Baltic fishing: is there a future?

Lysekil 25 May 2006

Bengt Sjöstrand

Inst. of Marine Research.

Catches are high

0

200 000

400 000

600 000

800 000

1 000 000

1 200 000

1970 1973 1976 1979 1982 1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003

TO

N

Very high from a historical point of view

0

100000

200000

300000

400000

500000

600000

700000

800000

900000

1000000

1903 1909 1915 1921 1927 1933 1939 1945 1951 1957 1963 1969 1975 1981 1987 1993 1999 2005

TO

N

SpratHerring

Fish in the sea

0

1 000 000

2 000 000

3 000 000

4 000 000

5 000 000

6 000 000

1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

TO

N

Any problems?

Stock situation Baltic Herring & Sprat

0

500000

1000000

1500000

2000000

2500000

3000000

3500000

4000000

1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006

ton

Herring Sprat

Spawning stock

0

100000

200000

300000

400000

500000

600000

700000

800000

1966 1969 1972 1975 1978 1981 1984 1987 1990 1993 1996 1999 2002 2005

TO

N

age8+age7age6age5age4age3age2Threshol

d

Stock situation Cod-E Bornholm

Spawning stock

”Biologically safe limits”

If spawning stock goes beneath a certain level, the risk of bad production of young fish inreases. = Blim = limit

Managers should react before this limit is reached due to all uncertainties in the whole system. = Bpa = threshold

0

100000

200000

300000

400000

500000

600000

700000

800000

900000

0 100000 200000 300000 400000 500000 600000 700000 800000

LIMIT THRESHOLD

” Biologically safe limits”

SPAWNING FISH (ton)

Nu

mb

er

of

recr

uit

s (

00

0)

Precautionary Approach

LIMIT THRESHOLD SPAWNING STOCK

REACT!

Stop!

Fishing

mortality

Limit

Threshold

Whitin biol

safe limits

Cod in the Baltic, E Bornholm

This stock is outside safe biological limits

Cod is in trouble. Only in the Baltic?

Threshold

Stock situation Cod Kattegatt

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

1971 1974 1977 1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004

(00

0')

TO

N

Spawning stock

Stock situation Cod Nordsjön-Skagerrak

Threshold

0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000

300000

1963 1966 1969 1972 1975 1978 1981 1984 1987 1990 1993 1996 1999 2002

(000

') T

ON

Threshold

Stock situation Cod North Norway-Barents Sea

0

200000

400000

600000

800000

1000000

1200000

1400000

1946 1950 1954 1958 1962 1966 1970 1974 1978 1982 1986 1990 1994 1998 2002

(000')

TO

N

Cod in Northeast AtlanticLanding (000) ton

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2001

N Norge-Barents Island Kattegatt Nordsjön-Skag VIa Irish Sea Celtic Sea Balt W Balt E

Cod in Northeast Atlanticproportion in EU-waters

TORSK -BESTÅND INOM EG-VATTEN (%)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2001

Lekbiomassa Landningar

Why are there so few old fishes now?

An effect of high fishing mortality

Fishery mortality - Age composition

F 25%

F 50%

F 70%

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

F (25%)

F (50%)

F (70%)

AGE

NUM

B

E

R

R/V Dana March 1987, S Baltic

The importance of old females(of cod)

They produce more eggs : 4 y 45-50 cm, 1 kg - 0.7 miljon egg

10 y ca 100 cm ,7 kg - 5 miljon egg

They produce bigger egg: better survival, better boyancy

Bigger eggs give longer larvæ with better survival.

Low recruitment of young cod

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04

High fishing mortality causes low spawning stock with increased risk for bad recruitment.

Low frequence of saltwater inflows causes low survival of eggs and larvæ

Number of cod age 2

EFFECTS on the ECOSYSTEM

LARGE PREDATORS LACKING

PREY SPECIES NUMEROUSTHEY EAT MORE:

ZOOPLANKTON, EGG, LARVÆ

LESS ALGÆ ARE CONSUMED.

