TL: NET LOSSES, GROSS DESTRUCTION SO: Greenpeace UK (GP) DT: June 1992 Keywords: oceans fisheries uk europe fish gp reports / European Fisheries in Crisis Published by Greenpeace UK, June 1992 CONTENTS Introduction Overfishing Threats to marine wildlife Industrial fishing Discards Regional problems The common fisheries policy What can be done? The Greenpeace approach to fisheries Conclusion INTRODUCTION Improved technology and increased demand for fish has led to unprecedented fishing intensity in the world's oceans. While fish are an important source of protein for humans, they are also vital links in ocean food webs. Thus, destructive fishing of the world's oceans is threatening the life of marine creatures and the viability of the oceans' ecosystems. Many communities have experienced the effects of overfishing such as the loss of jobs and lack of food. Marine creatures such as sea birds, dolphins and porpoises have been affected by loss of food and alterations in their feeding grounds. How has this catastrophic situation come about? It might be because the activity occurs far out at sea and the destruction is often below the surface. Destructive fishing is invisible to most people, and they are unaware that urgent action is needed to protect the oceans from overfishing. The European Community is now embarking on a process of reviewing the past ten years of the operation of the Common Fisheries Policy. The purpose of this document is to outline the existing problems and set out directions for solving them. OVERFISHING Fisheries in the European Community (EC) have been badly mismanaged, and one of the worst effects has been widespread overfishing. Much of this has been caused by the fact that fishermen's efficiency has been steadily increasing as new techniques and technologies are developed. As fishermen have increased their abilities to catch the few remaining fish, stock after stock of commercial fish has significantly declined. The most obvious problem caused by destructive overfishing in the EC is a gradual, steady depletion of many commercial species. For example, annual British cod landings have decreased from 380,000 tonnes to 60,000 tonnes since the 1970s. In the North Sea, the spawning stock of cod is estimated to be less than half the weight that existed in the years before 1975. Also in the North Sea, sole has decreased to about one-third its population since the 1960s. In the Atlantic, west of Scotland, haddock has declined by 68% since 1984 and whiting has declined by 61%. It is unlikely that over-fishing will lead to the extinction of any species. For fishermen, it is rarely worthwhile to continue to fish when a species has been severely depleted. However, the loss of such a huge proportion of fish populations is alarming in itself. Stock depletions can seriously harm habitats and the ocean food web. Overfishing can also endanger local populations of fish, such as European sturgeons. This is a particular problem where the fish do not venture far from a certain areas. Overfishing can cause a variety of environmental problems. Lower catches of fish mean that European fish purchases cost more. For example, in Britain, the amount of fish eaten in each household decreased slightly in 1990, but average expenditures rose by 12%. Loss of fish has economic as well as environmental effects. Decreases in fish populations provide strong evidence that a new approach to fisheries is needed in Europe. GREENPEACE DEMANDS Overfishing must be stopped in Europe. Improvements in the use of scientific advice, setting catch limits and enforcement of quotas are needed. This can only be accomplished if environmental considerations are given the same priority as economic considerations in fisheries decisions. THREATS TO MARINE WILDLIFE An illustration of the damaging effects of fisheries occurred in 1986-87, when overfishing caused a collapse of the capelin stock in the Barents Sea. Capelin is a fish which is a main part of the food chain in the Barents sea, so when the capelin stocks collapsed, many sea birds and seals starved. Some of the surviving seals migrated southwards to the Norwegian coast in search of food. This migration or "seal invasion" led to many seals becoming caught in the fishing nets near the Norwegian coast. This resulted in even more deaths. The Barents Sea example shows that by removing food sources through overfishing, destructive fisheries cause starvation. Where certain types of fishing gear are used in areas where marine mammals are abundant, they can be harmed through entanglement. Small cetaceans are marine mammals. Familiar examples of these mammals are dolphins, porpoises, belugas and pilot whales. Every year, millions of these cetaceans are caught in fishing nets. Unless the animal is freed or escapes, it drowns. Since the advent of modern synthetic nets and new, more efficient fishing techniques, the threat to cetacean populations from fishing has increased dramatically. The reasons why so many cetaceans are unable to avoid fishing nets are not clear, but there are several possible explanations. For example, dolphins may be attracted by the fish in the nets. Another possible explanation is that the nets resemble a natural, non-threatening form, such as a kelp bed. Whatever the explanation, the fact remains that this problem occurs and must be addressed. Unlike fish, which usually produce large numbers of offspring and are quick to mature, cetaceans are long-lived and mature slowly. Female dolphins normally produce one calf every two or three years, and each calf has up to a 50% probability of dying in the first year. Thus, the loss of cetaceans in fishing nets, even in relatively low