COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

Brussels, 16.8.2002SEC(2002) 888

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING PAPER

SCIENTIFIC, TECHNICAL AND ECONOMICCOMMITTEE FOR FISHERIES

REPORT OF THE ad hoc WORKING GROUPON EVALUATION OF RECOVERY PLANS OF ANDALUCIA AND

SICILY

Brussels, 23-24 May 2002

This report has been approved by STECF through a fast-track procedure by correspondence

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS1 INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................................3

2 RECOVERY PLAN FOR THE BLACKSPOT SEABREAM (PAGELLUS BOGARAVEO)LONGLINE FISHERY FROM ANDALUSIA (SPAIN).....................................................................4

2.1 DISTRIBUTION AND BIOLOGY .....................................................................................................4

2.2 RECOVERY PLAN ........................................................................................................................5

2.3 TARGET SPECIES AND FISHERY ..................................................................................................5

2.4 STATUS OF THE GIBRALTAR STRAIT STOCK...............................................................................6

2.5 ECONOMIC RELEVANCE .............................................................................................................6

2.6 COMMENTS .................................................................................................................................6

2.7 CONCLUSIONS.............................................................................................................................8

2.8 STECF OPINION .........................................................................................................................9

3 RECOVERY PLAN FOR THE SWORDFISH (XIPHIAS GLADIUS) LONGLINEFISHERY IN SICILY (ITALY). .........................................................................................................10

3.1 FISHERY CONCERNED ...............................................................................................................10

3.2 RECOVERY PLAN ......................................................................................................................11

3.3 TARGET SPECIES .......................................................................................................................11

3.4 STATUS OF THE STOCKS...........................................................................................................12

3.5 ECONOMIC RELEVANCE............................................................................................................12

3.6 COMMENTS ...............................................................................................................................13

3.7 CONCLUSIONS...........................................................................................................................15

3.8 STECF OPINION .......................................................................................................................16

4 RECOVERY PLAN FOR THE SHRIMPS TRAWL FISHERY AND TEMPORARYFISHING BAN IN SICILY (ITALY) .................................................................................................17

4.1 FISHERIES CONCERNED .............................................................................................................17

4.1.1 Recovery plan for shrimps trawl fishing fleet over 18 m overall length .........................17

4.1.2 Temporary fishing ban. Fishing fleet smaller than 24 m overall length.........................18

4.2 RECOVERY PLAN AND TEMPORARY FISHING BAN PROPOSALS ...................................................19

4.2.1 Recovery plan for shrimps trawl fishing fleet over 18 m overall length .........................19

4.2.1.1 Target species............................................................................................................................20

4.2.1.2 Status of the stocks....................................................................................................................21

4.2.1.3 Economic Data ..........................................................................................................................21

4.2.2 Temporary fishing ban. Fishing fleet smaller than 24 m overall length.........................21

4.3 COMMENTS ...............................................................................................................................22

4.3.1 Recovery plan for shrimps trawl fishing.........................................................................22

4.3.2 Temporary fishing ban. Fishing fleet smaller than 24 m overall length.........................23

4.4 STECF OPINION.......................................................................................................................24

3

1 INTRODUCTION

Regulation (EC) No. 2792/99 lays down the detailed rules and arrangementsregarding Community structural assistance in the fisheries sector. In line withprovision defined in Article 16.1(c) of the above Regulation, the Commissionrequested the opinion of the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee forFisheries (STECF) on scientific and economic justification for probable recoveryplans submitted by Andalusia (Spain) and Sicily (Italy).The above recovery plans, due to late submission and lack of time, were not evaluatedduring the STECF plenary session of 22-26 April 2002. Therefore, STECF decided toadopt the fast-track procedure, agreed upon at its 12th meeting (SEC(2001)1581), toevaluate proposals for recovery plans outside the plenary session meeting.An ad hoc Working Group(WG) was specifically set up and convened in Brussels on23rd and 24th May, 2002. The WG also worked by correspondence prior and, tofinalise the report, after the meeting.The WG was composed of the following experts:

STECF membersMr Giandomenico ArdizzoneMr Juan Antonio CaminasMr Antonio Di NataleMr Ramon FranquesaMr Georges Tserpes

Invited expertsMr Henri Farrugio (chairman)

STECF SecretariatMr Franco BiagiMs Deborah Attard-Montalto

The terms of reference for the meeting were surveyed and briefly discussed to arrangethe details of the meeting.

The three proposed recovery plans were:1. Andalucian bottom longline fishery targeting blackspot seabream (Pagellus

bogaraveo) in Gibraltar Strait2. Sicilian swordfish long-line fishery -fleet over 18m overall length.3. Sicilian shrimp fishery. Trawling Fleet of over 18m in length.

In addition, the ad hoc Working Group was also asked to evaluate a fourth proposaldealing with a temporary ban of 45 days for fishing vessels smaller than 18m overalllength in Sicily1. The proposal has been submitted under provision of Art. 12 (6) ofRegulation 2792/99. There was no obligation to submit it for scrutiny by STECF.However, due to its close relationship with the other recovery plan proposalssubmitted by the Sicilian Regional Administration, particularly the one dealing withshrimps fisheries, the Commission required both a scientific and technical opinion onwhether the proposal was likely to achieve an effective protection of aquatic livingresources and whether it was congruent with the other plans presented under Art. 16(c) of the same Regulation.

1 - Programma per l’arresto temporaneo relativo alla flotta non superiore a 24 metri di lunghezza

fuori tutto (Università degli Studi di Salerno - Istituto Ricerche Economiche per la Pesca el’Acquacoltura -IREPA).- Decreto 10 agsto 2001 N° 1482-Bozza di decreto D.A. N22/Pesca del 29 marzo 2002 : disciplina dell’interruzione tecnica delleattività di pesca a decorrere dall’anno 2002 in poi.

4

At the beginning of the meeting the Commission recalled the criteria that shouldguide the experts and particularly the following:

- diagnosis upon which the recovery plan is based: status of the resources andevolution of main fishery indexes;

- prognosis and expected results (benchmarks, appropriateness of the methodology toevaluate the achievements, etc.)

- short and long term socio-economic effects

-congruence of the plan with the targets (e.g. timeframe, appropriateness ofmanagement measures with conservation objectives, likely effectiveness of proposedmeasures, etc.) as well as with ongoing fishing practices and already enforcedmanagement measures

-completeness of the plan: conservation, market, control, monitoring and research

The Commission also underlined that both the recovery plans under Art. 16(c) and theprotection plans under socio-economic measures (Art. 12) should be based on genuineconservation needs and not be used as an excuse to subsidise the fishing fleet, with theconsequent high risk of eliminating the expected conservation results, as well as todelay other urgent conservation management measures.

2 RECOVERY PLAN FOR THE BLACKSPOT SEABREAM (PAGELLUS BOGARAVEO)LONGLINE FISHERY FROM ANDALUSIA (SPAIN)The STECF ad hoc WG examined and reviewed the documents provided by theCommission, concerning the Recovery Plan for Andalusia (Spain) 2 .The reports provided to STECF contain several biological, economic analysis andadministrative documents from various origins.The first legislative proposal of recovery plan is dated September 1999 and until now3 recovery plans ought to have been implemented for the years 1999, 2000 and 2001.However, STECF is not clear whether and how recovery plans have been actuallyimplemented so far.

2.1 DISTRIBUTION AND BIOLOGY

The blackspot seabream (Pagellus bogaraveo) is widely spread along the EasternAtlantic Area. There is evidence that this fish is present in the Western European andAfrican shores and in the Mediterranean Sea. This fish lives from the Norwegiancoast (65º north) to the Canary Islands (27º north) and can even be found in WhiteCape (21º north). Its distribution in longitude is between 30º west, to the west ofAzores, and 22º east, in the Mediterranean Greek coast.

2 1) Plan de pesca para la ordenación de la flota andaluza que opera con el arte voracera en la zona

del Estrecho de Gibraltar (Junta de Andalucía); 2) ‘Estudio de la pesquería del voraz (Pagellusbogaraveo) en aguas del estrecho de Gibraltar fisheries in the Strait of Gibraltar (InstitutoEspañol de Oceanografia -IEO); 3) Análisis económicos de la pesquería de voraz desarrolladapor la flota de Tarifa (Universidad de Huelva y Consejería de Agricultura y Pesca de la Junta deAndalucía ); 4) Aproximación a la dinámica del stock de voraz explotado por la flota de Tarifa(Universidad de Huelva y Consejería de Agricultura y Pesca de la Junta de Andalucía’; 5)Summary of the final report on “The study on the red sea bream (Pagellus Bogaraveo) fisheriesin the strait of Gibraltar (IEO); 6) Measuring the fishing capacity and standardazing the fishingeffort in the red bream fishery located in the Strait of Gibraltar (Universidad de Huelva).

