A large number of EU fisheries ministers criticised, on Monday 20 March in Brussels, the European Commission’s plan to ban bottom fishing gear in Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) by 2030.
Several ministers also regretted the lack of incentives in the communication on the energy transition of the fisheries sector.
The EU Council was able to react for the first time to the package of four non-legislative documents presented in February by the European Commission to promote sustainable fisheries.
The Spanish minister, Luis Planas, said that the fisheries sector was a strategic sector and that food sovereignty had to be defended.
The proposal to eliminate bottom trawling in MPAs is, according to Mr Planas, “unfocused and unbalanced”. “We do not agree that trawling should be demonised, because where it is practised, it provides sustainable yields and rebuilds fish stocks”, said the minister. He asked the Commission to provide an impact assessment on the social and economic consequences of such a ban.
Hervé Berville, French Secretary of State for the Sea, said that France was “opposed” to the end of towed gear in Natura 2000 areas in 2024 and in MPAs in 2030. This proposal is not proportionate to the objective and has not been subject to a thorough impact assessment, according to France. Furthermore, the proposal does not make any distinction between different fishing techniques. However, this measure, if implemented, would result in “a pure and simple condemnation of French and European artisanal fisheries in 2024”, protested France.
Mr Berville noted the efforts made by fishermen and pointed out that in France, 33% of waters are classified as MPAs, with strict rules allowing fishing in these areas. Spain spoke of 12% of waters under MPAs (30% in 2030).
Portugal also expressed doubts about the timing and legal framework for this ban on the art of dragging in MPAs.
A total ban on bottom trawling is not a good solution, according to Denmark, which has asked the Commission to take action on the proliferation of seals and cormorants. Slovenia is against this ban.
Italy expressed concern about the Marine Ecosystems Action Plan and was perplexed by the measures proposed. In addition, Italy has requested a revision of the eel management plan.
Germany advocated increased protection of the seabed, but also spoke out against an arbitrary ban on bottom gears because of their social and economic effects.
The Netherlands emphasised innovation and selectivity of fishing gear and considered that conservation measures should be based on scientific advice. This country has once again defended electrofishing.
Preparing a ‘roadmap’. The action plan “does not aim to create new legal requirements, but to give a new impetus to the implementation of existing legislation, be it environmental legislation or the Common Fisheries Policy”, said the EU Commissioner for Fisheries Virginijus Sinkevičius.
Member States will propose measures that will be “assessed on a case-by-case basis by the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF)”, the Commissioner said. He encouraged countries to “assess the situation in their waters and discuss it with stakeholders” in order to “prepare a roadmap on this basis”.
In his view, transition does not always mean the end of the activity. “Some innovative tools to limit the effects of these types of fishing gears are already showing promising developments and it is essential to continue discussions with the industry to stimulate innovation and the adoption of new solutions on the ground”, the Commissioner replied.
On the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), Portugal regretted the lack of solutions proposed to solve the problem of the implementation of the rule on the landing obligation (end discards). The Netherlands regretted the postponement of the assessment of the implementation of the landing obligation to 2025. Italy has criticised the complex rules on the landing obligation.
Some countries, including Ireland, Denmark and Portugal, regretted the lack of analysis in the Commission’s documents of the impact of Brexit on the EU fishing fleet.
Decarbonisation. With regard to the plan to decarbonise the fishing fleet, Mr Planas expressed Spain’s full support, given that “to fish in the 21st century, we need 21st century boats”, which is why he called for “new investments and European support”. The Spanish minister also stressed that this modernisation of the fleet is linked to the renewal of generations, while acknowledging that the working conditions on the ships are not “adapted to today’s world”.
The Netherlands has called for a revision of the CFP to help the sector in the energy transition.
France has asked for the rules of the European Fisheries Fund to be amended, particularly with regard to gauges, so as to allow aid for engine changes and investments to accelerate decarbonisation. (Original version in French by Lionel Changeur)