The NFFO summarises the annual fisheries agreements and highlights the main issues confronting the the fishing industry
Quotas for 2023
| Summary of agreed TACs and UK quota for 2023 Negotiation Forum | |||||||
| EU-UK | |||||||
| EU-UK-NO | |||||||
| Coastal States | |||||||
| Stock code | Stock name | Agreed TAC for 2023 (tonnes) | % Change in TAC from 2022 | UK quota for 2023 pre-LO deductions (tonnes) | % Change in UK quota from 2022 | UK quota for 2023 post-third country exchanges (tonnes) | |
| ALF/3X14- | Alfonsinos (3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,12,14) | 179 | -20% | 5 | -29% | 5 | |
| ANF/07. | Anglerfish (7) | 45724 | 11% | 10196 | 14% | 10196 | |
| ANF/2AC4-C | Anglerfish (North Sea) | 7211 | -20% | 6338 | -19% | 6338 | |
| ANF/56-14 | Anglerfish (West of Scotland) | 4082 | -20% | 1704 | -17% | 1704 | |
| ARU/1/2. | Greater silver smelt 1,2 | 59 | 0% | 25 | 0% | 25 | |
| ARU/3A4-C | Greater silver smelt North sea | 809 | 0% | 13 | 0% | 13 | |
| ARU/567. | Greater Silver Smelt (Western) | 8124 | -30% | 454 | -30% | 454 | |
| BLI/12INT- | Blue Ling (International 12) | 77 | 0% | 1 | 0% | 1 | |
| BLI/24- | Blue Ling (North Sea) | 27 | 0% | 7 | 0% | 27 | |
| BLI/5B67- | Blue Ling (Western) | 10952 | 1% | 2611 | 3% | 2541 | |
| BOR/678- | Boarfish (Western) | 22791 | 0% | 1450 | 0% | 1450 | |
| BSF/56712- | Black Scabbardfish (Western) | 1813 | -6% | 103 | -6% | 103 | |
| COD/07A. | Cod (Irish Sea) | 165 | -20% | 73 | -20% | 73 | |
| COD/5BE6A | Cod (West of Scotland) | 1210 | -5% | 913 | -2% | 898 | |
| COD/5W6-14 | Rockall Cod | 74 | 0% | 52 | 2% | 52 | |
| COD/7XAD34 | Cod (Celtic Sea) | 644 | 0% | 63 | 3% | 63 | |
| DGS/15X14 | Spurdog (Western) | 10889 | 3933% | 4825 | 4024% | 4825 | |
| HAD/07A. | Haddock (Irish Sea) | 2648 | -13% | 1440 | -12% | 1440 | |
| HAD/6B1214 | Haddock (Rockall) | 4078 | -30% | 3430 | -30% | 3430 | |
| HAD/7X7A34 | Haddock (Celtic Sea) | 11901 | -21% | 2142 | -16% | 2142 | |
| HER/07A/MM | Herring (Irish Sea) | 7309 | -14% | 6870 | -11% | 6870 | |
| HER/5B6ANB | Herring (West of Scotland) | 1212 | -65% | 791 | -65% | 791 | |
| HER/7EF. | Herring (Western Channel and Bristol Channel) | 558 | -40% | 279 | -40% | 279 | |
| HER/7G-K. | Herring (Celtic Sea) | 869 | 0% | 1 | 0% | 1 | |
| HKE/2AC4-C | Hake (North Sea) | 2883 | 5% | 1339 | 13% | 1339 | |
| HKE/571214 | Hake (Western) | 46335 | 5% | 9374 | 6% | 9374 | |
| JAX/2A-14 | Horse Mackerel (Western) | 13400 | -78% | 1258 | -78% | 1258 | |
| JAX/4BC7D | Horse Mackerel (Southern North Sea and Eastern Channel) | 8969 | 0% | 3074 | 9% | 3074 | |
| L/W/2AC4-C | Lemon Sole and Witch (North Sea) | 3140 | -27% | 2042 | -26% | 2042 | |
| LEZ/07. | Megrims (7) | 21348 | 13% | 4285 | 17% | 4285 | |
