Ref. Ares(2019)1069189 - 21/02/2019
Steps taken by Member States and producer organisations to comply with the landing obligation
No
Question
Input
Updates
1.
Have you initiated, supported, participated in or implemented
any measures and/or studies relating to the avoidance of
Yes. Closure of nursery areas as
unwanted catches through spatial or temporal changes to
per GFCM Recommendation
fishing behaviour (for example, studies/pilots on real time
GFCM/40/2016/4 has been
closures)? Yes/No
observed.
Please specify the measures taken or studies
2.
Which fleet segments/fisheries do these measures and/or
Otter Bottom Trawls
studies apply to?
3.
What has the uptake of these measures and/or studies been in
All Vessels
the fleet segments/fisheries to which they are applicable?
Please provide the number and proportion of vessels in the
segment/fishery.
4.
Have you initiated any changes to your quota management
Not applicable
system to implement the landing obligation? Yes/No
Please specify these changes.
5.
For stocks managed through catch limits, have you conducted a
Not applicable
quantitative analysis to identify potential national choke issues?
Yes/No
Please give details.
6.
Have you pursued any exemptions to the landing obligation
Yes. Malta has the possibility of
(either for high survival or de minimis) in the development of
applying exemptions under the
regional joint recommendations? Yes/No
‘De Minimis’ for the Lampara
fishery as per Regulation (EU)
Please give details of each exemption pursued.
1392/2014. However it should be
noted that in this fishery it has
been noted that no undersized
fish are normally caught and that
the primary destination of the
products are for feed in tuna
farms,
i.e.,
non-human
consumption.
Malta has also the possibility of
applying exemptions under the
“De Minimis” for the bottom
otter trawl fishery as per
Commission
Delegated
Regulation (EU) 2017/86 of 20
October 2016 establishing a
discard plan for certain demersal
fisheries in the Mediterranean
Sea.
7.
What studies or evidence have you collected or produced in
Evidence has been based on
order to support such a request.
observations and records
collected by observers on board.
8.
What steps have you taken to ensure the amount discarded
Monitoring of logbooks and
under granted de minimis exemptions does not exceed the
landings made in the presence of
permitted volume in the delegated act?
inspectors.
9.
What has been the utilisation of any granted de minimis
No discards were recorded. The
exemptions in the fleet segment/fishery to which the exemption majority of the Lampara catches
applies?
are used as feed for Tuna farms.
10. Have any of your vessels utilised the provision to discard fish,
The provision to discard damaged
which shows damage caused by predators? Yes/No
fish has not been utilised.
Please provide the total weight of catch of each species
Not Applicable
discarded for each fleet Segment/fishery concerned.
11. For stocks managed by catch limits, did you make use of the
Not Applicable
provisions for inter-annual or inter-species flexibility? Yes/No
Please identify which flexibility (or flexibilities) was used, and the
corresponding reallocation of fishing opportunities for the stocks
concerned.
12. In the development of joint recommendations, has consultation
Yes, Malta has participates in
with Advisory Councils and other relevant stakeholders taken
meetings with MEDAC in view of
place? Yes/No
the Landing Obligation and other
related issues
Please outline the process of consultation with Advisory
Councils.
Meetings with stakeholders were
Please outline the process of consultation with other
carried out through MEDAC
stakeholders, if relevant.
where fishermen were invited to
air their views and deliver advice
according to their experience at
sea.
13. Following the adoption of the delegated act for a discard plan,
YES. A letter explaining the
have steps been taken to ensure adequate understanding
landing obligation was sent to
among stakeholders of their obligations under the provisions of
each licence holder authorised
the act? Yes/No
for the lampara fishery.
Please outline the process of ensuring stakeholders understand
The landing obligation has been
the obligations that will apply to them.
introduced as a condition in the
fishing authorisation of otter
bottom trawls.
14. Are there any other steps not covered by the questions above
No
that you have carried out to effect compliance with the
provisions of the landing obligation? Yes/No
Please specify the measures taken.
15. Which fleet segments/fisheries do these studies/pilots apply to? Not applicable
16. What has the uptake been of these measures in the fleet
Not applicable
segments/fisheries to which they are applicable?
Please provide the number and proportion of vessels in the
segment/fishery.