5

The vital cycle of the blackspot seabream in the Strait of Gibraltar can be summarizedas follows: in the first years of life the specimens remain at a depth of less than 200m,in the surrounding waters of the Strait itself. The South-Mediterranean Spanish area isa very important place for the reproduction of this species. The juvenile specimensgradually join the area of the Strait of Gibraltar, namely the eastern fishing grounds.Most of those specimens are males, and they mature at three or four years old. Then,a great part of the population goes through a sexual inversion and become female. Thelatter mature at the age of four or six when they reach an average size of 35centimetres. The females colonise the fishing grounds that are located more to thewest. Spawning takes place mainly during Winter (from January to March). Inconclusion, juveniles tagged in the southern Mediterranean region moved to the Straitof Gibraltar. This suggest a link between Spanish south Atlantic and Mediterraneanblackspot seabream populations.

2.2 RECOVERY PLAN

In 1998, a specific Spanish fishing plan only permitted the deep water bottomlonglines fleets, locally named “voracera”, to be used to catch blackspot seabream(Pagellus bogaraveo) in the area between Punta Camarinal and Punta Europa (5º 7’950 W- 5º 20’700 W), and for no more than 5 days per week. A provisional list of 148authorized fishing vessels was provided. Other technical measures were alsoidentified, including a maximum overall length of 120m of each voracera, a maximumnumber of 100 hooks per “voracera”, a maximum number of 30 “voracera” per boat, asingle net rule, a minimum landing size of 25 cm and specific dimension of hooks.Furthermore, no more than 3 hydraulic systems per boat to shooting the voracera wereauthorised.In September 1999 a Recovery Plan was adopted for the voracera fleet, composed ofthe 148 vessels, listed in 1998, that were based in the ports of Andalusia (South ofSpain) and fished Pagellus bogaraveo (locally named “voraz”) in the Strait ofGibraltar. The area of the recovery plan overlaps with that of the fishing plan (that isPunta Camarinal and Punta Europa, 5º 7’ 950 W- 5º 20’700 W). However, somefishing grounds are located outside these boundaries.The plan was envisaged to last a maximum of 2 years (i.e. 1999 and 2000), plus apossible additional one (2001).The measures thereby identified were: a maximum number of 160 fishing days perboat for the 1999, a maximum of 5 working days per week and, however, never on aSunday. Furthermore, a two-months fishing ban was established for March andSeptember 1999, whilst the ban was centred in February and March for the probablefollowing years. The minimum landing size of 25 cm was enforced, and landings andsale of “voraz” were allowed only in the two ports of Tarifa and Algeciras. In theyear 2000 the census of the fleet was updated with 157 boats in the final list. Theother technical measures were as those identified in the 1998 fishing plan.In November 2000 the recovery plan was prolonged to the year 2001.The financial compensation of the fishing vessels is foreseen in accordance withCouncil Regulation No 2468/98.

2.3 TARGET SPECIES AND FISHERY

The blackspot seabream (P. bogaraveo) is the target species of the “voracera”.Several other species are caught, depending on the period of the year, as by-catches

6

including Brama brama, Lepidorhombus sp., Epinephelus sp. as well as Thunnusthynnus and Xiphias gladius.Most of the fleet is concentrated in two Spanish ports, Tarifa and Algeciras. However,a small part of the “voracera” fleet is also based in other ports of the Spanish coast aswell as in Ceuta, on the north African coast. Furthermore, it seems that an unknownnumber of artisanal Moroccan boats are also exploiting this resource but theirproduction is not available to the working group.It is known that the species, including an important number of juveniles, is alsoexploited by bottom trawl, other fixed gears and recreational fisheries mainly in thesurrounding area of the Recovery Plan.

2.4 STATUS OF THE GIBRALTAR STRAIT STOCK.Both total catches and catch per unit effort(CPUE) show sharp decreasing trends sincethe second half of the nineties. Total annual catches have changed from more than870 MT in 1994 to an average of 270 MT recorded in the latest 3 years. Stockassessment using both global production models and Virtual Population Analysis(VPA) show continuous decreasing trends in stock biomass and spawning stockbiomass since 1992 as well as a continuous increase of the fishing intensity.According to the literature, other stocks of this species have gone , in the seventies,under similar overfishing situations in other fishing areas like the Cantabrian Sea, theBay of Biscay and the Saharian Bank. The current status of the stocks in ICESDivisions VI, VII and VIII is near to collapse.Part of actual conservation problems might be in relation to the strong increase ofeffort related to various reasons: high prices of product, new fishing technologieswhich allow more hauls per day, increase in number of boats dedicated to this fisheryetc. The sustainable level of effort, at the current level of technology, is not yet clear.

2.5 ECONOMIC RELEVANCE

This activity has certainly a high economic importance for the fishery in the region.Landings in the port of Tarifa reached a total of 2.4 M € in 1999.Concerning employment, the available data shows an increasing number of fishermen,carrying out this fishery, from 1986 (185) to 1999 (356) in the port of Tarifa.

2.6 COMMENTS

The recovery plan lacks clearly stated objectives and a timeframe to pursue them.This fact, together with the lack of reporting of the probable results so far detected,impede the WG to check whether the expected results (presumably increase of SSBand abundance, inversion of CPUE trend at sea, increase of average landing size,reduction of effective fishing effort etc.) have been obtained.STECF ad hoc WG believes that, if the recovery plan was actually implemented,possible information from the commission expressly set up within the Recovery Planto monitor the development of the plan itself, would have been very useful to evaluatethe preliminary conservation results of the plan itself and to check whether the planhas been effective so far.However, the decreasing trend of catches and CPUE, recorded also in the years 1999and 2000, elicits some doubts on the effectiveness of the plan. The small increase ofCPUE in 2001 has been explained by an underestimation of nominal fishing effortinstead of by an increment of abundance at sea.

7

In fact, the study evaluates fishing effort as number of days of sales.This does notreflect very well the effective fishing effort but only underestimes it. Furthermore, thequality of the effort data series has worsened in the latest years. Therefore, thereduction in the nominal fishing effort of the latest years seems more an effect of apoor sampling than a real reduction. In fact, it is clear that the effort has constantlyincreased along time also due to the increase in number of hauls per day, as aconsequence of the technical improvements of the fleet .The fleet census was updated by a Spanish Resolution (BOE nº 183, 1 August, 2000).This latter census shows a higher number of boats (n°157) than the census mentionedin the Resolution adopting the Recovery Plan in 1999 (n° 148) (BOJA nº 112, 25September 1999).Taking into account the previous paragraphs, the number of hooks by “voracera” boatand the daily number of hauls per boat as well as the effective fishing days shouldhave better reflected the real effort and improved the quality of the assessments.The maximum level of 160 fishing days per boat chosen for the year 1999, andsupposedly enforced also in 2000 and 2001, correspond to the average of fishing daysper year registered in the major port during the last 16 years prior to 1999. Indeed, thefishing days per year are diminished in the years of the recovery plan, perhaps as aconsequence of the two-months seasonal ban. However, the average fishing days permonth have remained quite stable. In 1997, when the voracera fleet was on averagecomposed of 115 boats, a maximum of about 10400 fishing days was registered. Inprinciple, the ceiling value of 160 fishing days per boat, despite the 2 months closedseason, together with the average number of vessels, that has increased in themeantime, could have also determined an increase of the overall nominal fishingeffort, expressed in days at sea. All this without considering the increase of fishingpower due to technological creep of the fleet.Furthermore, the WG believes that the maximum overall number of hooks authorizedper fishing days, that is 3000 (30 voracera*100 hooks), is quite high in a situationwhere a recovery plan is necessary. In principle, assuming 140 out of 160 fishingdays per boat per year and, furthermore, that only 2-3% of the available hooks beeffective and that the average weight of caught specimen be 0.500 kg, we can expect atotal catch ranging between 700 and 1000 t.. This guesstimate is about 3-4 times theaverage landings of the voracera fleet in the last three years. Therefore, although thereduction in fishing days may presume a reduction in fishing effort, the WG believesthat the fishing mortality, that is the parameter we want to control through the fishingeffort, has rarely decreased. To improve the knowledge of the real fishing effort aswell as of the biological parameters of the stock an adequate scientific monitoringprogramme should have been implemented, including on-board observers.The Recovery Plan has been enforced partly in Atlantic waters, where currentminimum legal size for blackspot seabream is 25 cm, and partly in Mediterraneanwaters, where minimum legal size is 12 cm.The minimum legal size of 25 cm is less than Lm25, that is the size at which 25 % ofthe individuals are mature, (L25 = 27,18 cm for males and 33.02 cm for females). Dueto the proterandric hermaphroditism of the species, females start to reproduce whenover 33 cm in size. In the Gibraltar Strait the first maturity of the male occurs whenthe fish are between 3 and 4 years old. First maturity of the females occurs when theyare between 4 and 6 years old.As regard juveniles of the species, the Instituto Español de Ocenografia(IEO) taggingprogramme in the eastern and western parts of the Gibraltar Strait has shown that

8

important nursery areas are also exploited by other than bottom longlines fisheries,including bottom trawlers and fixed gears.These aspects should have been taken properly into account when the recovery planwas planned. In fact, their lack could have strongly reduced the effectiveness of theplan.The IEO tagging programme also provided information concerning the entry, into the“voracera” recovery plan area, of juveniles from external zones.The economic analysis is based on the data of Tarifa port which fleet represent morethan 50 % of the total number of boats. The trends of CPUE show a steep decreasingslope as in the biomass estimated through stock assessment methods.VPA analysis shows that during the period 1985-1992 the spawning stock biomasswas relatively stable for the then fleet ranging from 50 to 85 boats.The ad hoc WG notes that the monitoring commission does not include any scientificcomponent.