| Stock code | Stock name | Agreed TAC for 2023 (tonnes) | % Change in TAC from 2022 | UK quota for 2023 pre-LO deductions (tonnes) | % Change in UK quota from 2022 | UK quota for 2023 post-third country exchanges (tonnes) | |
| LEZ/2AC4-C | Megrims (North Sea) | 2723 | -1% | 2621 | -1% | 2621 | |
| LEZ/56-14 | Megrims (West of Scotland) | 5499 | -1% | 2296 | 2% | 2296 | |
| LIN/03A-C. | Ling 3a | 144 | 0% | 11 | 0% | 11 | |
| LIN/04-C. | Ling (North Sea) | 2577 | -18% | 2046 | -17% | 2046 | |
| LIN/6X14. | Ling (Western) | 12371 | -18% | 4598 | -17% | 3298 | |
| NEP/07. | Nephrops (7) | 18353 | 8% | 7371 | 10% | 7371 | |
| NEP/2AC4-C | Nephrops (North Sea) | 22073 | -9% | 19120 | -9% | 19120 | |
| NOP/2A3A4. | Norway Pout (North Sea) | 58412 | -2% | 11439 | 12% | 11439 | |
| PLE/07A. | Plaice (Irish Sea) | 2039 | -26% | 1042 | -26% | 1042 | |
| PLE/56-14 | Plaice (West of Scotland) | 592 | -10% | 360 | -10% | 360 | |
| PLE/7DE. | Plaice (English Channel) | 6775 | -26% | 2020 | -26% | 2020 | |
| PLE/7FG. | Plaice (7fg) | 402 | -77% | 103 | -77% | 103 | |
| PLE/7HJK. | Plaice (7hjk) | 132 | 16% | 22 | 16% | 22 | |
| POK/7/3411 | Saithe (Celtic Sea) | 2541 | 0% | 383 | 0% | 383 | |
| POL/07. | Pollack (7) | 6410 | -20% | 1506 | -17% | 1506 | |
| POL/56-14 | Pollack (West of Scotland) | 125 | -20% | 46 | -19% | 46 | |
| PRA/2AC4-C | Northern Prawn (North Sea) | 990 | 0% | 218 | 0% | 218 | |
| RJE/7FG. | Small-eyed Ray (7fg) | 86 | -30% | 43 | -25% | 43 | |
| RJU/7DE. | Undulate Ray (English Channel) | 3192 | 1264% | 1051 | 1301% | 1051 | |
| RNG/5B67- | Roundnose Grenadier (Western) | 2317 | 0% | 112 | 0% | 112 | |
| RNG/8X14- | Roundnose Grenadier (8,9,10,12,14) | 1545 | 0% | 4 | 0% | 4 | |
| SBR/678- | Red Seabream (Western) | 105 | 0% | 11 | 0% | 11 | |
| SOL/07A. | Sole (Irish Sea) | 605 | -23% | 140 | -23% | 140 | |
| SOL/07D. | Sole (Eastern Channel) | 1747 | -27% | 347 | -26% | 347 | |
| SOL/07E. | Sole (Western Channel) | 1394 | -23% | 861 | -23% | 861 | |
| SOL/24-C. | Sole (North Sea) | 9152 | -40% | 1323 | -35% | 1323 | |
| SOL/56-14 | Sole (West of Scotland) | 57 | 0% | 11 | 0% | 11 | |
| SOL/7FG. | Sole (7fg) | 1338 | 0% | 421 | 1% | 421 | |
| SOL/7HJK. | Sole (7hjk) | 213 | 0% | 36 | 0% | 36 | |
| SPR/7DE. | Sprat (English Channel) | 9200 | 218% | 6859 | 218% | 6859 | |
| SRX/07D. | Skates and Rays (Eastern Channel) | 1537 | 3% | 240 | 3% | 240 | |
| SRX/2AC4-C | Skates and Rays (North Sea) | 1764 | 0% | 1202 | 1% | 1202 | |
| SRX/67AKXD | Skates and Rays (Western) | 9797 | 3% | 2937 | 5% | 2937 | |
| T/B/2AC4-C | Turbot and Brill (North Sea) | 3747 | -32% | 715 | -30% | 715 | |
| USK/04-C. | Tusk (North Sea) | 228 | 0% | 92 | 0% | 92 | |
| USK/567EI. | Tusk (Western) | 4294 | 0% | 1272 | 1% | 892 | |