numbers, could greatly affect populations. Warning signals from outside the EC There are numerous examples that demonstrate the dangers that fisheries can pose to cetaceans. An example of a cetacean under serious threat is Hector's dolphin, found in the shallow coastal waters of New Zealand. There is incidental take of these dolphins in gill net fisheries for rig fish and elephant fish. In response to this threat, a marine mammal sanctuary was created in 1988 where the fishery is restricted. Fisheries interaction is also a major threat faced by the vaquita, a highly endangered cetacean in the Gulf of California in Mexico. Only 300-400 of these animals are thought to remain, yet 30-40 vaquitas are caught every year in the shark, shrimp and totoaba fisheries. Habitat loss and pollution also threaten the survival of vaquitas, so the impact of fisheries adds another unnecessary threat to the declining and endangered populations. In the Eastern Tropical Pacific, the yellow fin tuna fishery is lethal to dolphins. Yellow fin often swim directly beneath schools of dolphin. Since 1959, fishermen have used huge purse seine nets which encircle these schools in order to catch the tuna. In the process of hauling these nets, dolphins are killed, many drowned and others crushed to death as they are hauled on board boats. It is estimated that 7 million dolphins have died in this fishery so far. European Threats There is mounting evidence that cetacean populations are threatened in Europe as well. In 1991, the Greenpeace vessel Sirius documented the albacore tuna drift net fishery in the North East Atlantic. The drift nets which were observed being hauled on to French vessels caught and killed both common dolphin and striped dolphin. Total catches in the French fishery have been estimated at 300-600 dolphins every year. The harbour porpoise is also under threat in EC waters. In the North Sea, the harbour porpoise is the most frequently reported cetacean incidentally caught in fishing gear. 3,000 porpoises are estimated to be caught by Danish fishermen in fisheries for sprats, whiting, and coal fish in a single year. Additional porpoise catches have been recorded in English, Scottish and Dutch gill net fisheries in the North Sea. The Baltic coastal gill net fishery is thought to take up to 500 of these animals every year. In the Mediterranean Sea, the swordfish and tuna drift net fisheries are responsible for catching up to 10,000 cetaceans each year. More than 700 Italian vessels have been involved in this fishery, which expanded from Sicilian waters to the Ligurian Sea in the 1980s. Striped dolphins make up the largest part of this incidental cetacean catch. Many dead dolphins, porpoises and whales wash up on beaches in European countries every year. Often these animals show evidence of contact with fisheries operations. For example, in the first three months of 1992 there were over 60 dolphins washed up on the beaches of the UK, many showing signs of net tangling and rope abrasions. There have also been sightings of cetaceans with net remnants caught on them. In Britain, a scheme to monitor accidental catches of marine mammals began in 1992, but there is little incentive for fishermen to report incidents where cetaceans are killed. After all, it is hard to imagine anyone interested in being branded a "dolphin killer". Other Wildlife in Danger There are many other animals under threat from fishing activities, including the loggerhead turtle near Spain. Up to 50,000 of these turtles are thought to be killed every year in the Mediterranean long line tuna fishery. Limited data suggests a very high by catch of grey seals in the British tangle net fisheries. Also, non-target fish species are accidentally caught in many regions. Examples are the skate by- catch in Irish Sea trawl fisheries and pomfrets in the French tuna drift net fishery in the Northeast Atlantic. Entanglement of sea birds is another problem which is threatening wildlife in European fisheries. Several species, including razor bills, are caught in Spanish, Italian and Portuguese gill net fisheries. Although poorly documented, long line fisheries in European waters are thought to take fulmars, gannets and other species. In Ireland, there have been thousands of razor bills and guillemots killed in the salmon fishery in Galway Bay. In British waters, numerous unidentified birds have been reported caught in the trawl fishery for sprats in the Wash. Sea bird catches have also been reported in coastal gill net fisheries all around England and Wales. In 1989, an estimated 520 auks were killed in less than three months in a small inshore gill net fishery located in St Ives Bay, Cornwall. This implies that the numbers of birds killed in fishing nets could be considerable. All wildlife, including fish species, must be protected from destructive fisheries. The first step is to assess fisheries for entanglement problems. Currently this is not being done in Europe. GREENPEACE DEMANDS European countries must monitor the number of dolphins and other non-target animals killed in fishing gear, and control fisheries with a high incidence of kills. The goal must be to reduce the by-catch of non-target species to zero. If fisheries which accidentally or intentionally kill non-target animals cannot be made benign through gear modifications, seasonal or area restrictions or other regulatory measures, they should be banned. European countries must encourage world-wide measures to ban dolphin encirclement in all fisheries. The EC must also restrict or ban the imports of any fish product which has been caught using this method. European countries must search for and implement measures to