The EU Commission’s new biodiversity strategy is sending shockwaves through the European fishing industry, and no crystal ball is needed to see why the industry is alarmed. The Commission’s blueprint for the future is seen as a wholesale handover of fishing grounds to the energy and leisure sectors, at the direct expense of fishing and European food security.
“It wants to ban fishing in 10% of waters and limit activity in 30%, as well as a ban on bottom trawling,” said Javier Garat, president of European industry body Europêche.
“This is without acknowledging all the efforts and achievements in fisheries management in recent years. Instead of putting effort into improved management where needed, the policy is a ban. What will be the consequences? More destruction of companies, jobs, wealth and greater dependence on imports from third countries that have standards far below those of the EU.”
He points out that fishing has been singled out here, as while the industry is set binding targets, high carbon-footprint sectors such as oil, gas, dredging, aquaculture and shipping do not even merit a mention.
“This is discriminatory treatment and window-dressing, since the Commission is trying to greenwash its own image through fisheries restrictions,’ he said.
Greenwash
With the world’s population expected to top 8.5 billion by 2030, Europêche argues that the Commission’s focus should be on producing more seafood in a sustainable manner rather than further closing traditional fishing areas.
Javier Garat states that this policy will force Europe to import even more from third countries with lower standards.
“In short, this is exporting Europe’s environmental debt to developing countries to pacify the consciences of a few,” he said.
“In light of the trade disruptions created by the COVID-19 crisis, the EU cannot risk further reduction of our fisheries in exchange for more seafood supply from overseas from an environmental, social and food security point of view.”
The proposal to end demersal trawling has alarmed the European industry, considering there are numerous stocks currently exploited sustainably, and for which there is no alternative fishing method. These include sole, megrim, plaice, Greenland halibut, shrimps and nephrops, all of which are fished at MSY levels in European waters.
Europêche argues that, when referring the economic benefits of MPAs, which are largely related to tourism, ocean energy and recreation, the has Commission failed to mention that the economic benefits generated by these sectors have a negative impact on biodiversity, fish stocks and ecosystems.
“The Commission heavily relies on tourism and recreation as the main sources of new jobs and growth, two sectors that are very much struggling due to the COVID-19 pandemic,” commented Europêche managing director Daniel Voces
“Closing off parts of the ocean to fishing is a policy which actually conflicts with fundamental Sustainable Development Goals such as increasing food security and reducing poverty – both of which require the use of the ocean. We are shocked to read that while fishing would be heavily restricted or closed in protected areas, offshore wind farms will be permitted and even prioritised. The Commission already tried in the past to convert the oceans into a mining extraction site and now wants to transform our seas into the new European energy engine.”
He commented that these measures will have severe socio-economic impacts which need to be considered.
“According to the latest scientific figures, in the North East Atlantic there is 50% more fish in the sea in only ten years and overfishing in the EU is at an all-time low,” he said.
“In addition, almost 100% of the landings from EU-regulated stocks in that area come from catches fished at the MSY levels. It also fails to recognise that fishing has the lowest carbon footprint if compared with other food production industries, since wild-caught seafood does not require being artificially fed, the use of water supply, antibiotics or pesticides.”
Europêche is calling for the European Parliament and Member States to stop the Commission’s policy in its tracks, and to demand a full revision, including the full cost of the policy in terms of impacts by the new users of space, intensification of fishing in even more limited areas, reductions in fishing pressure and food production, the proposal to eliminate trawling without a viable alternative, and impacts on exporting the EU’s environmental debt to developing countries.
“Despite the recovery of the stocks and biodiversity, mitigation of environmental impacts and lower greenhouse emissions, the Commission refuses to acknowledge these achievements and uses fishing as the easy scapegoat to launch its environmental campaign,” Javier Garat said.
“We want a real strategy with proportionate, rational and achievable objectives where all industries are treated on an equal footing, not an ill-founded proposal based on stereotypes.
If the strategy is not changed, the Commissioner will fail to live up to his promise not to single out any of the pillars of sustainability – social, economic and environmental – during his mandate.”