| Stock code | Stock name | Agreed TAC for 2023 (tonnes) | % Change in TAC from 2022 | UK quota for 2023 pre-LO deductions (tonnes) | % Change in UK quota from 2022 | UK quota for 2023 post-third country exchanges (tonnes) | |
| WHG/07A. | Whiting (Irish Sea) | 721 | 0% | 428 | 1% | 428 | |
| WHG/56-14 | Whiting (West of Scotland) | 2636 | 46% | 1692 | 48% | 1692 | |
| WHG/7X7A-C | Whiting (Celtic Sea) | 9650 | -10% | 1077 | -9% | 1077 | |
| COD/2A3AX4 | Cod (North Sea) | 21652 | 63% | 9882 | 67% | 9882 | |
| COD/07D. | Cod (Eastern Channel) | 1261 | 63% | 117 | 65% | 117 | |
| HAD/2AC4. | Haddock (North Sea) | 58402 | 30% | 37261 | 31% | 37261 | |
| HAD/5BC6A. | Haddock (West of Scotland) | 6507 | 30% | 5245 | 30% | 5245 | |
| HER/2A47DX | Herring (North Sea bycatch) | 7716 | -6% | 140 | -6% | 140 | |
| HER/4AB. | Herring (North Sea) | 396556 | -7% | 72563 | -4% | 72563 | |
| HER/4CXB7D | Herring (Southern North Sea and Eastern Channel) | 396556 | -7% | 5162 | -5% | 5162 | |
| PLE/2A3AX4 | Plaice (North Sea) | 132922 | 6% | 35184 | 6% | 35184 | |
| POK/2C3A4 | Saithe (North Sea) | 53374 | 19% | 6186 | 23% | 6186 | |
| POK/56-14 | Saithe (West of Scotland) | 5538 | 19% | 2456 | 28% | 2456 | |
| WHG/2AC4. | Whiting (North Sea) | 34294 | 29% | 21410 | 33% | 21435 | |
| MAC/2A34. | Mackerel (North Sea) | 782066 | -2% | 1610 | 0% | 1610 | |
| MAC/2CX14- | Mackerel (Western) | 782066 | -2% | 209204 | 0% | 209204 | |
| WHB/1X14 | Blue Whiting (Northern) | 1359629 | 81% | 106034 | 82% | 106034 | |
| HER/1/2- | Herring (ASH) | 511171 | -15% | 9983 | -15% | 9983 | |
Annual Fisheries Negotiations
Since October, the UK, as an independent coastal state, has been engaged in a series of negotiations towards annual fisheries agreements for 2023. These sets of talks have continued more or less in parallel and have partly informed each other in the different strands in the annual round of fisheries negotiations. The UK/EU Fisheries Agreement for 2023 has just been signed, but other negotiations have included:
- Trilateral consultations between the UK, Norway and the EU
- Negotiations between coastal states on the big, highly migratory pelagic stocks (Iceland, UK, Faroes, Norway, Greenland and the EU)
- Talks on a bilateral agreement between the UK and Faroes.
- Talks towards a bilateral fisheries between UK and Norway
- Separately, the EU has also held separate bilateral negotiations with Norway
UK/EU Fisheries Agreement
The UK/EU negotiations are primarily focused on setting total allowable catches for 2023 on the 70 or so shared stocks. Quota shares and access arrangements between the UK and the EU are fixed by the Trade and Cooperation Agreement until 2026, after which they will be subject to annual agreement.