enforce the United Nations ban on the use of large-scale drift nets, which kill millions of non-target animals every year. INDUSTRIAL FISHING Given the alarming state of fish stocks in European waters, it is remarkable that up to 50% of the fish taken from the North Sea every year are caught by industrial fishing. "Industrial" fish are fish which are reduced to fish-meal and fish-oil, destined mainly for uses other than direct human consumption. The fish-meal and fish-oil produced by industrial fisheries is used for a variety of products. The products become ingredients in pig and poultry feed, farmed salmon feed, paint, candles and shoe polish. The oil has also been used to fuel Danish power stations. Targeted species are usually very small. They are oily fish, known as "forage fish", because they provide food for many fish eaten by humans. Sand eels, which make up the largest proportion of the industrial catch in EC waters, are eaten by cod, whiting, mackerel, haddock and other fish species. Sand eels are also an important part of the diets of many species of marine mammals and seabirds. Thus, overfishing of sand eels can cause starvation of these animals. The drastic decline of sand eels caused by fishing has been blamed for the starvation of thousands of young sea birds in the Shetland Islands in 1989. Worst affected were Arctic terns, Arctic skuas, kittiwakes, puffins, great skuas and red-throated divers. Overfishing of capelin, another target of industrial fishing, has caused localised declines of guillemots, herring gulls, great black backed gulls and cormorants in the Barents Sea. Regulation of the industrial fishing fleets of the EC is inadequate. In EC waters, Total Allowable Catch figures (TACs) are set for four of the five main industrial species. And where TACS are set, no quotas are allocated among EC countries. No TACs are set for sand eels, the most heavily targeted species. This is because the scientific body responsible for providing advice refuses to set a number because too little is known about the species. Industrial fishermen use nets with very fine mesh, which enable these small fish to be caught. There are no minimum landing sizes for industrial fisheries, which would ensure that smaller fish escape in order to grow and reproduce. There are few controls to prevent accidental catches of direct human consumption species like cod, whiting and herring. Industrial fishing and its destructive effects have existed for decades without control, and steps must be taken to change this. GREENPEACE DEMANDS Industrial fishing must be stopped in the North Sea. Until better monitoring, regulation and research programmes are designed, this fishery is too destructive and wasteful for these heavily exploited waters. DISCARDS Unwanted fish, which are caught by fishermen and thrown back in the sea, are known as discards. Since few fish are able to survive the physical trauma of being caught, most discards die once they are thrown away. Discards are a wasted resource and are a loss to the marine ecosystem. Discarding constitutes a destructive fishing practice. Discards are present in almost all fisheries. It has been estimated that fishermen world-wide catch and throw overboard from about 5 to 12 million tonnes of sea life annually. In the EC, there are no adequate records kept of the amount of discarded fish, but the practice is believed to be quite common. For example, in one year North Sea fishermen landed 150,000 tonnes of whiting, while discarding an estimated 54,000 tonnes. Discard rates for haddock in the North Sea may be as high as 60%. In the EC, discards are so widespread that they have been termed "the industry's cancer". Fishermen discard fish for a variety of reasons. Fishermen have a limited amount of storage space on their vessels, so they may prefer to keep only the fish which will fetch higher prices. In the Northern European countries, larger fish usually command higher prices, so smaller fish are often discarded. Species or sizes of fish which are not marketable are usually discarded. When catch quotas are reduced, discards can often increase. The lowered quotas increase the pressure which already exists on fishermen to keep the larger, more profitable fish. In other cases, fishermen discard their catch because it is illegal to land, since EC regulations prohibit landing some fish which are smaller than a set minimum size. In England, the discards of cod increased when the minimum landing size was raised from 30 cm to 35 cm. The European Commission has admitted that discards cause problems in managing fish stocks, and is searching for solutions. The ecological impacts of discarded fish are poorly understood because the practice has not been documented well. Thus, thousands of tonnes of fish are being wasted, while the public remains unaware. GREENPEACE DEMANDS Discards must be eliminated. Gear must be designed to avoid catching juvenile and non-target species, so funds must be available for research. Fishermen should be required to land everything they catch, whether undersized or not. REGIONAL SEAS PROBLEMS Two regional seas, which are partially within the Community, demonstrate clear examples of environmental harm done by EC fishermen: the Mediterranean Sea and the Baltic Sea. MEDITERRANEAN SEA The Mediterranean Sea, which is bordered by several EC countries, is a fragile ecosystem. Over the years, the diversity and health of marine wildlife have declined, much of it due to the fact that the Mediterranean is one of the most polluted seas in the world. However, overfishing has also contributed to the decline of this regional sea. Catches of fish in the Mediterranean are increasing to