Steps taken by Member States regarding control of compliance with the landing obligation
17. Has information been provided by Member States
Fishermen have been advised
administrations and control agencies to fishermen? Yes/no
that landings of the Lampara and
Otter Bottom Trawls Fishery have
In what format has this information taken:
to be carried out in the presence
of an Officer from the fisheries
Initiatives directed to fishermen to improve compliance;
competent authority for accurate
recording of the catches landed.
Guidelines on the application of the landing obligation,
accurate recording of catches, etc.;
Other
18. Have guidelines been provided by Member States
Yes –
administrations and control agencies for inspectors? Yes/no
100% of landings and a number of
In what format has this information taken:
outlets involving the reference
species were inspected and the
Delivery of guidelines for inspectors on the effective and
cases were followed up
uniform application of the landing obligation;
accordingly.
Seminars and trainings organised for presenting the guidelines Landing obligations are outlined
to inspectors at national and regional level.
regularly during briefing meetings
and EFCA workshops
19. Have new control and monitoring tools been used by Member
No
States? Yes/no
Please supply information on:
Control tools used in the context of landing obligation, i.e.
REM, traditional systems (aerial surveillance, inspections at sea),
reference fleets, etc.;
Steps towards implementation of new tools, including
electronic monitoring means dedicated to implementation of
landing obligation, haul-by-haul recording, etc.
20. Have the Member state administrations and control authorities
Yes
monitored below Minimum Conservation Reference Size (MCRS)
catches at and after landing (Traceability)? Yes/No
Please supply information on:
No catches below the minimum
conservation reference size of a
Total number of discards (by fishery, fleet segment) from 2013 species subject to the landing
to 2018;
obligation were registered.
Initiatives taken to prevent under MCRS catches from reaching Landing Inspections
the commercial channels (pre-notification of landings of under
MCRS catches, etc.);
Measures taken to monitor landings at fish markets/auctions
Fish market routine inspections
adopted.
21. Has control and monitoring been based on risk assessment?
No
Yes/no
Please supply information on the risk assessment tools used and 100% inspections of landings
the results obtained, including those implemented by the
from Lampara and Trawlers
regional Control Expert Groups in cooperation with EFCA.
22. Has the “last observed haul” approach elaborated by EFCA as a
No
tool for monitoring the implementation of the landing obligation
and to derive potential targets for inspection been used? Yes/No
Please give details of the fisheries covered and the extent of
sampling.
Information on the socioeconomic impact of the landing obligation
23. . Using the most appropriate indicators defined below, provide
No impacts perceived to date
information on the socioeconomics impacts on:
The catching sector;
Upstream businesses;
Processors;
Consumption and markets;
Costs for Member States.
24. Have there been any reported incidents of overloading of
No
vessels causing stability problems? Yes/No
Please specify the number and nature of such incidents.
Not applicable
Can you quantify these in terms of:
Number of deaths or serious injuries;
No of vessels involved as a % of the specific fleet segment.
25. Have there been any reported incidents of overloading of
No
vessels forcing them to return to port early? Yes/No
Please specify the number and nature of such incidents.
26. Have there been any reported incidents or accidents on board
No
vessels that can be attributable to excessive workload? Yes/No
Please specify the number and nature of such incidents or
accidents.
27. Has any national legislation relating to safety on board fishing
No
vessels arising from the landing obligation been amended or
introduced? Yes/No
Please provide details of this legislation.
28. Have you provided or received any funding under Article 32
No
(Health and safety) of EMFF or Article 3 (Eligible operations on
safety) and Article 6 (Eligible operations on working conditions)
of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/531 to mitigate
against potential safety issues caused by the landing obligation?
Yes/No
If yes, please specify the number of projects involved and the
nature of the measures taken.
If no, have any measures been taken which have not been
funded under the EMFF?
Information on the use and outlets of catches below the minimum conservation reference size of a species subject to the landing obligation 29. What have been the main reported uses and destinations for
Not applicable
catches below MCRS?
Can you quantify these catches by species in terms of volumes,
price per tonne and associated costs for the different outlets
such catches have been sent?