Mixed Fisheries: Despite dealing with 70 individual stocks, our understanding that, for many of these, agreement was reached quickly by following the headline ICES scientific advice. The question of how to apply ICES mixed fishery scenarios to those stocks where there are technical interactions between different species proved more controversial. Different species have different levels of interaction and in complex multispecies fisheries like the demersal fishery in the Celtic Sea, the range can be considerable (haddock quite a lot, monkfish, megrim and sole much less).
Cod in UK waters, for which scientists detect a northward movement in distribution and low recruitment, possibly through some kind of regime shift, is not an economically important species in the Celtic Sea or Irish Sea, and there is a judgement call required as to how to balance protection for the residual component of the stock whilst maintaining economically viable fishing opportunities on the many (up to 40) other economically important species. The degree to which this already complex set of considerations was further complicated by political manoeuvring to secure negotiating leverage in these complex negotiations by both sides is an open question but was certainly a factor.
In the final outcome, ICES headline advice appears to have been followed in the main in the Celtic, Irish Sea and West of Scotland fisheries with some consideration to mixed fisheries interactions on specific stocks like haddock and megrim. In the North Sea, where mixed fisheries interactions were dealt with on a more pragmatic basis, the decision to limit recommended increases in haddock and whiting TACs to 30% (rather than 160% and 224% respectively) is widely regarded as a sound call in the context of the trilateral negotiations.
Seabass: The positive ICES advice this year provided scope for modest increases in the catch limits for all metiers: trawl and seine, gill net, and hook and line. This is welcome as a step towards reducing dead discards of unavoidable bycatch, though quite limited. There will be many, certainly, who are frustrated by the slow pace of improvement, which is largely dependent on the size of incoming recruitments. A further source of frustration will be the time that it take to obtain parliamentary approval for the changes that will delay the availability of the increased limits for around four months. As this lack of agility was one of our principle criticisms of the CFP, the Federation will be campaigning for a much more streamlined mechanism for the future. These changes should be capable of being implemented through licencing conditions in 24 hours, not 4 months.
The changes are:
Trawl and Seine – More flexibility from 760kgs per two month period to 3.8 tonnes per year
The 5% per trip limit remains in place as does the closed season in February and March
Hook and Line – The 5.95 tonne annual limit is raised to 6.2 tonnes
Gill Nets – the 1.5 tonne limit is increased to 1.6 tonnes per vessel per year
It is impotant to check these provisional figures with the MMO guidance when it becomes available.
Spurdog: The extremely positive scientific advice on spurdog after having previously been on the prohibited species list, opens the possibility of a significant fishery in 2023 and 2024, subject to a number of conditions, such as returning mature females to the sea. There will be a rather frustrating delay whilst certain legal and constitutional hurdles are navigated to take them off the prohibited species list, but we are assured that EU vessels will only be able to catch and land spurdog caught in UK waters when this facility is also open to UK vessels.
Skates and Rays: The Skates and Rays group TAC was the subject of a difference of opinion on interpretation between the UK and the EU, but in truth, for this year at least, there seemed little difference in the outcomes. The group TAC remains an imperfect way to manage 12 different sub-species but a complete alternative solution has yet to materialise.
The NFFO will participate in meetings to make progress on this front in the New Year.
Non-Quota Species: Progress has been made in ensuring data transparency as it is not possible to manage any fishery on the basis of inadequate information. The UK’s insistence of a committment in the agreed record will mean that catch statistics from both the EU and the UK will now be published quarterly. This removes an important impediment to sustainable management. In the meantime, it has been agreed to continue to monitor uptake of catch limits without the kind of hard stop that would carry adverse consequences, including fleet displacements. The longer-term approach to managing NQS through multi-year strategies will begin with king scallop in the New Year.
UK/Norway/EU Trilateral
The UK/EU/Norway fisheries agreement has now been signed and the trilateral negotiations completed.