2.7 CONCLUSIONS

The STECF ad hoc WG considers that the main aim of a recovery plan is to recover adepleted stock outside safe biological conditions.As regard the blackspot seabream stock of the Gibraltar region, the availableinformation shows a clear overexploitation and a very low level of the spawning stockbiomass. Inspite of the recovery plan, the ad hoc working group believes that underthe current level of effort and exploitation pattern there is a high risk of no recovery ofthe stock. A recovery plan has to take into account the fact that the blackspotseabream is a long-living and slow-growing hermaphroditic species, and that thespecies, although target of a specialised sector of the fleet, has an economicimportance for the overall Andalusian fishing sector. Therefore the recovery planshould be focussed to reach real safe biological conditions.The lack of appropriate management measures has led other stocks of the samespecies close to collapse situations.The ad hoc working group recognize the need of a recovery plan for the blackspotseabream in the Gibraltar area. However the ad hoc working group believes that thecurrent structure and components of the Recovery Plan need to be improved, toachieve the pursued objectives, by taking into account the following considerations:� The real effort seems to be much higher than expressed in the documents, so there

is a high probability that the stock is in worse conditions than the analysis reveals.� An effective minimum legal size, to permit the recovery of the stock, should have

been set at least at the female minimum size of maturity, that is about 33 cm. Thehook size should have been determined accordingly.

� Considering the distribution of the stock, the (revised?) Recovery Plan should beextended to include all the surrounding areas where the stock is distributed, andshould include all the fisheries, either professional or recreational, affecting theblackspot seabream Gibraltar stock.

� The Recovery Plan should have considered the last updated fleet census availableand should have had as a target a less amount of overall fishing days reached in1997 before the steep decrease of the overall catches.

� The objective of the Recovery Plan should have been to come back to theequilibrium situation of the period 1985-1992. That means that at the end of thePlan the fishing effort should have been considerably lower than the current oneand in line with the fleet dimension of the late eighties.

9

� Considering the age at first maturity of male and female the Recovery Plan shouldbe enforced for not less than 5 years to be effective and to allow for any possibleamelioration in the status of the stock and fishery to be detected.

� The economic support to the Plan needs to:� stimulate economic and social incentives to obtain social support to the

temporary two-month tie-up� introduce new measures to reduce the effort to the sustainable level

� The actual proposal did not introduce clear objectives and incentives for reductionof the structural effort. Some kind of clarification of these objectives, ascomplementary action would be more preferable.

� A scientific monitoring programme (biological and socio-economic) should beincluded as part of the Recovery Plan.

2.8 STECF OPINION

There are clear indications that the stock is under high risk of collapse and that thestock can no longer sustain a profitable fishery. The WG believes that a realistic andeffective recovery plan was and is still needed.However, the WG is not in a position to evaluate thoroughly whether the recoveryplan, implemented from 1999 to 2001, has given any positive results. To this end, itwould have been advisable to make available also the findings and results of themonitoring commission set up expressly to monitor the plan.However, considering both the current number of fishing vessels and the permittedactivity level of 160 fishing days, as well as the fact that other fisheries exploitingnursery areas were not included in the plan, the WG think that, most likely, the two-month fishing ban did not deliver a real reduction in fishing effort and fishingmortality nor an improvement in the state of the stock.Since, the recovery plan should have been already undertaken, the WG suggests theEU Commission may wish to give a positive approval of the recovery plan so farenforced only under the following conditions:

- the recovery plan, irrespective of the lack of funding possibilities for furtheryears under Art. 16(c) of FIFG, should continue for at least another 3 - 4years, since most probably it has not been implemented in 2001. Orotherwise, if it has been implemented in 2001, for another 2 - 3 years;

- the state of the stock and fisheries targeting this species should be monitoredfor at least another 2 years after the end of the recovery plan. It would beadvisable that the monitoring be carried out also by a specialised researchInstitute. A sampling scheme with observer on board should be implemented;

- reporting of the conservation and economic/commercial results obtained sofar, after three years implementation of the recovery plan, and in theforthcoming years;

- the hook size should be increased, for the forthcoming years, in order toincrease minimum landing size (MLS) and set the Lc to the size of firstmaturity of females;

- in line with European Commission orientation to set up both a TAC andfishing effort regime for the management of deep sea resources, includingblackspot seabream, also in area IX, an appropriate catch limitation for theVoracera fleets should be set up at a level not higher than the average catchesof the most recent years, that summed up to about 270 MT. This catch

10

restriction should be applied to all voracera fleets irrespective of whether theyare based in the Atlantic and Mediterranean side of Andalusia;

- identified nursery areas should be closed to the trawl fishery;- the seasonal ban should be extended to also include January;- the actual proposal did not introduce clear objectives and incentives for

reduction of the structural effort. Some kind of clarification of theseobjectives, as complementary action would be more preferable;

- the number of authorised fishing vessels should be restricted, by the end of therecovery plan, to no more than 50-85 vessels, having as a reference thedimension of the fleet in the years 1985-1992. A stepwise approach on ayearly basis is suggested;

- the authorized overall number of hooks per day seems incongruent with theneed to reduce the fishing effort and thus the fishing mortality. The overallnumber of hooks per boat should be drastically reduced in the continuation ofthe recovery plan. In the current situation of number of authorised vessels andmaximum of 160 fishing days, and if the data of overall catches provided intothe report are reliable, the WG thinks that no more than 800-1000 hooks perboat could be deployed;

- depending on the results so far obtained, after three years enforcement of therecovery plan, further reduction of maximum allowable fishing days shouldbe considered;

- recreational fisheries need to be included in the recovery plan, monitored andlimited in their catches or, even better, closed.

3 RECOVERY PLAN FOR THE SWORDFISH (XIPHIAS GLADIUS) LONGLINE FISHERYIN SICILY (ITALY).The STECF ad hoc Working Group examined and reviewed the documents providedby the Commission, concerning the Recovery Plan for the Swordfish in Sicily (Italy),for the fleet segment over 18 m overall length (OAL) 3.The report provided to STECF ad hoc Working Group, prepared by IREPA andattached to the draft Regulation of the Sicilian Regional Government, containsscientific information from various origins and covers particularly the last three years.The report highlights an overall decrease in yields for the long-line swordfish fisheryin Sicily.

3.1 FISHERY CONCERNED

According to the scientific report the Recovery Plan is proposed only for fishingvessels over 18 m overall length, based in the Mediterranean ports in Sicily (Italy),that prevalently undertake the surface longlines. In fact, the fishing vessels over 18 moverall length that are authorized to fish with surface longliners amount to 227 vesselswith a total of 13475 GRT. However, half these vessels also have the fishing licencefor bottom trawl, while 93 vessels (5353 GRT) do not have the fishing licence forbottom trawl.

3 - Piano per il recupero della risorsa Pesce spada. Segmento di flotta: flotta palangriera superiore

a 18 metri di lunghezza fuori tutto. (Università degli Studi di Salerno - Istituto RicercheEconomiche per la Pesca e l’Acquacoltura -IREPA).- Bozza di decreto presidenziale per il piano di recupero del pesce spada (17.05.2002).

11

3.2 RECOVERY PLAN

The Recovery Plan proposed by the Sicilian Regional Government for the swordfishhas the objective to increase the biomass of the stock, particularly by protecting thejuveniles when they are more vulnerable.The Recovery Plan is proposed only for the Sicilian (Italy) surface longliners over 18m overall length and which are not also authorized for the bottom trawl fishery.The plan consists of a compulsory fishing ban that should last for 60 consecutive daysstarting from 1st October. The plan will be carried out for a maximum period of 2years, and possibly extended by a further year, within the limit period up to 2006.In this period (i.e. October-November) of the year, there is an important recruitmentof juvenile swordfish and bluefin tuna. Furthermore, the data provided to STECF adhoc Working Group shows that there is no important surface long-line activity inSicily between December and February, with some occasional and sporadic activity inJanuary in only one year. This fishing pattern could implicitly extend the benefits of arecovery plan ban in October and November to a much longer period.The benefit expected on swordfish should be reasonably extended to all the otherlarge pelagic species included in the Sicilian surface long-line catches, like bluefintuna and albacore. Due to the peculiarities of the fishery, all the surface long-lineactivity, independently from the target species, are included into the recovery plan.A research Institute will be responsible for the monitoring of the plan, that will last afurther year after the end of the plan itself. The research Institute will report every sixmonths and it will also carry out a comparative study on hook selectivity to identifypossible additional technical measures.The scientific report attached to the draft proposal of the recovery plan foresees that ascientific monitoring of the most important concentration areas for juveniles is to becarried out every year by the research Institute in charge. An observer-samplingscheme is also envisaged. The purpose would be to identify the areas where theICCAT resolution adopted in 2001 should be possibly enforced. (Resolution byICCAT for Evaluating Alternatives to Reduce Catches of Juveniles or Dead Discardof Swordfish). Along this line, the report also foresees the perspective to ask theItalian Directorate General for Fishery for a time-area closure including the mostimportant areas for juvenile swordfish, valid for all the surface long-linersindependently from the register location, with the purpose to avoid that vesselscoming from other areas negatively affect the expected results. However, both tasksand actions are not explicitly taken into consideration in the draft proposal of theSicilian legislative act.Financial compensation for both fishing vessels and fishermen is foreseen accordingto Council Regulation No 3699/93 and Regional law N° 6 of 03/05/2001 respectively.The draft of the Sicilian legislative act reports 93 vessels4 and an assumption of 550fishermen. The annual financial compensation amounts to 6,163,444 €, of which4,800,000 € for the fleet and 1,363,444 € for the fishermen.

