Brussels, 10/04/2007 (Agence Europe) - On Tuesday 10 April, the European Commission adopted a report that gives a somewhat alarming picture of the quality and seriousness of member state monitoring of Commission Fisheries Policy (CFP) implementation over the period 2003-2005. Inspection missions conducted over this period by European Commission officials highlight the considerable failings of national control systems, especially the lack of consistency between data provided by the Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) and information recorded in vessel logbooks. The Commission has above all updated findings on the use of prohibited fishing gear, such as driftnets, and checked the over-large differences between declared and real catches, mainly during cod fishing in the Baltic Sea.
In order to remedy these failings as quickly as possible, the Commission has drawn up a list of priority actions to be carried out by member states, namely: - full use of existing regulatory tools such as receipt of basic catch registration documents, cross-checks, VMS and the use of transport checks; - the allocation of more skilled human resources to fisheries control; - the adoption of a systematic approach to the training of inspectors; - the strengthening of cooperation and coordination between member states and within member states at all levels; - an improved sanctions system that is more dissuasive and deprives those responsible of any economic benefit arising out of an offence; - strengthening of means devoted to the control of landings of vessels fishing beyond Community waters; - and the use, as quickly as possible, of new technologies such as the electronic logbook, to improve the flow of information.
Inspections conducted by the Commission focused on activities that present a high risk of possible fraud, such as recovery programmes for fish stocks, satellite surveillance, activities of third country vessels and the marketing of fish products.
North Sea cod. The Commission report highlights a lack of strategy in countries concerned by the recovery programme to secure compliance with the effort limitation scheme (limited number of fishing days). It also states that VMS information was not used effectively to cross-check prior notifications of landing and fishing effort recorded in vessel logbooks. Inspectors also noted a lack of systematic checking of by-catch rules. Finally, member states, it was found, did not properly enforce the reduced margin of tolerance of 8% for catch estimates in the logbook.
Northern hake. A large proportion of catches of hake are transported from landing in one member state for sale in another. Commission findings showed that these countries had not required hake to be weighed prior to transportation and that, as a result, the accuracy of the data in the landing declaration could not be guaranteed. Furthermore, the lack of some of the basic legal catch registration documents in some member states (logsheets, landing declarations, transport documents and sales notes) prevented effective cross-checks. The Commission found that France, in particular, was slipshod in its control of landings and sale of undersized hake.
Southern hake and nephrops. The impact of the recovery programme (which mainly concerns Spain and Portugal) was limited as “it only really affected 250 out of the 11,000 vessels involved in the southern hake fishery”. Also, the Commission reproaches Spain for closing its eyes to landings of undersized fish, including hake, in some of its ports. In Portugal, the special fishing permit required was “successfully” introduced and catches must now be weighed before transportation, the Commission is pleased to note.
Baltic Sea cod. Commission inspectors noted that records showed an overall average under-declaration of recorded catches of 23% in logbooks (between 8% and 49% depending on the country). The Commission criticises the lack of infrastructure for weighing catches at the point of landing.
Highly migratory fish. The Commission highlighted the fact that there were “virtually no catch registration systems” put in place by member states for bluefin tuna. “Missions carried out in France, Italy, Spain and Greece confirmed that prohibited driftnets are still used in several member states”, the report reads.
Third country fishing vessels. The Commission found evidence that fish carried by vessels of third countries known for their illegal activities had entered EU territory. Member states have taken measures to stamp up this trade.
VMS. Generally speaking, at least until end 2005, member states did not make full use of VMS technology to manage fisheries.
Traceability. As far as imported products are concerned, the Commission believes “huge quantities of fisheries products” have entered the Community without any indication of the origin or catching area. The “common use of local commercial denominations” not present in the official national list, such as “whiting” for hake or “atun” for bluefin tuna, has “commonly covered the sale of undersized or undeclared fish”, the Commission report explains. (lc)