The outcome in summary is:
North Sea
Cod + 63%
Haddock + 30%
Whiting + 30%
Saithe +19%
Plaice + 6%
Herring (A fleet +7.3%, B Fleet +5.6%)
The very positive ICES scientific advice this year meant that the task of setting TACs for the main jointly managed stocks was relatively straightforward. Restraint was shown in setting TACs in the haddock and whiting fishery in acknowledgement of the interaction of these species with cod. The substantial increase in the TAC for cod is exceptionally welcome as it brings the industry’s view of abundance and those of ICES into closer alignment. The well- attended meeting in Edinburgh at the beginning of November between the industry and senior ICES fisheries scientists was likewise a very positive development.
Much of the time during the negotiations was spent on a long-running dispute between the EU and Norway about how to handle bycatch in the industrial fishery.
UK/Norway Fisheries Agreement
The bilateral with Norway principally concerns access arrangements and quota exchanges.
The arrangement for reciprocal access for demersal species up to 30,00 tonnes introduced in for 2022 will be rolled over into 2023. The level and type of quota exchange is determined by need, surplus and politics. The UK prioritised an inward exchange of monkfish as the TAC was facing a significant reduction. Politics are likely to have been a significant factor in deprioritising take up of the full fishing opportunities offered by Norway in the North East Arctic.
Coastal States
A management framework to cover shares and harvest control rules for the massive western mackerel and blue whiting stocks is edging slowly towards agreement. All parties know that an agreement is vital to avoid stock decline, but it remains to be seen if the necessary compromises to overcome national self-interest can be made. The signs are that the parties (Greenland, Norway, Iceland, Faroes, EU and the UK) are edging towards agreement but a final effort is required to close the gulf on quota shares and access arrangements. Talks will resume on mackerel and on blue whiting in the New Year.
Big Picture
Contrary to some of the more lurid catastrophe narratives which appear in the media, most stocks in the northeast Atlantic continue to head in the right direction, as they have done since the turn of the century. Some like North Sea haddock and plaice and Western hake now have biomasses above anything in the historic record. Equally there are a few outliers, notably cod at the southernmost extent of the species distribution, that are not thriving, probably not unconnected to changing sea water temperatures. Fluctuations in recruitment and changed scientific perceptions accounted for most of the stocks where there were big swings in the 2022 assessments. Broadly speaking, the decisions taken this December keep us safely on the road to sustainable fisheries management, whilst reaffirming the importance of food security, thriving fishing businesses and coastal communities.
Beyond the annual negotiations, it has been a busy year for the NFFO.
Spatial Squeeze
Without doubt, the publication of the report on displacement commissioned by the NFFO and Scottish Fishermen’s Federation from independent consultants ABPmer, with financial support from the Fishmongers Company, was the most dramatic policy intervention of the year.
The report estimates that the rapid expansion of offshore wind and the implementation of a network of marine protected areas, under the best-case scenarios mean that the fishing industry will lose access to one third of the fishing areas currently available to it, and under the worst-case scenario we will lose a half. The scale of displacement ahead is truly breath-taking, and the consequences will impact on individual fishing businesses, coastal communities, fisheries management and fisheries science.
The report is not just an objective analysis by respected consultants, based on reasonable and reasoned assumptions, but also a call to arms for joined-up government and effective marine spatial planning.
Whilst the report has been widely welcomed as a timely and important intervention, we have yet to hear of how the government intent to minimise, mitigate and otherwise deal with displacement on this scale.
At the heart of the issue is the fact that fishers, unlike farmers, do not hold legal title over their production areas and to date there has been an assumption that fishing can always be pushed aside. It remains to be seen if the focus on food security in the wake of shortages in 2022 will be the catalyst for policies that match the scale of the problem. The NFFO certainly expects to be at the centre of discussions with policymakers in the New Year.
Science Forum
Cefas and the NFFO have established a new fisheries science forum through which the industry can hear about the most recent developments in fisheries science and fisheries scientists can learn directly from the knowledge held by fishermen and vessel operators. Although there are now many ways in which a two-way exchange of knowledge and information between fisheries scientists and the industry can take place, we lacked a place where direct exchanges could be held and the new forum will fill that gap. The forum’s first meeting was held on 1st November and was considered to be an extremely useful base to build on.
