Brussels suggests dedicating bottom fishing to another activity: “There’s help”

Specifically, to ships affected by the veto on bottom fishing.It was decided by Brussels on 15 September and appealed by the central government to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). A written question from Socialist Member of the European Parliament Nicolás González Casares, “What measures does the Commission plan to take to help the affected fleets?” Here is the commissioner’s response: “States can […] to support their fleets with measures such as diversification of activities”With public funds from the Fempa program (European Maritime, Fisheries and Fisheries Fund) or aid details.

Sinkevicius responded in writing to three questions formulated by Casares as a result of the information published by FARO DE VIGO from the Prensa Ibérica group on the executive regulation, which came into force on 9 October and was implemented without socioeconomic impact reports. . As this paper reveals, in 41 of the 87 affected areas—they cover more than 16,400 square kilometers—depths did not reach the Commission-determined 400 meters. In any case, and with regard to measures to mitigate losses for the sector, Brussels is talking about small amounts of items that can only be allocated by the Spanish Government. In addition to these funds that Fempa provides for ships to “diversify” their activities beyond mining fisheries (tourism, environmental services or cultural maritime activities), he refers to the so-called regulation. details. “The total amount of de minimis aid granted by a Member State to a single company in the fisheries and aquaculture sector – referring to the regulations – shall not exceed EUR 30,000 in any period of the three fiscal years”.

The Commissioner refuses to back down from a regulation that halves the unloading of fish in Galician markets and raises prices, as it has already been decided in front of industry representatives. According to Sinkevicius, Spain is also responsible for enacting this veto on bottom fishing, even without measuring its socio-economic impact.. “This system only works if the data provided by Member States is correct. For example, ICES [por el Consejo Internacional para la Exploración del Mar, ICES por sus siglas en inglés] In 2018, Spain reported difficulties in reporting VMS and registry data related to assessing fisheries intensity”. At this point, Lithuanian means ship tracking system. And it continues: “Over the past two years, the Commission has asked national authorities for precise information on possible repercussions on certain parts of the fleet”.

no data

Although he did not have this “precise” information, he also applied a rule that, according to his own statement, put the Gran Sol longline fleet in jeopardy. data. “It is difficult to determine a preference because the socioeconomic effects are unknown.. Some fishermen go to certain places on a regular basis, and although the effort is not very high, it can be important to them,” he says verbatim.

The authors of this analysis likewise make it clear that: There is no study that determines the effect of fixed equipment such as a long line on the seabed.. “Although it is possible to measure the effects of the moving gear in contact with the base, [en referencia al arrastre, por ejemplo]There are still problems with fixed gear ships”. Another example: “Benthic footprint [en el fondo del mar] and the effects of these arts are largely unknown. The veto on bottom fishing, which mainly damaged the longlines, was also approved.. According to Sinkevicius, who is a supporter of this measure along with Charlina Vitcheva number two, there is no doubt that consultations with the industry have taken place, but sources from the Vigo Shipowners’ Cooperative (ARVI) or Cepesca employers say this dialogue is a “pantomime”. “The Commission held extensive consultations and invited national administrations and all interested parties to meet and consider these issues before proposing the Implementing Regulation.”