Advice and Recommendations

The regional groups are currently reviewing the evaluation of the compliance with the landing obligation for mackerel after the first report published in 2020. The PelAC expressed in several letters its great disappointment over EFCA and the regional groups’ refusal to publish the full report. While the PelAC’s request for the publication of this first report still stands, the ongoing review of the evaluation by the regional groups is an opportunity to rectify this situation and ensure full transparency. Once the review will be completed, the PelAC urges the High-Level regional groups to authorise and instruct the EFCA to publish not only the executive summary but also the integral report, regardless of its conclusions.

Both the Faroe Islands and Norway unilaterally set own quotas for total catches of Mackerel in the Northeast Atlantic. The combined TAC for these two nations now amounts to almost 55% of the recommended annual TAC.

In light of these irresponsible unilateral decisions, which go against all the efforts of the EU and its fleet to sustainably manage fish stocks based on the best possible scientific advice, the PelAC urges the European Commission and the Council of the European Union to take immediate and decisive actions to stop Norway and the Faroe Islands from another year of massive overfishing of this valuable stock.

Finally, the PelAC remains committed to a long-term sustainable management strategy for mackerel and recalls the need for the EU and Coastal States to work towards a management tool considered precautionary by ICES.

At the occasion of the MIACO meeting of 22 June, ICES presented the draft stakeholder engagement strategy and requested input from stakeholders. The Pelagic Advisory Council (PelAC) participated in this meeting and then discussed the draft stakeholder engagement strategy at its Executive Committee meeting on 13 July. The comments were written in a letter to ICES.

Since their establishment under the Common Fisheries Policy as far back as 2005, the Advisory Councils have grown not only in number, but also in reach and in coverage of thematic issues. In recent years the ACs have seen the introduction of wide-ranging policies by the European Commission, such as the Green Deal and its related strategies. The ACs are the ideal vehicles to reach out to hundreds of stakeholders at the same time. Unfortunately, is has become apparent that the invitations to meetings does not seem to extend into all parts of DG MARE with the result that the ACs have been left out of important meetings in the past. The ACs would be grateful if they could be notified as part of the routine scheduling of MARE events.

In its response the Commission agreed to facilitate participation by ACs members by routinely notifying the ACs of the schedules of various MARE events such as the science seminar, and increase the already existing efforts MARE is undertaking in this respect.

The NWWAC and PelAC recommend that the TAC for sprat in the English Channel should not exceed the ICES MSY advice.

The advice mentions the stock structure of sprat populations in the Celtic Seas ecoregion is unknown. The ACs recommend that a genetics stock identification project should be undertaken to better understand the stock structure of the sprat populations in the Celtic Seas ecoregion.

In addition, in the context of improved management of the directed fishery, the PelAC will be examining the possibility of developing a management strategy for sprat in the Celtic Sea ecoregion.

Both ACs suggest that the current sprat management units should be evaluated by ICES.

The North Western Waters Advisory Council and the Pelagic Advisory Council approved a gentlemen’s agreement, establishing a protocol for collaboration on providing advice to the European Commission on sprat and greater silver smelt in ICES areas VI and VII.

As part of the newly agreed NWWAC-PelAC protocol, the PelAC will include the greater silver smelt stock in the advice package to be presented by ICES during the annual PelAC Working Group II meeting in July.

All concerned NWWAC members will be invited to attend the April meeting as observers. During this meeting, discussions on the catch advice of sprat will be held between ICES and PelAC members, and preliminary thoughts on a potential recommendation will be formulated.

In its response to the review of the CFP consultation, the Pelagic AC highlighted a number of key themes such as the impacts of Brexit. The PelAC underlined the importance of taking changes in relation to Brexit onboard in any review of the current CFP, as it has fundamentally changed the dynamic of the CFP. The PelAC stressed the shortcomings of the regionalization process in the context of pelagic fisheries, and raised existing issues as a consequence of mis-alignment between the CFP and other Union legislations. The PelAC highlighted the importance of progressing the application of the ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management. Finally, the PelAC felt managing all stocks at MSY-level was an example of a CFP objective contributing to positive change on the status of fish stocks.

The Pelagic, Long Distance, North Western Waters, North Sea and Markets Advisory Councils produced a joint-lettter informing the Commission of the set up of the newly formed ‘inter-AC Brexit Forum’, composed of the ACs impacted by Brexit. Through this Forum, the ACs wish to address horizontal issues with the Commission specifically in the context of UK-EU fisheries management. In its recommendation, the Forum has formulated a number of key questions in relation to the setup and operational mode of the Specialised Committee on Fisheries (SCF) moving forward, and sought to establish a formalised framework for consultation on specific topics prior to relevant SCF meetings. The members of the Inter-AC Brexit Forum reiterated their plea for structured stakeholder engagement in SCF proceedings and invited the Commission to actively support our ambitions towards transparent, just and sustainable management of shared resources. The Forum invited the Commission to attend its next meetings on 5 May and 2 June 2022, to contribute to the discussions with details concerning developments in the SCF.

In its response, the Commission supported the establishment of the inter-AC Brexit Forum and provided further detail on the functioning of the SCF in response to the different queries raised by the ACs in the letter. PelAC members were pleased with the quality of the interaction with the Commission in the following Inter-AC Brexit Forum meeting.

The Inter-AC Brexit Forum sent a follow-up to the previous two letters concerning stakeholder engagement in future management and governance post-Brexit, as well as addressing the Commission’s response to these. The Commission’s direct engagement with the Inter-AC Brexit Forum has been particularly welcomed by the members most affected by Brexit and is considered critical for further endeavours to set the course of the Inter-AC Brexit Forum, the establishment of which the Commission services clearly supported. The Forum remains open to establishing a framework for formal consultations on specific topics prior to relevant SCF meetings. As the Forum evolves organically from one meeting to the next, its structure and format are being determined through iterative, consensus-based processes. One of the resolutions of the last meeting related to the scheduling of Forum meetings within one week after every SCF WG meeting to allow for timely transmission of relevant information on SCF procedures through the Commission’s SCF debrief. The Forum invited the Commission to its next meeting in September 2022.

In this recommendation, the PelAC asked the Commission to support the Pelagic AC by requesting ICES to improve the quality of the data available for the North Sea horse mackerel and boarfish stocks, and to prioritize the transition of these two stocks to stronger ICES stock categories and subsequent full-assessments.

In its response, the Commission mentioned the planned benchmark meeting for the boarfish stock which would look at the available data. It also expressed its willingness to further discuss with ICES on the possibility of reinforcing science on these stocks in line with the suggestions made by the PelAC.

In a joint-letter from 10 ACs regarding the process of targeting ACs for public consultations, as well as on the consideration of AC responses by the Commission services, the ACs ask the Commission to:

• Treat contributions from ACs to public consultations with added weight compared to responses from individuals/individual organisations;
• Document AC advice uptake at the end of the consultation process;
• Take working processes of ACs into account in a systematic fashion, i.e. by flagging upcoming consultations as early as possible, by providing translated documents in relevant working languages and by extending timelines for feedback submissions from ACs as appropriate.
• In addition to the questionnaire consultations, engage in active dialogue with ACs through bilateral meetings on relevant policy consultations,
when launching relevant EU consultation questionnaires.

In its response, the Commission confirmed that flexibility in the response format would be given to the ACs, and also confirmed that AC responses to consultations adopted by consensus are treated with added weight. The Commission is aware of the need for advance notice of consultations, and dedicates effort to make this possible. As for direct dialogue, the Commission does its utmost to attend relevant AC meetings but asks ACs to prioritize and send meeting invites with enough notice, noting the strain on the Commission resources.