Top-down effects?, Bottom-up effects?

Has the system flipped?

Are the processes reversibel?

Are the prospects for a recovery of cod in EU-waters good?

NO

Cod will not make the basis for a fishery of

resonable size within the coming 10 years

(E Baltic, Kattegatt, North Sea-Skagerrak)

What are needed to restore fish stocks?

• The decrease must be substantial• Now 65-75% of the fishes are

caught• The most efficient way towards

recovery would be NO FISHING

• Sustainable level of F ca 25%

A decrease of fishery mortality

Cod Baltic E Bornholm

• ICES ADVICE - DECISION

• 2001 Max 39 000 t 105 000 ton• 2002 Lowest possible(0) 76 000 ton• 2003 Decrease F 70% 75 000 ton• 2004 Max t 13 000 t 45 400 ton• 2005 No fishing 42 800 ton• 2006 Max 14 900 t if MP 49 200 ton

SCIENTIFIC ADVICEAND

POLITICAL DECISIONS

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005

tho

us.

to

nn

es

0

50

100

150

200

250

Dev

iati

on

(p

erce

nt)

Recommended TAC Max. of (TAC, Landing) Deviation (%) from rec.

1993 = 1228%

Why are the advice not followed?

Difficulties for decision makers

• COD:• most economically important fishery

(Baltic Sea)• Caught in mixed fisheries (Nordsjön,

Katt.Skag)– Fishtrawl - haddock, withing – Beamtrawl - plaice, sole – Nephrops trawl - Nephrops

Difficulties for decision makers

• COD• Also the mixed fisheries have to be

reduced for efficient cod management

• ”There are no cod, why should we suffer?” - haddock fishers, North Sea, nephrops fishers, Kattegatt, Skagerrack

Difficulties for decision makersDISCARDED FISH

Cod in swedish trawlcatches - Kattegatt

0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000

12 19 26 33 40 47 54 61 68 75 82 89 98

längd (cm)

discard landning

Difficulties for decision makersExample of discard

31%68%Catch weight

76%24%Catch number

DiscardedLanded

Mean weight 130 g860 g

Cod in swedish trawlcatches - Kattegatt

Difficulties for decision makers

• COD• To reach international agreements when a

certain regulatory measure hits differently among countries

• To handle bankruptcies, unemployment among fishers

• To withstand preassure from demonstrations, blocades etc

• To agree with regional och local decision makers in the country

Why is fish discarded?

◊They are too small (unlegal to land)

◊The quotum is filled (unlegal to land)

◊You want to fill your quotum/ration with bigger, more valuable fish (high-grading)

Who is to be blamed?

Contributing factors

• The conflicting goals in the policy:• simultaneously: conserve stocks

and promote the industry (by the same authority)

• Fishers lack distinct fishing rights:– It would not pay to save fish for to-

morrow/next year

Contributing factors• Fishery:• Too large total catches,

lack in control, enforcement• large bycatches of small fish

• Overcapacity in fleets - subsidies

FISHERY POLICYFish Fishing

CONSERVE

STOCKS

PROMOTE INDUSTRY

§ €

0

1 000 000

2 000 000

3 000 000

4 000 000

5 000 000

6 000 000

7 000 000

8 000 000

9 000 000

10 000 000

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998

Tonnage kW

FUNDING (EU+national.)5-year plan 1994-99

826 mill. € for scrapping, 548 mill € for building + modernizing

GOAL:

REDUCE

40% !

¤

PRODUCTIVITYIN SWEDISH FISHERY

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

1970 1973 1976 1979 1982 1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

Fångst/Fiskare Tkr/Fiskare Antal fiskare

i 99 års priser

¤

To-day :

•Stoch crises - overfishing•overcapacity in fleets•inreasing cheating, distrust, frustration

The challengeAccomplish a substantial cut down of

fleets.

Pay for it.

Give remaining fishers some form of rights.

Create a number of no-fishing areas

No fishing without fish.

Many fishes without fishing.

Thanks for your attention