3.3 TARGET SPECIES

The main target species for the large majority of the fleet is the swordfish (Xiphiasgladius), but for a minor part of the fleet the target species are both the albacore(Thunnus alalunga) and the bluefin tuna (Thunnus thynnus). All these large pelagicspecies are widely distributed in all the Mediterranean Sea. Sharks, small tuna species

4 source: fishing licences archive of MiPAF (June 2001)

12

and other pelagic species are caught as a by-catch. Marine turtles, marine mammalsand others species are also incidentally captured.

3.4 STATUS OF THE STOCKS

The Sicilian Regional Government presents the results included in the final report ofthe EC 98/0034 project, concerning the first attempt to assess the Mediterraneanswordfish stock, based on Sicilian and Greek data. According to this study, theswordfish stock has an almost stable biomass. However, it is characterised by a lowaverage length, close to the former minimum landing size of 120 cm LJFL. Nospecific stock assessment on the Mediterranean swordfish has been carried out so farby ICCAT. Past genetic studies suggest that all Mediterranean swordfish individualscompose a unique stock, which is separated from the Atlantic ones.Data provided about the CPUE (kg per 1000 hooks) for the swordfish long-line insome of the most important Sicilian harbours show a decrease in recent years. (-6.1%in Mazara del Vallo between 1992 and 2000; -18.3% in Lipari between 1985 and1999). According to the report, in the most recent period (1998-2000) the CPUE datashow a more important decrease: -21.5% in Mazara del Vallo; -43.7% in Marsala,while in Lipari the long-line fishery was not carried out in 2000, due to the very lowyields. A parallel decrease of the total fishing days is reported: -64.4% in Mazara delVallo between 1994-2000 (188 days vs 67 days), and –43.5% in Lipari between 1994-1999 (23 days vs 13 days).Other data are also provided about the CPUE obtained by all the surface long-lines(target on swordfish, albacore and bluefin tuna) in the period 1998-2000: in this casethe decrease is –27.2% in Mazara del Vallo, - 44.1% in Marsala, while the fishery wasnot carried out in Lipari in the year 2000.However, although the reduction of total fishing days, the total swordfish mortality(Z) in the Sicilian long-line fishery increased from 0.68 in 1991 to 1.06 in 1999.The swordfish is widely distributed in the Mediterranean Sea, with higherconcentration of juveniles in the Balearic area, in the Southern part of Italy (includingSicily) and in the north-eastern Mediterranean.In Italy a minimum landing size of 120 cm LJFL is still enforced for swordfish. Theaverage length of the swordfish caught by the Sicilian long-liners is usually wellbelow the minimum landing size. The monthly size frequency of the catches shows ahighest percentage of juveniles in autumn.The bluefin tuna stock assessment is usually carried out by ICCAT but, due to thehigh incertitude of the most recent data, the latest results are those for 1998. TheVPA shows a decreasing trend and the bluefin tuna stock is managed by a quotaregime.No stock assessment is available for the albacore in the Mediterranean.

3.5 ECONOMIC RELEVANCE

The swordfish fishery is one of the most important activities from an economic pointof view, due to the high value of the product and to the increasing market request.Notwithstanding this activity definitely has a high economic importance for thefishery in that Region no economic data and analysis are provided by the documents.The total number of surface long-line fishermen included in the Recovery Plan is 550.However a high, but undefined, number of vessels less than 18 m in length which alsopractice swordfish fishery is not included in the Recovery Plan.

13

Actually the fleet of vessels smaller than 18 m overall length amount to 3356 boatsand account for 17003 GRT. However, this information needs to be checked becauseit is incongruent with the data reported in the main part of the text (3467 boats for23805 GRT). This latter fleet segment is composed of vessels authorised to useseveral fishing gears including longlines; however it is not possible to distinguishbetween bottom and surface longlines.No information on the relative fishing effort exerted by the swordfish fleet over 18 mis provided by the report.

3.6 COMMENTS

The report provided to STECF ad hoc Working Group, on the Recovery Plan for theSwordfish surface long-line fishery in Sicily (fleet segment over 18 m OAL), gives ashort description of the Sicilian long-line activity specifically targeting swordfish orcatching swordfish as a co-target species (in the albacore and the bluefin tuna long-line fisheries). However, the objectives of the plan, timeframe and expected resultsare not duly presented. Actually, the expected results are presented as suppositioninstead of through a more formal analysis.The document doesn’t provide any preliminary rough information on the possiblefishing areas where juveniles concentrate. Considering the protection of juveniles asthe main objective of the recovery plan, this information is fundamental to guaranteethe Plan’s effectiveness.According to the ICCAT data bank, the Sicilian swordfish fishery is one of the mostsignificant in the Mediterranean, accounting for about 70% of the Italian catches,which represent between 30% and 60% of the total Mediterranean swordfish catches,depending on the year considered.As stated by the ICCAT workshop on the juvenile swordfish in the Mediterranean in2001 the protection of the juveniles represents one of the most important issues for theconservation of the stock, together with the correct management of the fishing effort,that should be strictly controlled.According to the data provided, it is quite clear that it is important to reduce thecatches of juvenile swordfish and that the Sicilian long-line fleet has a very significantportion of the catches below the minimum landing size of 120 cm LJFL. Thesecatches are due to the high number of recruits in autumn, but also to the swordfish by-catch in the albacore long-line fishery. A reduction of these catches might benefit thestock due to the relevance of the Sicilian long-line fleet in the Mediterranean context.Thanks to the current good knowledge of the general situation the WG notes that theswordfish long-line fishery is also carried out by a large number of Sicilian vesselssmaller than 18 m OAL. Nothing is reported about this fleet segment in the recoveryplan proposed by the Sicilian Regional Government. This segment of the fleet,mostly provided with multi-gear licences, is quite relevant in number of vessels and insome years it exceeds more than 1000 vessels. Consequently, due to the lessspecificity of the fleet smaller than 18 m OAL, the STECF ad hoc Working Groupsupposes that these vessels might possibly switch their effort to other resources, incase of a general ban of the surface long-line fishery in the two months required bythe recovery plan.The STECF ad hoc Working Group notes that the proposed recovery plan wouldcertainly affect the albacore fishery and this fact is taken into proper account.The current pattern of the surface longline Sicilian fishery, that reduces its activity inthe winter period, mostly due to bad whether conditions, will most probably enhancethe expected conservation benefit that would be obtained in October and

14

November.The possibility of a compulsory closure, in October and November, of thesurface long-line fishery in all the Sicilian waters, to also cover all surface long-linevessels from outside Sicily, as reported by the scientific report upon which therecovery plan is based, would be an important point to be achieved. However, thiscommitment is not explicitly mentioned in the draft proposal of Sicilian legislation.According to the most recent biological knowledge of the Mediterranean swordfish,the size at first maturity (L50) is around 110 cm LJFL, as an average between asmaller size for the males and a larger size for the females.The scientific conservation reasons upon which the recovery plan is scheduled on a2+1 year basis, are not stated in the plan. In fact, from a conservation approach, due tothe great importance of the resource and its long life span, the possibility to letjuvenilesreach the age of at least three years is considered the minimum requirement.Therefore, the proposed recovery plan seems too short to allow and to detect possibleamelioration in the status of the stock and fishery. Doubts on the rationale uponwhich the duration of the plan is based are also raised because the envisaged timeperiod mirrors that foreseen in the FIFG Regulation (2792/1998) as the maximumperiod allowed to grant financial compensation. The choice of the duration of the planseems more related to the minimum requirement to grant compensation.A recovery plan should probably be enforced for more than three years to beeffective, and accompanied by the necessary monitoring to assess the results.However, due to several uncertainties, including environmental factors, the WGbelieves that a reasonable time for a recovery plan of a long-living species should beenforced for at least 5 years.The study does not show the likely results after the enforcement of the Recovery Planand furthermore the WG is not clear through which methodology the possibleexpected results will be evaluated. A simulation approach included in the proposalwould have certainly helped the WG to better evaluate the Recovery Plan.The scientific evidence available to the STECF ad hoc Working Group about thecurrent compliance with the regulation (CE 1626/94) about the maximum allowedlength for the surface long-line (60 km and not 70 km as reported in the SicilianRecovery Plan) is low, due to the fact that much longer long-lines (around 100 kmand even more) are used by some vessels. This fact needs to be better considered bythe Plan.A much stricter control of compliance with the current regulation could certainly helpto effectively reduce the fishing effort on the swordfish. The Recovery Plan mustelaborate on the compliance with the regulation. In the recovery plan there are nomeasures aiming to prohibit landing and selling of Sicilian swordfish during theswordfish longlines fishing ban. To this end, enforcement of labelling regulationshould be adequately assured.Moreover, while control represents an important element for the success of a recoveryplan, is not clearly underlined. This aspect is indispensible, particularly in an areawhere there are several landing sites and the level of compliance is usually quite low.Further attention is to be given to the international framework in which this plan is tobe considered.The swordfish (as well as the other species that might benefit from the Sicilianrecovery plan) is a common-shared resource in the Mediterranean, subject to themanagement by the ICCAT, the GFCM and the States which practice this fishery inthe Mediterranean (i.e. not only the coastal States). To reach a more valid result and tocreate a full benefit for the stock, it is essential that similar recovery plans be adoptedfor all the fleets concerned, as requested by ICCAT resolutions and by GFCM. Till

