The Royal Society of Edinburgh (RSE) is pleased
to respond to the Scottish Executive Rural Affairs Department consultation
on the future of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). The RSE is Scotland’s
National Academy of Science and Letters, comprising Fellows elected
on the basis of their distinction, from the full range of academic disciplines,
and from industry, commerce and the professions. This response has been
compiled by the General Secretary with the assistance of a number of
Fellows with substantial experience of fisheries and marine science.
The Society agrees that there is a need to reform the CFP and has concerns
about the present stock levels of many species of commercial importance,
and the potential negative socio-economic impacts that could result
from partial or total collapse of this sector of the economy. While
many aspects in the Green Paper are to be welcomed, including the integration
of improved ecosystem-based science into fishery management, the Green
Paper lacked any market or commercial analyses of the demand for wild
and farmed fisheries products. The current policy proposals could be
a recipe for a continued decline of stocks, albeit at a somewhat slower
rate than in the recent past. It will be important that in reforming
fisheries regulations that the regulations should be simplified and
made more transparent and accountable and work with, rather than against,
market forces.
The specific questions identified in the consultation document are
addressed below:
The European Commission Green Paper (COM(2001)135)
Areas of emphasis
The state of the main fish stocks
The Society agrees that many fish stocks of commercial importance are
at the threshold of sustainability and that urgent action is required.
With regard to the causes, the regulations on mesh size and "Total
Allowable Catches" (TAC) have been largely discredited, possibly
contributing to, rather than helping, safeguard over-fishing. The mesh
size regulations have not been uniformly enforced across the Community
and the TACs have resulted in the discard of under-size fish and non-target
species with negative ecological impact on populations. With regard
to the use of closed areas and closed seasons, these have had some success.
However, as happened with TAC setting, often the scale of closure recommended
by fisheries scientists has not been implemented in full.
Extensive research and knowledge in marine ecology does exist, but
most of that which does exist may be found in institutions that are
not primarily charged with providing advice for fishery management.
Under the revised policy proper communication across areas of scientific
responsibility would help to ameliorate the situation. In addition,
fishery science has not been well supported by Research Councils and
most Governmental funding for fishery science goes towards the provision
of routine statutory advice. If the integration of the environmental
dimension is to form a greater part of the CFP, then funding should
be reviewed to allow for research of more ecosystem-based management
measures.
The environmental dimension
The Society welcomes the environmental dimension coming at the top of
the list of priorities with the state of the main fish stocks. This
inter-linking of the fish stocks with the marine environment is very
important and the CFP should recognise that fish stocks depend upon
the environment which in turn depends for its quality on a sensible
management of those fisheries.
With regard to the statement that "many problems in the marine
environment are not due to fishing activities only and that fishing
has suffered from environmental damage", it should be recognised
that fishing activity is the major anthropogenic influence in many marine
systems and that many environmental concerns could be remedied rapidly
through policies of large-scale closure or partial closure (e.g. through
the limitation of certain gear types) of the fishery. A major uncertainty
that may impact on future sustainability of some fisheries, however,
is possible short- or long-term influences of climate variation.
Fleet policy
The Society agrees with the three conclusions in this section. In particular,
that funding for technological progress, and subsidies to the industry,
have far outweighed funding in areas of research appropriate to understanding
the effects on the ecosystem.
Monitoring and control
The Society believes that monitoring and control would be made easier
and more cost-effective if there were physical restrictions or partial
closure to fishery access.
The economic and social dimension of the CFP
The document refers to the European Union PESCA programme which was
a very small highly targeted programme, administered locally, with close
stakeholder involvement. PESCA was a minor programme and its most innovative
aspects were poorly used, but the latter was largely due to its small
size which meant main line aspects were tackled first. In Scotland it
was generally perceived as very positive and despite its small size,
much more small-community friendly than the Financial Instrument for
Fisheries Guidance (FIFG). One very valuable aspect was the emphasis
on coastal zone management and funding of first efforts at an Integrated
Coastal Zone Management Plan for each PESCA area. This had not been
attempted in Scotland before. By involving all stakeholders, in some
cases, it resulted in both valuable and useful documentation and also
a very salutary and positive experience for fishermen, aquaculturists
and those promoting tourism who were all forced to accept that the coastline
was a multi-use zone.
Aquaculture
In relation to aquaculture, the paper acknowledges the contribution
of the industry to economic development, but not its size and significance.
In Scotland aquaculture contributes 40% of all agricultural exports,
worth £280M at farm gate and over £600M as processed product.
As such it is very much larger than sheep or cattle production and dwarfs
fishing per se. The situation is even more marked in rural Greece, where
only tourism is bigger.
This failure to recognise the scale, importance and potential growth
of aquaculture in comparison to the inevitable shrinkage of the fishing
industry means that it does not receive sufficient support as a major
economic engine in rural communities. For example, although salmon is
the largest single livestock production product in Scotland with numerous
veterinary staff employed, neither of the two Scottish Veterinary Schools
has any investment in aquaculture research.
There are great concerns for the environmental effects of aquaculture.
However, research into these concerns should be funded to a considerably
enhanced degree, in an enabling, rather than in the currently negative
fashion; and, particularly, into the three-way interaction between cultured
fin fish, wild fin fish and the environment. This aspect is not sufficiently
emphasised in the Paper.
Proposed objectives for the CFP
The Society believes that the CFP does need a new set of objectives.
