News

Commission made aware of Landing Obligation difficulties

Published on February 26, 2016

In a stakeholder seminar in Brussels, the fishing industry made their concerns with the landing obligation known to the Commission, who are evaluating the policy so far.

During the meeting, the industry presented a united front with concerns raised from representatives active in all EU waters. Broadly speaking there were some complaints regarding how the landing obligation came to be part of the CFP, as well as detailed points about the ways in which fishers abilities to comply with the policy have been restricted.

The Commission pointed out that the landing obligation has been phased in over three years in order to iron out practical difficulties, and there is also an additional two year period in which enforcement will be with a light touch in order to help the industry adapt to the revised regulations. The benefits of the landing obligation, with improved data and science, better utilisation of fish, and efficiencies as a result of improved selectivity were highlighted.

For the industry, the rules have so far not well been understood by many fishermen and there needs to be better clarity. Moreover, the economic consequences of the landing obligation are problematic. The lack of physical space onboard to be able to separately sort and handle undersize, over quota, or catches of the wrong species both adds cost and lowers income. In addition, EMFF funding has been delayed which has slowed down the fleet’s adaptation process.

In the CFP, there are a range of provisions which were supposed to enable problems surrounding choke species and zero TAC species would be overcome. However, this has so far not proved to be the case.

Key issues which have not been resolved are that Member States (MS) have not been swapping quota between themselves, and that provisions within Article 15 concerning quota flexibility between MS as well as Producer Organisations have not functioned as they should.

The landing obligation seems to have created perverse incentives where quota holders, be they MS or industry, fear trading a holding as they may need it later in the year in order to overcome a choke species situation. Rather than a fluid environment existing, in which quotas are readily traded in order to meet the present needs of those active in the fishery, quotas have been static.

Over the coming year, both the Commission and MS will continue to evaluate the difficulties of implementing the policy on fishing ground, and as Ernesto Penas of the Commission said “there is no way back from the landing obligation…(now) we need to find common solutions”.