30. Have you carried out any studies or pilot projects considering
No
the potential uses for such catches? Yes/No
Information on port infrastructures and of vessels’ fitting with regard to the landing obligation for each fishery concerned
31. Have you provided funding under Article 38 of the EMFF for
No
modifications on board vessels for the handling of catches on
board? Yes/No
Please specify the number, nature and total amount invested in
such projects.
32. Have you provide funding under Article 43 of the EMFF for
Yes – The Project Selection
investment in the
Committee approved the Landing
infrastructure of fishing ports, auction halls and shelters for the
Office project on the 11/05/2017.
handling of unwanted catches? Yes/No
This project entails the
Please specify the number, nature and total amount invested in
Construction of a Landing Office
such projects.
and a cold room in Marsaxlokk. It
shall provide better facilities to
the DFA officials in carrying out
effective fish landing and
inspections. A crawler crane shall
also be purchased as part of this
project.
Name of Project: EMFF1.23.1
The Construction and Finishing of
an Office on the Fish Landing Site
in the Marsaxlokk Designated
Port
33. Have you provide funding under Articles 68 and 69 of the EMFF
Yes, the Project Selection
for investment in marketing measures and the processing of
Committee approved the
fishery and aquaculture products? Yes/No
Nesploraw Flimkien it-Teżori tal-
Baħar! (Exploring Together the
Please specify the number, nature and total amount invested in
Treasures of the Sea!) on
such projects.
23/01/2018.
Name of Project: EMFF4.3.1
Nesploraw Flimkien it-Teżori tal-
Baħar!
The Department of Fisheries and
Aquaculture (DFA) in partnership
with the National Literacy Agency
(NLA) and the Directorate for
Learning
and
Assessment
Programmes (DLAP) launched a
promotional campaign, holding
the title Nesploraw Flimkien it-
Teżori tal-Baħar! The main scope
of
this
operation
was
to
communicate the following three
(3)
principle
messages-
(i)
awareness of the state of the
local fish stocks, (ii) sustainable
fish consumption and (iii) the role
of each individual in assisting
conservation efforts.
Dissemination of information,
specifically the three (3) principle
messages
was
carried
out
successfully
through
diverse
mediums, namely: TV Spots, 3
minute animated video, leaflets,
roll-up banners, A4 sticker sheets,
bus-wraps,
radio
adverts,
billboards, adverts placed on
social media platforms and
publication of adverts on online
newspapers.
Further to this, the project was
also promoted during an open
weekend activity at the Fish
Market in Marsa where different
stakeholders were invited to take
part in this activity. By means of
this activity valuable information
was disseminated to visitors in a
fun, visual and interesting
manner.
Funding: EMFF Funds
Budget: € 250,000 excl. vat
(Public Eligible)
Budget Share: 75% EU Funds,
25% National Funds
Information on the difficulties encountered in the implementation of the landing obligation and recommendations to address them
34. Please provide information on the following:
As the amount of discards related
Operational difficulties, such as:
to national fisheries has been
negligible, there is nothing to
Avoidance and/or selectivity insufficient to avoid unwanted
report on this issue.
catches;
Handling, storage and processing of unwanted catches;
Lack of funding to adapt fishing gears, vessels or port
infrastructure
Difficulties relating to monitoring, control and enforcement,
such as:
Lack of understanding or awareness of the rules;
Difficulties implementing and monitoring de minimis or high
survivability exemptions;
Implementation problems with regard to control/monitoring
processes or infrastructure (e.g. adaptation of ERS systems);
Refusal to carry observers.
Difficulties in fully utilising fishing opportunities, such as:
Problems re-allocating quota to cover catches previously not
landed;
Problems with the timing or availability of quota swaps;
Fisheries being forced to close early due to choke problems.
Questions concerning control and enforcement, added in the questionnaire sent in 2017 35. How is the effective control and enforcement of the landing
As mentioned above, Lampara
obligation at sea and the accurate documentation of all catches,
fisheries do not produce any
including quantities discarded, ensured?
difficulty in this regard as no
fisheries below the minimum size
are caught or discarded.
36. How many suspected and confirmed infringements, related to
None
the landing obligation, have been detected at sea and at
landing/marketing?
In cases of confirmed infringements please indicate the
circumstances of the offence and the sanctions applied,
including penalty points.
Not applicable