15

2001, only the Greek regulation included a surface long-line ban from October toJanuary, enforced since the 1980s.The STECF ad hoc Working Group recommends that this problem be seriously takeninto account by the European Commission, and then proposed and discussed in theproper fora.Monitoring of the fishing activity after the adoption of the Recovery Plan is correctlyincluded in the proposal. The monitoring of the expected results, due to severalsources of uncertainties and also to the seasonal feature of the fishery, should becarried out for at least two years by the end of the recovery plan, instead of only oneyear as foreseen by the recovery plan.

3.7 CONCLUSIONS

According to the report submitted to the STECF ad hoc Working Group for theevaluation of the Sicilian Recovery Plan for the Swordfish, it is shown that thesituation of the stock of Xiphias gladius, as it is also pointed out in all scientific fora,is quite problematic in all the Mediterranean areas where swordfish fisheries havebeen carried out for several years.The recovery plan proposed by the Sicilian Regional Government for a limitation ofthe surface long-line fishery is in line with the most recent resolution by ICCAT.However, a favourable opinion is subject to a more general compulsory fishing banfor this fishery, to be extended to all the fleet, irrespective of the length of the vesselsand the gears used to capture the swordfish.STECF thinks that the enforcement of a seasonal ban only in Sicily, as it stands now,will most likely not deliver a significant reduction in fishing effort nor animprovement in the state of the stock.The above statement does not necessarily imply that the financial implications of theRecovery Plan need to be extended to all the Sicilian surface longline fleet, becausethe smaller vessels are supposed to be quite able to carry out other fishing activities,besides the long-line fishery.To enhance the possibility to be biologically effective and to allow the assessment ofresults, the Recovery Plan should be enforced for a period longer than three years,preferably five years. The monitoring should continue for a further two years after theend of the plan.Enforcement of closed areas should be an objective of the plan so as to be in line withthe ICCAT resolution.A simulation approach, to be included in a possible revised proposal, might certainlyhelp the WG to better prior evaluate the Recovery Plan and to properly assessexpected benefits.The economic support to the Plan should:� stimulate economic and social incentives to obtain social support to the temporary

limitations and ensure the collaboration of the industry;� introduce new measures to reduce the effort at the sustainable levelThe present proposal does not introduce clear objectives and incentives for reductionof the structural effort. Some definition of these objectives as complementary action isrecommendable.A reduction of the fishing effort of the long-line fleet in the Sicilian area, as well as inthe rest of the Mediterranean area, would benefit the fishery resources.The STECF ad hoc Working Group suggests the Commission may wish to encouragethe adoption of similar recovery plans for all the other EU fleets concerned.

16

3.8 STECF OPINION

The scientific report upon which the recovery plan is based lacks thoroughlyeconomic, fishery and stock assessment analyses. Actually the report cites quitebriefly some information available in the literature and does not give an account eitherof the overall swordfish catches or the economic value of the catches by fleetcategory. It is therefore not possible to evaluate the relative importance of the catchestaken by the surface longline fleet segment over 18m. The plan is mainly based onsuppositions and does not allow a quantitative evaluation of the expected results.Furthermore, scientific information reported in the annexes is not thoroughlycommented upon and linked to the main body of the report.Nevertheless, although the report does not provide enough scientific details that thestock is under high risk of collapse and that it cannot sustain a profitable fishery anylonger, the STECF WG acknowledges that the status of swordfish stock needconservation measures. Therefore, although the scientific diagnosis provided does notscientifically highlight the urgency of a recovery plan, the WG believes that a realisticand effective recovery plan might be useful to improve the exploitation pattern, thepoor state of the stock as well as the economic performance of the interested fleet.The WG understands that this proposal, particularly its limitation to the segment over18 m, has to be read in conjunction with the other draft proposal on temporary fishingban, presented by the Sicilian Region under Article 12 (6) of Council Regulation2792/1998. This refers to fishing vessels smaller than 18 m overall length5. In otherwords the recovery plan is not self-sufficient, as it stands now, and its conservationresults also depend on whether the latter proposal will enter into force or whetheradditional conservation measures will be adopted.The WG believes that the proposal of recovery plan, as it stands now, cannot achieverealistic conservation results. The WG suggests the Commission may wish to give apositive approval of the recovery plan proposal under the following conditions:

- objectives and timeframe of the plan should be more thoroughly presented. Asimulation analysis, or at least a more formal scientific analysis, with expectedconservation results under different scenarios, be included in a revisedproposal of the recovery plan;

- the fishing ban be extended to all fishing vessels authorized to use surfacelongline, irrespective of vessel dimension and target species. To this end, thisspecialised fishery needs to be regulated by issuing a annual special fishingpermit (Council Regulation 1627/94) to all vessels which want to undertakesurface longline fishery. A detailed comprehensive list of authorised fishingvessels needs to be included into the framework of the recovery plan;

- the census of the fishing fleet and fishermen should be updated to 2002,furthermore the factual error on the dimension of the fleet smaller than 18 mshould be corrected in the report;

- the Recovery Plan should be enforced for a period longer than three years,five years preferably, and the monitoring should last a further two yearsfollowing the end of the plan; the financial support to the Plan may also needto assure the introduction of further measures to reduce the fishing effort and

5 - Programma per l’arresto temporaneo relativo alla flotta non superiore a 24 metri di lunghezza

fuori tutto (Università degli Studi di Salerno - Istituto Ricerche Economiche per la Pesca el’Acquacoltura -IREPA).- Decreto 10 agsto 2001 N° 1482- Bozza di decreto D.A. N22/Pesca del 29 marzo 2002 : disciplina dell’interruzione tecnicadelle attività di pesca a decorrere dall’anno 2002 in poi.

17

to improve the exploitation pattern at the sustainable level (shorter longlines,etc..);

- identification of clear objectives and complementary actions to reduce thestructural effort;

- identification of both an adequate control legal framework and marketmeasures to ensure, also after the temporary ban, compliance with the currentlegislation (MLS, overall length of longline less than 60 Km), including,among others, both the designation of ports where swordfish can be landed;

- the current information on swordfish nursery areas is not yet well defined.Furthermore, it might change every year. However, a legal commitment toenforce, after the first year of the recovery plan, closed areas of adequatedimension according to the findings of the monitoring and observerprogramme should be included in the recovery plan legislation;

- as suggested in the scientific report annexed to the recovery plan, a legalframework, in coordination with Italian national Authorities, needs to beestablished before the recovery plan starts, so as to avoid that other Italiansurface longlines fishing vessels could fish in the identified closed areas.

4 RECOVERY PLAN FOR THE SHRIMPS TRAWL FISHERY AND TEMPORARY FISHINGBAN IN SICILY (ITALY)

4.1 FISHERIES CONCERNED

The STECF ad hoc WG examined and reviewed both the documents concerning theRecovery Plan for the Sicilian shrimp trawl fishery6 and the proposal dealing with atemporary ban, to be implemented on a yearly basis, for the fishing fleet smaller than24 m7 overall length. The former proposal is presented by the Sicilian RegionalGovernment under Article 16 (c), of the Council Regulation No 2792/1999, whichrefers to the implementation of recovery plans. The latter proposal concerning fishingvessels, authorized also for trawl fishing, smaller than 24 m overall length. It ispresented under Article 12 (6) of EC Regulation No 2792/1999, which refers tosocio-economic measures linked to temporary fishing ban implemented within aframework of a protection plan.

4.1.1 Recovery plan for shrimps trawl fishing fleet over 18 m overall lengthThe scientific report, annexed to the proposal of shrimps recovery plan, mentions thatthe Sicilian bottom trawl boats over 18 m in length, that undertake prevalentlyshrimps fishery, ‘suffer a reduction of the shrimp resources’.

