Ref. Ares(2017)1061376 - 28/02/2017
Regional report on the implementation of the
landing obligation in the Baltic Sea in 2016
Table 1: Summary of steps taken by Member States regarding control of compliance with the landing obligation at regional level in the Baltic Sea area
for issues highlighted in Q18, 21 and 22 of DG MARE’s questionnaire.
DG MARE Questionnaire
Baltic Sea
Steps taken by MS regarding control of
compliance with the LO
Q18: Have guidelines been provided by
Yes. A regional workshop for inspectors was organised 5-6 October 2016 for standardising the
Member States administrations and control implementation of the LO in the framework of the BS JDP.
agencies for inspectors?
Yes/No
The following topics have been dealt with during the training workshop:
In what format has this information taken:
-
Omnibus regulation
• Delivery of guidelines for inspectors on the
-
Discard plan
effective and uniform application of the
landing obligation.
-
Guidelines for last haul inspections
• Seminars and trainings organised for
-
MS Exchange of experience on the landing obligation
presenting the guidelines to inspectors at
national and regional level.
-
Data collection procedures
In 2015, upon request of BALTFISH, EFCA assisted MS in the preparation of guidelines for
inspectors in the context of the introduction of the LO. In 2017 these will be reviewed.
Q21: Has control and monitoring been based
Yes. In cooperation with the JDP Steering Group and the Baltfish regional Control Expert Group
on risk assessment?
Yes/No
(CEG), EFCA has developed a methodology for risk assessment. The methodology follows the
structure of weighing the likelihood of occurrence of non-compliance against the potential impact on
Please supply information on the risk the stock.
assessment tools used and the results
obtained, including those implemented by In order to be able to perform this risk assessment for the fisheries concerned, EFCA has produced
the regional Control Expert Groups in factsheets by fleet segments to compile and update all relevant information available for each fishery.
cooperation with EFCA.
Fisheries segments have been defined together with the Baltic Sea CEG and the SG. These fact
sheets contain descriptions and tables on: gear, target species, discarding, fishing season, fishing
vessels flag states, fishing areas, stock status, allocation of the TAC, applicable regulations, catches
in previous year and risk characterisation.
During a joint session between experts nominees by the CEG and members of the Steering Group,
the risk assessment was performed by fleet segment for non-compliance with the LO for the JDP
species. The outcome of the risk assessment (annex 1) has been a key input for the
recommendations developed by the regional CEG and for the planning of the Baltic Sea JDP.
Q22: Has the “last observed haul” approach
Yes. The last observed haul methodology has been developed to:
elaborated by EFCA as a tool for monitoring
Estimate the likelihood of non-compliance with the provisions of the LO for risk assessment,
the implementation of the landing obligation
and to derive potential targets for inspection
Share information between MS on catch composition rates across the different fisheries
been used?
Yes/No
segments and
3
Please give details of the fisheries covered
Facilitate the evaluation of compliance with the LO provisions.
and the extent of sampling.
This is implemented through the JDP in cooperation with the Member States inspection services.
The data derived from the last observed haul inspections is combined with other available data on
catches and discards and is being used as input for risk assessment exercises. In the medium to long
term, the data collected through the last haul scheme would serve as a baseline for preparing the
development of a compliance evaluation tool in the context of the landing obligation.
The cooperation in the Baltic Sea area between the MS and EFCA in the implementation of the LO
has been quite successful since it started in 2014. The last haul scheme has been embedded in the
BS JDP and the data collection is being implemented routinely by the MS inspectors. The data
collected at regional level is shared with all MS so it can also feed national risk management
programmes.
List of Annexes:
Annex 1 – Risk Analysis results Baltic Sea 2016
4
Annex 1 – Risk Analysis results Baltic Sea 2016
SEGMENT
GEAR GROUP
GEAR TYPE
AREA
RISK LEVEL
Demersal
1
OT (≥105)
22-24
High
Active
Demersal
2
SDN (≥105)
22-24
Low
Active
Demersal
3
OT (≥105)
25-27
Medium
Active
4
OT, PT (16≤ and <32)
Pelagic Active
22-27
Low
5
OT, PT (32≤ and <90)
Pelagic Active
22-27
Low
6
OT, PT (16≤ and <105)
Pelagic Active
28-32
Low
Pelagic
7
GN (≥157)
22-29
Low
Passive
Pelagic
8
LL
22-29
Low
Passive
Pelagic
9
FIX (nat. rules)
30-32
Low
Passive
Demersal
10
GN (110≤ and <156), LL
22-24
Medium
Passive
Demersal
11
GN (110≤ and <156), LL
25-27
Low
Passive
GN (32≤ and <110),
Pelagic
12
22-32
Low
FIX (national rules)
Passive
Other non-reported in
Demersal
13
22-32
segments 1-12
Active