a point where they cannot be sustained, courting inevitable disaster. For example, tuna have been so intensively fished that their stocks are becoming depleted. Many bottom-dwelling fish are overfished, some in danger of collapse. Fishing operations in the Mediterranean also pose problems to marine mammals. The threats to the striped dolphin and turtles have already been described in the chapter on marine wildlife. Use of drift nets in the Mediterranean also threatens whales and birds. Another victim is the critically endangered Mediterranean Monk Seal, which feeds on local fish and is considered a pest by many fishermen. Thus, its tiny population of less than 300 is threatened by loss of food due to overfishing, and direct killing by fishermen. Regulation in the Mediterranean is chaotic and poorly enforced for several reasons. All the coastal countries set their own regulations, and their jurisdiction only extends to their territorial sea. Efforts to set up area-wide fishery management, primarily by the United Nations, have so far been unsuccessful. Urgent action is needed. BALTIC SEA Increasing fish catches have also been threatening the Baltic Sea. Like the Mediterranean, its commercial fishermen are over- exploiting the fish stocks. Fish stocks have declined by almost 30 percent between 1970 and 1985. The worst affected species have been cod, salmon, herring and sprat. Fishing has also contributed to the steady decline of marine mammals in the Baltic. The coastal gill net fishery is thought to take up to 500 animals per year. Between 1900 and 1950, hundreds of thousands of seals were deliberately killed by fishermen who regarded them as pests. At least 20,000 birds, mainly guillemots, razor bills and loons, are taken each year in the salmon drift net fishery. Fishing combines with pollution to pose a serious threat to the survival of wildlife in the Baltic. Baltic fisheries are regulated by the International Baltic Sea Fisheries Commission (IBSF), and advised by scientists on the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES). IBSF has consistently ignored the advice from ICES by consistently setting fishing quotas over 20% higher than the recommendations from ICES. While the number of fish able to reproduce is declining steadily, fishermen are being allowed to catch more and more every year. Since many EC countries border these waters, EC fishermen play an important role in the destructive fisheries that take place there. However, the CFP has little jurisdiction over Baltic waters and none of the Mediterranean is covered. Any serious overview of EC fishing policies must acknowledge the need to find effective ways of managing these regional seas in cooperation with non-EC countries. The European Commission has announced that it would take the initiative in introducing a common system for managing Mediterranean waters, but so far this has not been successful. Baltic fisheries management is also flawed. Urgent action is needed to save both seas. GREENPEACE DEMANDS EC countries must encourage and work with non-EC Baltic and Mediterranean Countries to improve effective regional fisheries management. Efforts now are too weak, and both areas are suffering. THE COMMON FISHERIES POLICY As this report makes clear, the European Community allows destructive fishing to flourish. Greenpeace is calling for urgent changes in the European Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). The CFP is a package of rules and regulations which determines how fisheries are managed in the EC. The CFP covers waters in the Community up to 200 miles from the coasts, except in certain circumstances, and has some jurisdiction over fishermen from EC nations even when they are outside the EC. The CFP must be changed to end the environmental damage being done in European and the world's seas. Current Status of the CFP One of the ways in which the CFP attempts to "conserve and manage" fish stocks is by setting Total Allowable Catch (TAC) figures, agreed annually for over 100 species. The numbers of fish available for fishermen to catch has been steadily declining in many fisheries, and the fishing capacity of the fleet has increased. The CFP also sets technical measures, which are intended to protect young fish. These measures include gear regulations, minimum sizes of landed fish and by catch restrictions. For conservation purposes, the CFP sets out ways to regulate fishing time, areas and methods used to catch fish. It also oversees the way each member country enforces the fisheries rules, and funds research into new fishing techniques. The Cause of Destructive Fisheries Many of the destructive fisheries outlined in this report come under the control of the CFP. By setting catch levels, the CFP affects stock levels. The CFP also affects how many marine mammals are accidentally caught by regulating the areas fished, the type of gear allowed and other aspects of fishing. These regulations also affect the level of discards. Making the CFP Environmentally Sound Given that fishing has widespread effects on other wildlife and the environment, it must be controlled so it causes the least damage possible. Thus it is surprising that, in all the conservation and management provisions, the CFP says next to nothing about protection of the environment or other marine species. To begin the process of making the CFP environmentally sound, this protection must become a guiding principle. GREENPEACE DEMANDS: A new guiding principle must be incorporated into the Common Fisheries Policy. This principle must state that fisheries must be conducted in away which minimises harm to the marine environment and wildlife. Fisheries decisions must