6 - Piano per il recupero della risorsa gambero. Segmento di flotta: flotta strascicante superiore a

18 metri di lunghezza fuori tutto. (Università degli Studi di Salerno - Istituto RicercheEconomiche per la Pesca e l’Acquacoltura -IREPA).- Bozza di decreto presidenziale della Regione Sicilia per il piano di recupero della risorsagambero (17.05.2002)

7 - Programma per l’arresto temporaneo relativo alla flotta non superiore a 24 metri di lunghezzafuori tutto (Università degli Studi di Salerno - Istituto Ricerche Economiche per la Pesca el’Acquacoltura -IREPA).- Decreto 10 agosto 2001 N° 1482- Bozza di decreto D.A. N22/Pesca del 29 marzo 2002 : disciplina dell’interruzione tecnicadelle attività di pesca a decorrere dall’anno 2002 in poi.

18

The proposed Recovery Plan involves all the 423 Sicilian bottom trawlers over 18 min length registered in the Sicilian maritime Departments fleet registers as of June2001.The 423 boats, out of a fishing fleet of 3890(?), account for 37256 GRT, andrepresent, according to the report, "the most important productive segment in theItalian fisheries". Most of these boats are concentrated in the maritime Department ofMazara del Vallo and Porto Empedocle. Some vessels pertaining to this segment onlyhave the bottom trawl fishing licence while others have the authorisation also forother fishing gears.This fleet segment has been reduced by more than 20% in number (from 536 to 423vessels), in the last six years (1996-2001), resulting in a total fleet capacity reductionof about 12 % in GRT and 8 % in kW.However, notwithstanding this reduction, the likely expected increase in abundancedid not occur because the overall production decreased by about 10% from 1998 to2000. In the same period the fleet decrease of about 12.2% (from 531 to 466 vessels).Whilst, in the same period, an increase of fishing days per boat has been recorded. Infact, fishing vessels bigger than 18 m OAL have operated, on average, for 194 fishingdays.From 1998 to 2000, a reduction of about 13.4% (or 4.5% depending on whether Tab.2or Tab. 4 data sets are reliable in the report) in the overall CPUE (kg/day) per boat,that is considering not only the shrimps but all the species captured is reported.Albeit the numerous species captured by bottom trawlers only three shrimp specieshave been considered in the plan (Parapaeneus longirostris, Aristeus antennatus andAristaeomorpha foliacea.) because of their importance in commercial value. Thesespecies are however shared stock in the Strait of Sicily. Furthermore, there areseveral fishing vessels, based in Adriatic ports, which are authorised to undertake afishing season to catch shrimps in areas south of Sicily.The scientific report has some incongruities, between the CPUE reported in Tab.2 andthose in Tab.4. There are also differences/discrepancies between the overall numberof 3356 fishing vessels smaller than 18 m, as reported in Tab.1 and the information of3467 reported in the main body text. This fact determines a dimension of Sicilianfishing, ranging from 3890 to 4001 vessels in 2001. Furthermore, the amount of 3467vessels smaller than 18 mt coincide with the total number of 3467 smaller than 24 m,as reported in the proposals of temporary ban for socio-economic reasons. The WG isnot clear on how to explain such differences.

4.1.2 Temporary fishing ban. Fishing fleet smaller than 24 m overall lengthThe plan, according to the scientific report, regards all fishing vessels, smaller than 24m overall length. Inspite of this the current draft Decree refers only to fishing vesselssmaller than 18 m overall length which also have, in their fishing license, theauthorization to use the bottom trawl gear.The scientific report points out the heterogeneity of these fishing vessels in terms offishing practices undertaken. Furthermore, several of them are multipurpose vessels,that is the same vessels can use different gears along the years. The report states,without providing detailed economic and biological analyses, that this fleet segment isin an unhealthy situation due both to a serious impoverishment of fish resources andto a poor economic performance. The current poor state of marine resources cannotassure the optimal economic sustainability.

19

Fishing vessels smaller than 24 m overall length have operated an average of 161 daysin 2000. Notwithstanding an increase of average price per unit of weight, this fleetsegment has recorded a 14% and 7% decrease in catches and revenues respectively incomparison to 1998.The assumption of the proposal is that the temporary fishing ban alone will besufficient to protect the fishing resources and improve the context of poor conditionsat sea. However, no information is given on which species are expected to benefitfrom the temporary ban.The reported number of Sicilian fishing vessels, as at the year 2000, is 4329 thataccount for 68000 t. This fleet is, in number of vessels, about 11 % bigger than theone of 2001 as stated in the reports for the recovery plans for shrimps and swordfish.A total of 256 vessels out of 4329, including 220 bottom trawlers, are bigger than 24m overall length.The number of 606 vessels, smaller than 24 m overall length, out of 4073, are bottomtrawlers of which 203 are bigger than 18 m, 346 are between 12 and 18 metres and 57are smaller than 12 m. About 2986 out of 3043 vessels smaller than 12 m, are notauthorised for bottom trawling.

4.2 RECOVERY PLAN AND TEMPORARY FISHING BAN PROPOSALS

4.2.1 Recovery plan for shrimps trawl fishing fleet over 18 m overall lengthThe recovery plan, as described in the scientific report, should start in 2002 and last 2years. The main target species of the recovery plan is the deep-sea rose shrimp(Parapenaeus longirostris).The plan regards all the 423 Sicilian bottom trawlers over 18 m in length and about2,960 fishermen. The requested temporal ban of trawling fishery, for this segment offleet, is mainly aiming to improve the recruitment of P. longirostris for which nurseryareas are known.The scientific report identifies four major tasks to be achieved through the plan:

1. Knowledge and control of fishing effort targeting shrimps;

2. Reduction of the fishing effort;

3. Research of new fishing grounds and control of predators;

4. Technical measures of trawl nets.

The objective of the first point is the compilation of a list of trawlers, both Sicilianand of other Italian areas, mainly carrying out shrimps fishery around Sicily. Aresearch Institute should monitor both the logbook and possibly the real activity ofthose vessels included in the list. Blue box will be used for vessels longer than 24 m.To be included in the above list, fishing vessels should be committed to provide dataand allow logbook inspection.Both second and third tasks aim to reduce the fishing effort by enforcing twosuccessive monthly temporary ban for bottom trawlers longer than 18m.A first ban of 30 days, in March, during which the boats will be tied up in theharbours. This month has been chosen to better protect the recruits of the pinkshrimp. The plan foresees the establishment of possible closed areas for two monthsto avoid that fishing vessels of other Italian regions could come and fish for shrimps

20

where and when Sicilians are not allowed to do so. This temporary closed areasshould be set up in coordination with the national Italian Administration.Then, a second period of 30 days of temporary trawl ban should be enforced in April.During this second period the bottom trawlers will not tie up in the harbours andthey will be allowed to go to sea and towing the old trawl gear to remove obstaclesfrom fishing grounds currently not suitable for bottom trawling. According to thestatement included in the scientific report, although without any scientificjustification, there are plenty of “predators” in this area which diminish the amount ofshrimps trawl fishery target species. The fishermen want to eliminate ‘a large amountof predators’ which the fishermen state are currently protected in these areas. In fact,the same fishing grounds are also not exploitable by trawlers because of hardobstacles left by the FAD fishery. Supposed effects of the obstacle-removing taskshould be twofold: 1) to make workable new fishing grounds with supposedconsequent reduction of the fishing effort on the currently fishing grounds in the nearfuture 2) immediate reduction of fishing effort during the month of April becausetrawl vessels are not supposed to carry out fishing operations. The vessel monitoringsystem(VMS) and logbooks would ensure control of the bottom trawlers.The fourth task foresees a gradual adoption of bigger codend mesh sizes in the trawl,36 mm from 1.5.2002 and 40 mm as from 1.5.2003.The annual financial compensation amount to 15,215,357 €, of which 8,215,357 € forthe fleet and 7,400,000 € for the fishermen.However, the draft decree of the Sicily Government does not explicitly match most ofthe above points as foreseen in the scientific report. In particular, there is no mentionof temporary closed areas, of augmentation of codend mesh size, of commitment forfishermen to provide data and allow logbook inspections, as well as of measures,coordinated at national levels, to impede the fishing activities to bottom trawlers ofother areas etc…

4.2.1.1 Target speciesThe report presents some biological information on the selected shrimps species.A. antennatus is found below 400 m in depth and is fished down to 700-800 m. It hasa large reproductive period from Spring to Autumn. First maturity length (50%) is forthe female 32-38 mm CL. Male maturity is slightly smaller. Maximum length is 65-70mm CL for female and 40 mm for male. No significant genetic difference has beenproved to demonstrate the existence of different populations. Different opinions existon the life cycle of this species varying from 5 to 10 years. No information is knownon nursery areas for this species.A. foliacea is found below 400 m in depth and is fished down to 700-800 m. Thereproductive period is between May and September. The female reaches first maturity(50%) at 34 mm CL while the male is mature at 29 mm. The female reaches amaximum length of 65-70 mm CL and the male at 45-50 mm. The life cycle for thespecies is 6-7 years. The mortality estimates (M and F) have a high variability amongdifferent areas and years, not directly linkable with the fishing effort variation. Thereis no known information known on nursery areas for this species.P. longirostris in the presented document is reported to be found between 100 and700, but it is well known that it is mainly found between 100 and 300 m in depth andbelow this its presence is only occasional. This aspect is quite relevant because thefishing ground of the deepsea rose shrimp are located in different areas contrary tothe red shrimp grounds.