The NFFO is also supportive of the establishment of a Centre for Sustainable Fisheries, by the University of the Highlands and Islands and more about this will be heard in the New Year.
Highly Protected Marine Areas
The government’s lurch into highly protected marine areas in which no fishing of any kind would be permitted, suggests a drive for green credentials over a coherent, evidence based, approach that balances the need for environmental protection with food production and the welfare of coastal communities. The consultation exercise on five candidate HPMAs made clear that the interlinked issues of displacement, unintended consequences, and cumulative impacts had been given next to no thought. Without a coherent purpose, and no attempt to deal with policy consequences the candidate HPMAs, (if they are adopted) have the potential for real socio-economic and ecological harm. The fact that fishing organisations were not invited onto the HPMA panel speaks volumes on where the drive for this policy comes from. It is also of significance that the chair of the HPMA panel Richard Benyon, now Lord Benyon, was the UK fisheries minister who signed up for the misconceived EU landings obligation, from which his department are now trying to find an escape route.
The consultation having now concluded, we await the publication of a summary of responses in early 2023 and the final decision to designate or not from Secretary of State for the Environment Therese Coffey before the end of June.
Shellfish
Having successfully launched the Shellfish Industry Advisory Group, to give the economically important shellfish sector an effective voice at the policy level, most of the Federation’s efforts go into making the group a successful example of co-management, involving fisheries scientists, fisheries managers as well as a good cross-section of the shellfish sector.
The mammoth task of developing fisheries management plans, foreseen in the Fisheries Act, through energetic sub-groups for crab/lobster, whelk and scallop, and overseen by Seafish, who provide the secretariat for the Group currently occupies most of the Group’s time.
Risk, Safety and Training
The NFFO pursues a twin-track approach to keeping vessels and crews safe in a sometimes-hostile environment. We have ongoing engagement with the Maritime and Coastguard Agency to press for pragmatic and effective approaches to fishing vessel surveys and better communication between the MCA and the industry. We also work to assist individual fishing vessels to meet safety standards and prepare for vessel surveys. The appointment of Charles Blyth, an-ex MCA surveyor and qualified naval architect, as NFFO Safety Officer has been a game changer. A more relevant approach to surveys for the under-15m fleet has been secured and a video explaining how to prepare a vessel for survey has been widely welcomed.
Crew Welfare
The NFFO is a member of the Fishermen’s Welfare Alliance, whose role is to work ensure sound employment conditions for crews across the whole fleet, irrespective of country of origin. Working in cooperation with a range of regulators and across the supply chain, the FWA also works in the complex and politically fraught area of immigration policy and labour supply.
Fisheries Law, Fisheries Policy, and Fisheries Management Plans
Disappointment at the limited achievements of Brexit in terms of securing additional fishing opportunities commensurate with the UK’s legal status as coastal state remains sharp. The focus during the year, however, shifted to the opportunities provided by leaving the Common Fisheries Policy to design and implement fisheries policies more tailored to the specific needs of our fleets and fisheries. The Fisheries Act 2020 provides a balanced legal framework and the recently published Joint Fisheries Statement, provides a necessary policy framework for the development and implementation of UK fisheries policy within the context of devolved responsibilities.
The real work, however, lies ahead with the development of fisheries management plans that will over time replace EU retained fisheries law. Frontrunner plans are under development for crab and lobster; whelk; king scallop; seabass; Eastern Channel and Southern North Sea flatfish; and Channel demersal non-quota species. The NFFO will expect to be heavily involved in discussions with the appropriate bodies as the shape of the plans emerge.
Fuel Costs
2022 will certainly be remembered as the period when geopolitics impacted heavily on the viability of many fishing vessels through stratospherically high fuel costs. Unlike many EU member states, no fuel subsidy was provided to sustain UK fleets, creating an uneven playing field, and had it not been for the reasonably high quayside price for many fish and shellfish species, many vessels would have had to tie up.