be taken with full consideration of effects on the wider ecosystem. All existing fisheries must be regularly and diligently assessed and monitored for their environmental effects. Where there is inadequate information to determine the environmental impact of an existing fishery, regulation must be based upon a precautionary approach. Once discovered, the harmful effects of fisheries on the ecosystem must be stopped. Improvement of existing fisheries, which will require action on an ongoing basis. This may be achieved by imposing seasonal or geographic limits, gear regulations, reducing the amount of fishing, or other limitations. If the destructive features of a fishery cannot be removed through regulation, the fishery should be banned. Full environmental assessment must be made before a new fishery is initiated. All the potential effects of a fishery must be assessed, not just the effects on targeted fish populations. Only if it can be proven that a fishery will not have a negative impact on the ecosystem, should the fishery be allowed to begin or expand. In European Community institutions, fisheries and environmental issues must be connected. There must be closer consultation and closer integration between the European Commission Fisheries Directorate (DG XIV) and environmental authorities, particularly those in the Environmental Directorate (DG Xl). EC bodies have encouraged this, but it has not yet been achieved. Effective, separate management plans must be negotiated between all countries of the Mediterranean and Baltic Seas. The EC must take a leading role in encouraging and facilitating these negotiations. WHAT CAN BE DONE? The Greenpeace Approach to Fisheries Greenpeace has been campaigning to protect the health of the oceans for over two decades. Our success in fighting widespread, destructive fishing practices is well-known. For example, Greenpeace has campaigned tirelessly against large-scale drift nets, which hang from the surface like curtains, entangling and killing virtually everything in their path. The campaign has resulted in three UN Resolutions calling for a world-wide ban, and the announcement by some of the high seas drift netting countries that they will stop using these drift nets by December, 1992. The knowledge and experience gained through campaigning has led to the formulation of the Greenpeace Approach to Fisheries. This is a set of general principles that are vital to any fisheries management policy - if it is to secure the long term protection of the marine environment, and thus of the fishery itself. Application of this approach would prevent overfishing and other kinds of destructive fisheries. What makes a fishery destructive? It is when the level of fishing intensity or a fishing practice imposes harm upon the ocean ecosystem. Fishing can change the species composition, and diversity in the ocean. All fish populations play a vital role in the ecology of the oceans, so the potential for harm is great. The Greenpeace Approach to Fisheries is in the interest of the environment and the fishing industry. Protecting the health of the oceans will ensure that there are fish for tomorrow's generations, and will enable a long-term future for the industry. So the Greenpeace Approach to Fisheries does not spell the end of the fishing industry. The basics of the Greenpeace Approach to Fisheries are: Environment First Fisheries management decisions must be based on the need to protect wildlife and the marine environment. This in turn will protect the needs of the fishing industry itself; Ecological Principles Fisheries should be based upon sound ecological principles.These principles should protect the health of the slowest growing and reproducing animals; Burden of Proof The burden of proof must fall on the fishing industry and management authorities to demonstrate that a fishery does not or will not harm the marine environment or its wildlife. The responsibility must not continue to be put upon environmentalists to demonstrate that harm will occur; Precaution Where there is inadequate information to determine whether a fishery is harmful, decision-makers should discontinue the fishery until more information is available. CONCLUSION If the well-being of marine life and indeed the future marine ecosystem is to be restored and maintained, the fishing industry must be radically changed. Fishing must be regulated in such a way that it is compatible with, and not damaging to the natural marine environment. The CFP must address the environmental impacts of fisheries, and EC countries must take measures to make sure this happens. Fundamental new laws and regulations must be made to conserve fish stocks, marine wildlife and the whole ecosystem. A Summary of Greenpeace Demands: Incorporation of a new guiding principle for environmental protection in the Common Fisheries Policy. Implementation of this principle by preventing all harmful effects of fisheries on the ecosystem. Assessment and monitoring of the environmental impact of existing fisheries, and prior assessment of any new ones. Improvement in the way the European Community fisheries officials consult and work with environmental officials. Measures to reduce the by-catch of non-target species to zero. Elimination of discards through better gear design, enforcement, and regulations. Elimination of industrial fishing in the North Sea due to its effects on the ecosystem and levels of by-catch. Negotiation of fisheries management agreements for the Baltic and Mediterranean Seas which incorporate the Greenpeace Approach. For more information please contact: Mary Munson Fisheries Campaigner Greenpeace UK Canonbury Villas Islington London N1 2PN