21

The first maturity is reached in the first year of life at 22-24 mm CL for female andsmaller for male. The reproductive period is in Autumn and Winter and after a pelagicphase, juveniles reach nurseries located between 100 and 200 m in depth. A directcorrelation between depth and size is known for this shrimp. Maximum observedlength for females is 44 mm CL and 34 mm for males. The life cycle for the species is3-4 years . The mortality estimates (M and F) show an high level of variability.

4.2.1.2 Status of the stocksScientific information on the status of shrimps stocks is insufficiently presented in thereport, albeit the long list of scientific papers listed in the bibliography section.Therefore the WG is not able to evaluate the correctness of the diagnosis upon whichthe recovery plan is based. However, the report provides catch rates that showdifferent trends for the three species in the various seas around Sicily.In particular, A. antennatus shows a very low abundance indices in the Strait of Sicilyif compared to the southern Tyrrhenian and Ionian sea. And there is evidence ofdecreasing catch rate only in the Ionian Sea.The abundance indexes of A. foliacea present a rising trend in the southernTyrrhenian, a decreasing trend in the Strait of Sicily and a low abundance in theIonian sea. Abundance indexes of P. longirostris have a similar trend with a decreaseboth in the Strait of Sicily and in the Ionian sea.In conclusion, these data suggest a high variability of the yield experimental catchrates in most areas and a decreasing trend for A. foliacea and P. longirostris both inthe Strait of Sicily and the Ionian Sea.

4.2.1.3 Economic DataThe report provides overall daily revenue data per boat of the trawling fleet segmentover 18-m length. Nevertheless, neither shrimp yields nor economic data are reportedto show the relative importance of the three shrimps species in comparison to the totalcatch.

4.2.2 Temporary fishing ban. Fishing fleet smaller than 24 m overall lengthThe temporary ban has two objectives:

� preserve the resources allowing their replenishment� support economically the fishing sector

The draft Decree proposal foresees, starting from 2002, a recurring implementation ofa temporary total fishing ban that will last 45 days of which 30 consecutive days perboat in the period from 1 August to 31 October. Then, a further 15 days to befractioned for no more than 5 days per month in the period between May andNovember.During the temporary ban period, both routine and exceptional maintenance of thevessel is authorized.The plan, as defined in the scientific report, regards all fishing vessels, smaller than24 m overall length. Furthermore, the ban is obligatory for vessels smaller than 12 mwhilst is non-compulsory for vessels between 12 and 18 m overall length.Notwithstanding the scientific report, the current draft Decree which howeverendorses the whole scientific report, refers only to the fishing vessels smaller than 18m overall length which have in their fishing license also the authorization to use thebottom trawl gear (N° of vessels 403). Furthermore the ban is compulsory.

22

However, the draft Decree includes a clause that allows, between 1 and 31 March ofeach year, modifications of the current text. The possibility for modifications is notenvisaged and presented neither in the report nor in the draft decree.

4.3 COMMENTS

4.3.1 Recovery plan for shrimps trawl fishingThe scientific report upon which the recovery plan is based lacks thorough economic,fishery and stock assessment analyses. In fact the report cites quite summarily someinformation available in the literature and does not give an account either of theoverall catches of the three shrimps species or the economic value of the catches. It isnot possible to evaluate the relative importance of the shrimps catches against theoverall catch. The plan is mainly based on suppositions and does not allow aquantitative evaluation of the expected results. Furthermore, scientific informationreported in the annexes is not thoroughly commented upon and not linked to the mainbody of the report.It is quite clear, although not sufficiently explained in the report, that the threeshrimps species are caught within a multispecies fisheries and that the Sicilian fleet,over 18 m, does not target only those species all year round. This is due, either bothbecause more species can be caught in the same hauls or because the same fishingvessels can exploit different depths in the same fishing trip. However, it is also knownthat there are specialised fishing vessels targeting deep sea red shrimps that undertaketwo weeks fishing trips. However, the number of these fishing vessels does notcoincide with the whole fleet of vessels bigger than 18 m.The WG notes the lack of information on Norway lobster (Nephrops norvegicus) thatis one of the main target species among crustaceans. More than thirty fish species,regularly fished on the same fishing grounds, are likewise important target speciesand cannot be considered only as auxiliary species (“contribuiscono al risultatoeconomico della pesca”, pag. 31).Therefore, the WG thinks that it would be advisable either to limit the recovey plan tothose vessels only targeting deep sea shrimps or to conceive a more integrated andrevised proposal of the recovery plan which also includes the other main species ofthe bottom trawl fishery. It is a fact that several other species exploited by the samefleet segment are overexploited.The WG thinks that, since the goal of the recovery plan is the protection ofrecruitment, at least for P. longirostris, one of the first steps should be an immediateenforcement of the current legal mesh size of 40 mm. To this end, the WG considersthat its postponement, as indicated in the report, is not in line with the necessity of arecovery plan. In particular, scientific studies carried out in the said same area haveproved that a mesh size of 56 mm in bottom trawl fishery to be an optimalexploitation gear for deep sea shrimps.However, the application of 40 mm mesh size in a multispecies fisheries oftenexploiting small size fishes or juveniles, not necessarily concerned by minimumlanding size, might produce reduction of capture, at least enough to give the mainpopulations time to reach the size corresponding to a greater mean mesh size. Atemporary ban of the fishery linked to the application of the legal mesh size can helpthe main fish species reach a longer length structure of the stocks avoiding thereduction in the total amount of capture by trawlers. This could be applied in differentperiods of the year in the various main recruitment areas. Firstly for the fast growing

23

species (pink shrimp, red mullet, cephalopods) but also for species important from theeconomic point of view, such as hake and common pandora whose nurseries are wellknown.The proposed fishing ban does not seem to be of great significance for the two speciesof Aristeidae.Furthermore, being that the selected shrimps species are of mid to long-term life-span,the WG is sceptical that the enforcement of only the proposed fishing ban will allow arealistic improvement of the status of the stocks, as well as of the economicperformance of the fleet.The second temporary ban of 30 days is a way to improve the accessibility of fisheryto new fishing grounds, instead of a measure for the recovery of stocks. The WGthinks that the presence of untrawlable areas is a positive factor that, so far, hasimpeded an even more rapid and dramatic collapse of some Mediterranean resourcesexploited with small mesh size fisheries. In fact these “refugium” areas could beimportant areas of protection for reproduction and recruitment of several species.The lack of data on shrimps’ relative economic importance, particularly of the deepsea rose shrimp which is supposed to benefit from the trawl ban, as well as the lack ofyield and economic expected results, does not allow for the evaluation of thecongruity of financial compensation against the supposedly expected results.Clearly, the fact that the Sicilian Government also put forward a proposal, althoughunder Article 12(6) of the EC Reg. 2792/1999 which refers to socio-economicmeasures, for a temporary fishing ban of boats smaller than 24 meters, demonstratesthat there is a more general problem for bottom trawling and other fisheries in Sicily.In actual fact, the joint action of both proposals will affect the whole bottom trawlfleet in Sicily but in different periods of the year.Therefore, a more integrated analysis of the resources exploited by the whole trawlfisheries in Sicily, should improve the proposed plan in order to achieve moreimportant and lasting improvements of the overall status of the main resources .The mismatch between the draft decree of the Sicilian Government and the actionsforeseen in the scientific report should be eliminated. In particular, the draftlegislation should take into consideration also the setting-up of temporary closedareas, the possible further augmentation of codend mesh size and the enforcement andcompliance with current legal mesh size of 40 mm, as well as measures, coordinatedat national level, to impede the fishing activities to bottom trawlers of other areasetc…Furthermore STECF thinks that actions to be taken to monitor the “recovery plan”should be more thoroughly detailed and duly reported also in the draft Decree.Some discrepancies of the dimension of the Sicilian fishing fleet have been detectedin the different scientific reports, the STEFC WG recommends that the same year,preferably 2001 or 2002, be used to provide statistics on the dimension of Sicilianfishing fleet and number of fishermen. The relative number of bottom trawlers whichare bigger than 24 m, 18 m and 12 m should also be included. Vessels that carry outshrimps fishery on a more continuous way shouyld be more clearly identified. It isalso recommended to provide a trend of the fleet dimension and capacity, by thechosen segments and fishery, of the latest 3-5 years.