Membership
This year, the Welsh Fishermen’s Association-Cymdeithas Pysgotwyr Cymru moved to formalise its membership of the NFFO, having worked very closely with the Federation for many years. While maintaining its distinctive national identity and role, the WFA-CPC will now have two seats on the Executive Committee and will participate fully in all of the NFFO’s policy decisions. Its members will also be eligible for grants made through the NFFO Training Trust.
New CEO
During 2022, the NFFO’s Chief Executive, Barrie Deas, announced his retirement at the end of April 2023, after 26 years at the helm. After a robust recruitment process, the Federation announced that his successor will be Mike Cohen, currently NFFO Deputy Chief Executive. Mike is a past NFFO Chairman, and successfully ran the Holdeness Fishing Industry Group, so he is very well equipped to meet the challenges of the role.
NFFO Services Limited
The Federation’s commercial division, NFFO Services, has for almost 40 years, provided fisheries liaison services, fisheries liaison officers, and where necessary guard-ships, to any offshore infrastructure projects likely to interact with fishing vessels. Facilitating co-existence and minimising frictions at sea has become even more important within the context of the rapid expansion of the offshore renewables sector. In profitable years, the company has channelled a substantial part of its profits into the NFFO Training Trust, which in turn has provided grants for young fishermen and safety related equipment aboard fishing vessels.
Political Pressures, Green Politics and Geopolitics
Environmental NGOs, have a valid and important role in fishing, as in any other area of society. At their best, they can be partners in the promotion of progressive policies and initiatives and unravelling knotty management problems. At their worst, they can be self-absorbed, legalistic, and irresponsible bodies, committed to a catastrophe narrative that flies in the face of the evidence. There is no doubting their power and influence. With huge funds at their disposal, they can shape media narratives and ministers are always sensitive to criticism from the green lobby. No one can look at the mess that is the EU landings obligation and fail to understand the power of the media, irresponsible environmentalism the moral panics they can cause.
Since the turn of the century when the fleets were right-sized through decommissioning, and with one or two outliers, most fisheries across the north-east Atlantic region have been on a solid pathway to sustainability. The biomass for some stocks like North Sea plaice or haddock, or western hake, are above anything seen in the historical record. This positive story is anathema to some NGOs, because it robs them of legitimate purpose and therefore potentially funding. Hence, the catastrophe narrative is rolled-out year after year, and adversarial postures are struck, with a resolute commitment to only engage with fisheries science on those occasions where it tells a negative story.
This is only one facet of the array of political pressures on the fishing industry. Others include energy policy, devolution politics, the UK’s relationship with the EU, and immigration policy. What has been missing from many of the debates is the question of how we are going to feed the country and the planet, without sustainable fisheries and the grounds on which to work. The role of the NFFO is to work with those, across the spectrum, who are open to the evidence and willing to cooperate, and to call out the charlatans, liars, and merchants of untruths and half-truths.
Discard Policy
The EU landing obligation was a badly designed piece of remote, top-down legislation, born from a legitimate desire to reduce unwanted catch. Ignoring the evidence that the fishing industry and policy makers had been steadily reducing discards for over 20 years (in the case of the North Sea groundfish fishery by 90%) the landing obligation was introduced in 2013 with much righteous indignation and fanfare. It has been a flop. Worse, with its tendency to create chokes in mixed fisheries and the exemptions required to make it work, it has been counterproductive, undermining rational fisheries management and increasing the level of discards. The UK is now working on ways in which reducing unwanted catch remains a policy objective, but in ways that avoid the over-centralised, blunt approach that characterises the landing obligation. The evidence objective in the Fisheries Act, the scope to integrate rational discard policy into fisheries management plans, and using TAC and quota policy to minimise choke/discard risks, seem to offer the key elements of a new and better approach.
Offshore Wind
The news that some meteorologists consider that we are entering a period of lower wind velocities is unlikely to halt the headlong rush to build offshore energy installations on a massive and unprecedented scale.