It was unfortunate that the Treaty establishing the European Community
did not have a specific fisheries chapter. By deriving the objectives
from the Common Agricultural Policy, the promotion of technical progress
has resulted in marked increases in the efficiencies of fishing boats
and gears often to the detriment of fish stocks, and there was no reference
to environmental management.
The new proposed objectives are, therefore, to be welcomed and the objective
of "sustainable fisheries that ensure healthy marine ecosystems"
is rightly placed first. The objective 'to improve the quality and amount
of data to support decision-making and to promote multi-disciplinary
scientific research which will provide scientific information and advice
on fisheries, associated with ecosystems and relevant environmental
factors, is also important.
Policy options
Strengthening and improving conservation policy
The Society suggests that the Community should consider adopting the
successful Icelandic approach to fisheries management. All the catch
should be landed and quotas should be set for the number of fish caught,
regardless of size and species. It is the mortality of each species
which is the biologically important parameter in any population model.
The movement towards multi-annual, multi-species and ecosystem orientated
population models is, therefore, to be welcomed. However, this will
require much more basic research within the member States. Such models
should be used to predict the likely proportion of species caught in
different geographical zones which can be subsequently verified from
catch statistics. Discarding fish should become an illegal practice
and subject to heavy fines. This measure, in itself, will alter the
economic benefits of different fishing methods and encourage a shift
to more ecologically friendly capture techniques, such as long-lining,
which only takes large fish and minimises by-catch. It is only through
an assured sustainability of stocks that the socio-economic objectives
- important as they are - can have any foundation
Promoting the environmental dimension of the CFP
The integration of the environmental dimension within the CFP is to
be welcomed. There should, however, be a much greater recognition of
biodiversity. Given the Convection on Biological Diversity, which applies
equally to biodiversity in the sea as on land and fresh waters, there
should be more mention of biodiversity in the consultation paper.
Promoting animal and public health and safety in the fisheries
sector to ensure consumer protection
In order to improve the market price for wild caught fish, research
is needed on biological markers on freshness. Fresh fish should be subjected
to a labelling system for date of capture and shelf life according to
method of storage. Products should also be compulsorily labelled as
wild caught fish or of farmed fish. The technological capacity already
exists to introduce such a food labelling system, which should lead
to a higher priced but more consistent quality product. Fish should
also be randomly tested for levels of key pollutant residues to give
consumers greater confidence in food safety.
Improvements are also needed in the current EU disease control arrangements
for fish. Current policies pay little attention to the uncontrolled
movement of aquarium fish (one of the most dangerous of all potential
infectious routes) and also apply controls to aquaculture adapted straight
from terrestrial management, which take little account of wild fish
migration, nor of shared waters with third countries. The implementation
of the present policy also differs from country to country, both structurally
(for example, there is no compensation for seizure of healthy fish in
UK, but full compensation in Denmark) and in terms of quality of enforcement.
Fleet policy
Subsidies to fleets should be removed and market forces allowed to determine
the size of fishing fleets and any subsidy should only be to ameliorate
local unemployment impacts.
Improving Governance within the CFP
The Society welcomes the establishment of regional advisory committees
in association with elements of decentralisation which should lead to
more involvement of stakeholder groups in decision-making. The Society
also agrees with the need for better integration of scientific advice
into the decision-making process.
Monitoring, control and enforcement
The Commission should seek to establish a European-wide Fisheries Protection
Service, applying common policy and common level of enforcement. More
widespread use should also be made of temporary closures of fishing
grounds For example, in Iceland there is a random inspection of fishing
vessels, and the ground is immediately closed if more than 25% of the
fish are under-sized.
Strengthening the social and economic dimension of the CFP
The provision of fisheries products through aquaculture plays a relatively
minor part in the Green Paper and contrasts with the policy of the Norwegian
Government. Norway plans to substantially increase the value of sea
products so that it overtakes the oil and gas sector in terms of net
contribution to GDP within 30 years. Although the Commission is right
to stress environmental problems, these can be overcome with appropriate
technology and management policies, for example with respect to waste
management and recirculating systems. Greater use should also be made
of seafood products, for example, pharmaceuticals could be obtained
from the offal which is currently discarded. Overall, more research
is needed in the aquaculture of alternative species to offset current
reliance on salmonids and on alternative sustainable feeds which are
not dependent on capture fisheries.
UK priorities
In general, the Society supports the UK set of priorities. They strongly
reflect a more holistic approach to the management of fisheries and
the marine environment. The only other issue which could be pursued
in the context of this review relates to marine protected areas. In
Australia and New Zealand the fishermen originally opposed such protected
areas, but they have now come to realise that these areas can 'seed'
the surrounding fisheries, and are important breeding grounds for many
of the commercially important species. The UK has no particularly effective
legislation for marine protected areas. The concept of the Marine Nature
Reserve (MNR) in the 1981 Act has been so difficult to apply that there
are still only a handful of MNRs around the UK coast after 20 years.
Movement to make it easier to establish marine protected areas, whether
they be MNRs or some other form of designation, may in the long term
be seen to be an important plank in the conservation of biodiversity
and the sustainability of a viable fishing industry.
Additional Information
In responding to this inquiry the Society would like to draw attention
to the following Royal Society of Edinburgh responses which are of relevance
to this subject: The EU policy on Biodiversity (May 1999); Conservation
of Salmon and Sea Trout (August 2000); Protecting and Promoting Scotland's
Freshwater Fish and Fisheries (August 2000); Sixth Environmental Action
Programme (May 2001) and The Nature of Scotland (June 2001).
June 2001
Further information is available from the Research Officer, Dr
Marc Rands |