4.3.2 Temporary fishing ban. Fishing fleet smaller than 24 m overall lengthThe WG thinks that the scientific basis upon which the recurrent temporary ban isbased are not clearly explicated. The few data reported refers to an heterogeneous

24

fleet segment. That is, all vessels smaller than 24 m, irrespective of the fisheryactually carried out. Thus, they are not suitable to give a real picture of the differentfisheries. In particular, it is not clear which is the current nominal fishing effort ofbottom trawlers smaller than 18 m and of 24 m, and therefore it is not possible toevaluate the relative importance of the 45 days of temporal ban. In fact, the averagenumber of 161 fishing days does not refer to trawl fishery only but it is an average ofvessels carrying out different fisheries. Information should be provided by fleetsegments carrying out different fisheries.To be effective and solve specific problems a temporary fishing closure needs toaddress particular species or group of species. Actually, due both to the heterogeneityof fisheries carried out by different vessels included in this segment and the variety ofspecies, it might be advisable to have different closure periods for different fisheriesalong the year. Furthermore, several important species for bottom trawl fishery do notspawn in the selected period as otherwise indicated in the proposal.From the draft Decree it is not clear whether these fishing vessels, which should beauthorised also for trawl fishery, will be tied up in the harbours or whether they couldcontinue fishing with a gear other than bottom trawl.The WG thinks that the possibility of carrying out routine and extraordinarymaintenance of the vessels, as well as the renewal of the safety control permits, duringthe temporary ban, will limit the possible expected reduction of nominal fishingeffort. In fact, days spent to accomplish maintenance and bureaucratic duties arealready normally discounted from the nominal annual fishing effort.The given expected results are too general and therefore difficult to evaluate. A moreclear and formalised definition of expected results is needed.The WG thinks that alone the seasonal closure will hardly give, at the current level offishing effort and exploitation pattern exerted by Sicilian trawl fleet, conservationresults in the absence of other congruent management measures ( e.g. mesh size, etc.)Furthermore, different portions of trawl fleet, although they practice mainly the samemultispecies fishery, will stop their fishing activities in different periods of the year,in particular 423 trawlers, longer than 18 m, might stop in March, while 606 trawlers,smaller than 18 m, could stop in groups for 30 days, between August and October,both months included. Therefore trawl fishing activities, although reduced in numberof fishing vessels, will never completely stop along the year.Moreover, the WG thinks that the possibility that the Decree could be modified, byallowing, in the near future, non compulsory adhesion to the temporary ban forfishing vessels bigger than 12 m, makes the temporary ban even weaker.The WG understands that there might be the possibility of a discriminatory financialcompensation. In fact, in case both the recovery plan and the protection plan(temporary fishing ban) are approved vessels smaller than 18 m will receive afinancial compensation only for the fishermen (socio-economic measures), whiletrawl vessels bigger than 18m might benefit of a financial compensation for both thefishermen and the boat (recovery plan).

4.4 STECF OPINION

The scientific reports annexed to both proposals do not give enough scientific detailsand trends to support the request for neither a recovery plan nor a temporary ban. Thedocuments are mainly based on statements and assumptions that are difficult toevaluate. However, although the scientific diagnosis provided does not scientificallyhighlight the urgency of a recovery plan, the STECF Working Group recognizes theimportance of improving the status of the resources exploited by the Sicilian trawl

25

fleet. In fact, it is well known that the current exploitation pattern is not adequate forsustainable fisheries.The WG believes that realistic and effective management measures, possibly alsoincluding recovery plans, are needed to improve the exploitation pattern, the poorstate of several stocks, as well as the economic performance of the interested fleets.The WG understands that the shrimps recovery plan proposal, particularly itslimitation to the segment over 18 m, has to be read in conjunction with the draftproposal on temporary fishing ban, presented by Sicily Region under Article 12 (6)of Council Regulation 2792/1998, which refers to fishing vessels smaller than 18 moverall length8. In other words the shrimps recovery plan is not self-sufficient and itsconservation results also depend on whether the latter proposal will enter into forceand vice-versa. However, STECF notes that the two proposals of fishing ban includetwo different periods of the year, thus demersal trawl fishing is never completelystopped.The WG believes that the proposal for recovery plan, as it stands now, cannot achieverealistic conservation results for shrimps fisheries.Furthermore, the WG is of the opinion that the proposal of “cleaning” bottom fishinggrounds will hardly provide conservation results. On the contrary, it is incontradiction with the “refugium” hypothesis.Moreover, considering that trawl fishing will never completely stop throughout theyear and that the overall period of recurrent trawl ban needs to deduct both the days ofbad weather as well as days committed to vessel maintenance and bureaucratic duties,the WG envisages a possible limited reduction in fishing mortality due to the limitedreduction in fishing effort. The WG doubts that the possible limited reduction offishing mortality could counteract negative effects of current long-termoverexploitation.The WG suggests the Commission may wish to give a positive approval either of therecovery plan and/or temporary ban proposals under the following conditions:

- a more thoroughly biological analysis of the status of the most importantspecies exploited by trawl fisheries. This study should provide a more cleardiagnosis of the main species as well as their relative importance withindifferent fisheries. Technical interactions should be taken into consideration.Objectives and timeframe of the plan should be more thoroughly presentedand justified. A simulation analysis of the expected results from a biologicaland economic point of view, be included in a revised proposal of the recoveryplan;

- conservation and fishery management objectives should be more extensivelyand clearly outlined;

- a more accurate economic analysis showing the relative importance of thespecies in over-fishing condition in relation to the total fisheries. Trends ofeconomic performance by fleet segment should be provided;

- the same year, preferably 2001 or 2002, be used to provide statistics on thedimension of Sicilian fishing fleet and number of fishermen by fleet segment.It is also recommended to provide a trend of the fleet dimension and capacity,

8 - Programma per l’arresto temporaneo relativo alla flotta non superiore a 24 metri di lunghezza

fuori tutto (Università degli Studi di Salerno - Istituto Ricerche Economiche per la Pesca el’Acquacoltura -IREPA).- Decreto 10 agsto 2001 N° 1482- Bozza di decreto D.A. N22/Pesca del 29 marzo 2002 : disciplina dell’interruzione tecnicadelle attività di pesca a decorrere dall’anno 2002 in poi.

26

by the selected segments, of the latest 5-10 years. Furthermore the factualerror on the dimension of the fleet smaller than 18 m should be corrected inthe report;

- both proposals of recovery plan and recurrent temporary fishing ban couldneed to be part of a more comprehensive and integrated management plan ofSicilian trawl fisheries aiming to improve the conservation status of severalspecies. Enforcement of adequate technical measures need to be clearlyplanned. For example, an immediate enforcement of the 40 mm codend meshsize (Council Regulation EC No 2550/2000) is recommended.

- a more articulated plan for temporary fishing ban, divided by fleet segmentsand different periods of the year, and focused on a real benefit of importantspecies (mainly recruitment) in relation both to their abundance and to to theireconomic importance in the fisheries. The fishing ban be extended, for thesame period, to all fishing vessels authorized to use bottom trawl, irrespectiveof vessel dimension and target species. A detailed comprehensive list ofauthorised fishing vessels needs to be included within the framework of therecovery plan;

- actions aiming to clean sea bottom from obstacles should not be counted astemporary cessation of fishing activities;

- if the aim is to recover only deep sea shrimps resources ( e.g. red shrimp andblue and red shrimp), mainly targeted by certain specialized vessels, eitherbased in Sicily or in other Italian ports, a more focussed approach on controland reduction of fishing effort needs to be conceived. Such an approach couldalso foresee the listing of vessels authorized to carry shrimps fishery,irrespective of port of base and vessels’ length, as well as the issuing ofspecial fishing permits (Regulation 1627/94). Furthermore, according to themost recent scientific advice, consideration should also be given to possiblefurther enlargement of the mesh size of specialised Sicilian shrimps trawlers(e.g. 56 mm);

- considerations should also be given to limit fishing activities to 5 workingdays per week in the months not included in the recurrent fishing ban.Eventually, this permanent limitation of the fishing effort will help avoid atremendous foreseeable increase of fishing effort, just after the end of thetemporary ban, to catch possible increment of abundance at sea;

- the shrimps recovery plan should be enforced for a period longer than threeyears, five years preferably, and the monitoring should last a further two yearsfollowing the plan ends;

- considerations should also be provided on clear objectives and complementaryactions to reduce the structural effort by fleet segment/fishery;

- identification of both an adequate control legal framework ( special fishingpermits, authorized landing port, logbook etc.) and market measures to assure,also after the temporary ban, compliance with the current legislation(minimum landing size, 40 mm codend mesh size, etc. );

- a legal commitment to enforce, for the main species, closed areas of adequatedimension according to the current information should be included in theshrimp recovery plan legislation;

- a clause should be included in the draft legislation which obliges fishingvessels to provide data and allow logbook inspection.

- Whereby only the recurrent temporary fishing ban (article 12(6) of FIFG) forvessels smaller than 24 m overall length were accepted by the Commission,

27

the WG thinks that the seasonal closure alone will hardly give conservationresults. Especially in the absence of other congruent management measures (e.g. enforcement of legal mesh size of 40 mm, shorter working week, etc.) atthe current level of fishing effort and exploitation pattern exerted by theSicilian trawl fleet. Furthermore, the current Sicilian Govern Decree of 29March 2002 includes only trawl vessels smaller than 18 m.