assessment would then be made of the programme ’s usefulness and potential compared with other means of collecting discards data.
Principal benefits
If successful, the self-sampling scheme could provide a cost-effective alternative means of collecting additional discards data, without the requirement for additional (expensive) at-sea observers, further increasing the amount of information available to inform the development of a practical discard ban regime.
This method could possibly be extended to the collection of other types of fisheries data.