With governmental aspirations for 130Gw of offshore energy generating capacity to be built by 2050, the continually increasing pace of wind farm construction is hardly surprising. 2022 has seen the ongoing development of the vast Hornsea and Dogger Bank wind farm zones in the North East and proposals to extend existing smaller wind farms south of the Humber.
This was also the year when offshore power stations started to encroach on the Celtic Sea. The Crown Estate began consultation on areas to be leased for the first floating wind turbines in English and Welsh waters. This is unknown, untried technology and we await further details of how it will be constructed, installed, operated and maintained: all activities likely to have significant impacts on fishing activity across a very wide area.
While the Crown Estate will lease areas for the construction of four 1Gw arrays in this first round, a further 15Gw of generating capacity, or even more, installed in the Celtic Sea in due course has been suggested. Dedicated lobbying by the NFFO and its member associations and Producer Organisations in the affected region – with particularly notable efforts from the Cornish Producers Organisation and the WFA-CPC – has succeeded in removing the threat of imminent development from some of the most sensitive fishing grounds, but valuable areas remain under consideration. There are also concerns about how little has been done to understand the impact of these vast and novel developments on the healthy marine ecosystems that our fisheries depend on. The NFFO continues to campaign for more and better quality research to rectify this shortcoming.
Alternative Propulsion
We can already take pride in knowing that fishing provides one of the healthiest and lowest carbon sources of protein known. When it comes to meeting the aspiration of net zero carbon emissions, our industry is already well ahead of most. There is no reason to rest on our laurels, however, nor to neglect the fact that cutting carbon emissions further will also mean reducing fuel use and so cutting costs.
The NFFO commissioned a report from independent experts at Hull University, to examine the potential for electric propulsion for fishing vessels. Electrifying the Fleet generated significant interest from many quarters, including the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Fisheries. This helped to create the momentum which led, in December 2022, to the creation of the Vessels of the Future forum. Convened by Seafish and chaired by NFFO Deputy CEO Mike Cohen, this initiative has brought together representatives of the fishing industry, ship builders, engineers, officials and researchers, from across all four UK administrations. Its aim is to support projects that will lead to the development of new technologies to increase vessel efficiency, reduce fuel costs, and shrink our carbon footprint even further.
£100 Million
There was, from the outset, concern that much of the fishing industry’s second prize, the £100 million announced by PM Boris Johnston as the Trade and Cooperation Agreement failed to deliver the additional fishing opportunities promised by those at the top of government at the time, would fail to find its way to support those who had lost out – fishermen and vessel operators. Those better equipped to navigate the application forms and public procurement processes have an inbuilt advantage in the public procurement labyrinth. Some good Fishing/Science partnership projects have been funded but when the dust settles there is a suspicion that on the whole, fishermen and fishing vessel operators – who were supposed to be the main beneficiaries – will have lost out, following the pattern of many of the earlier European funding programmes.
Remote Electronic Monitoring
REM is a feature of the modern world, for better or worse. AIS, CCTV, AI and a whole array of rapidly developing information technologies have already, and will continue to impact on the fishing industry. The key question, of course, is where and how these technologies will be used and what safeguards for their use will be put in place. There are regular calls for REM (in particular, CCTV) to be placed upon fishing vessels as an enforcement tool. Leaving aside the civil liberty, ethical and legal issues involved, this would be to waste the real potential of REM to efficiently capture a whole array of data of use to fishers, fisheries scientists and fisheries managers. This can only be done where there is trust and confidence in the uses of the new technologies from all parties. We have had positive experiences using CCTV, in the North Sea and Celtic Sea. Misused, or used as a blunt enforcement tool would generate a reaction that would set back the use of REM for at least a decade. By contrast, its intelligent deployment could transform data deficiencies, leading to better, more sensitive and refined fisheries management. There will be a Defra consultation on REM in the New Year and this is the line we will take.
Finally
Finally, on behalf of our President, Chairman, Executive Committee, and whole NFFO staff, we would like to wish you a very happy Christmas and best withes for the New Year