World Fishing: How do you describe the situation of the Spanish fishing sector?
Elena Espinosa: First of all, I would like to highlight that Spain is still a big fishing country. It still has an important fishing tradition and it is still a power in the EU and at world level. Translated into numbers, this means almost 13,500 vessels directly employing about 52,000 people. I would define the sector as dynamic and participative. An example of this dynamism can be seen going back to the 1980s when the sector had to take very important decisions to survive, such as participating in joint ventures.
I also wouldn’t like to forget another aspect related to the consumer. Consumers are increasingly becoming more demanding about fish quality and food security. In this regard, the whole fishing sector, from sea to plate, has learnt how to improve and it is progressively adapting its offer to consumers’ demands. Obviously all this goes hand in hand with the process of investment, development and innovation that the Ministry of Fisheries is supporting.
Another aspect is the sector’s involvement with resources. Nowadays the sector knows that resources are limited but it also knows that if we are able to take early conservation measures it will not have to go through drastic and traumatic situations.
We also need to use other instruments such as artificial reefs and marine reserves. We at the Ministry are convinced that all these systems working together are going to give a boost to the sector in the medium and long-term.
In some cases we were late and we had to take harder measures such as scrapping the fleet.
WF: Are there illegal fishing practices among the Spanish fleet?
EE: No, absolutely not. I would like to categorically say that Spain is completely against illegal fishing. We have instruments working to fight these practices. We have also signed The FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries. In addition we have subscribed to the 2005 Rome Declaration and we have done all this for two important reasons. On the one hand, we have to continue defending responsible and sustainable fishing; otherwise there is not reason for talking about the sector having a future. But also if we allow illegal fishing, we are hurting those who are respecting the norms.
WF: How does your Ministry fight against illegal fishing?
EE: We have tools such as tracking systems that are compulsory for all vessels fishing in international waters. On the other hand all the fishing vessels operating in those fisheries need special authorisation from the Spanish authorities as well as their fishing license. We also have random controls in the arrival ports. We check both the incoming fish and the creels.
Even further, we have signed an agreement with the Spanish Federation of Municipalities and Provinces to seize illegal fish (illegal size or species) found in any fish market.
However, this doesn’t mean that being the biggest fleet in Europe we do not have isolated cases of illegal fishing. But this just happens as it could happen in any other industrial activity or in our private life. Can anyone certify that 100% of a country’s citizens observe their tax obligations? An exception cannot describe the whole sector.
WF: During last year, four Spanish trawlers have been arrested in Norway accused of illegal fishing around the Svalbard archipelago. While Norway defends its right to arrest the vessels, Spain maintains that the Scandinavian country has no jurisdiction in the area according to the 1920 Treaty of Paris. What is Spain doing to defend its views?
EE: In the first place, Norway has the right to inspect all the fishing vessels in the area and to manage its fisheries. As well as we do, the Norwegians are defending responsible fishing and they can also take measures if they consider that a fishery is not in a good state. However, we have always argued that given the case that a vessel breaks the law, it has to be penalised by the country whose flag the vessel is flying.
What have we done so far? Even before the latest events (in July three Spanish vessels were arrested in Norway – ed) we have passed our demand on to the EU’s Council of Fisheries and we have been supported not only by the Commission and the Commissioner but also by the 25 countries in the EU.
The EU has presented legal proceedings and Spain has submitted a formal complaint before Norway. We have reclaimed the vessels’ records so they can be penalised in Spain.
We and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs are currently studying whether to take the case to the Court of The Hague to settle the Treaty of Paris of 1920. However, we cannot just rely on this last act because it is a slow proceedure that will take a few years and meanwhile we have to continue with all our diplomatic efforts.
WF: Will the Spanish fishing sector survive without fishing agreements with third countries?
EE: It would put us in a very difficult situation although I am convinced that we would know how to cope with it. It would be a traumatic and hard process. But we are very far away from this happening [i.e., not having agreements with third countries]. Nowadays the EU and the third countries sign partnership agreements. This means that the EU participates in the development of the third country’s fishing sector.
Why are we far away from ending the fish agreements with third countries? Because, even though these countries are developing their fishing sector, they are still in a situation in which they could not face the investments that the sector needs, so I think these agreements will remain for some time. We have to remember the number of agreements that we have signed in less than a year: Cape Verde, Madagascar, Seychelles, Comores, Ivory Coast, etc.
WF: In the summer the EU renewed its fisheries agreement with Mauritania for six years. It has been described as successful from your Ministry. However, the new fisheries agreement provides 45% less quota than the previous one (2001-2006).
EE: We and the EU cannot defend responsible and sustainable fishing inside our waters and then not follow this principle when fishing in other waters. We have to use exactly the same norm wherever we are operating. What we have done in this agreement is to set the quota according to the information from scientists and to adapt the fleet working there to the available resources. However, Spain hasn’t been affected by these reductions.
WF: In 2005 the anchovy fishery in the Bay of Biscay was closed for six months. Spanish fishermen associations asked for a zero quota for this fishery for 2006. A TAC of 5,000t was established, but the anchovy season had to close early again. Should fishermen’s advice be taken more into account when deciding the quotas?
EE: First of all, the sector is always taken into account. Referring to the anchovy situation, when in 2005 the sector detected that the catches were at one of the lowest levels of all the historical cycles and it was us, Spain, who asked the EU to close the fishery. It was closed for three months. The closure was extended for another three months but in a Council of Ministers of the EU in December 2005, the Commission considered that opening the fishery with a minimum TAC would not at all affect the biomass situation. The fishery was reopened and we found that we were in a better situation than the previous year but scientific data showed that the biomass was still low. As a consequence, we asked for the fishery to be closed.
We have collaborated with the sector. For example, we have used some fishing vessels operating in the area to carry out works with the Ministry.
We need to be careful when we talk about the sector. Very often there is not a common front in the fishing sector. When the Council of Ministers took the decision to reopen the anchovy fishery, the position of the sector was not unanimous. Our obligation is to attend to the whole sector. Our responsibility is global and not just with one area and one species.
WF: How important is aquaculture for the Spanish fishing industry?
EE: Aquaculture is playing a very important role for the Spanish fishing industry. We are now the 15th producer of aquaculture in the world and we are working on two fronts, such as marine and continental aquaculture.
We are leaders in harvesting some species like mussels but we cannot forget about other species such as trout. Due to the advances in trout and sea bream culture, these farmed species are now in the gourmet group of food.
Aquaculture has a great future. We are investigating a lot in this field as I think that we have to diversify the species that are being commercialised at the moment. This is not easy but we have to continue this way so that aquaculture can become a source of food for a country that is the leader in fish consumption per capita in the world.
WF: Galicia has fallen one place, to third place, in mussels production behind China and Thailand. Mussels exploitation in Galicia is said to be at its maximum level. How can Spanish seafood compete with cheaper products from Asia?
EE: I don’t think that our mussel is competing with the Chinese mussel. It is a totally different kind of mussel and it has a completely different quality from the Chinese one. We need to continue being leaders in quality. In all sectors, especially in the food sector, there is a demand for high quality products. Let’s think about Denominaciones de Origen*, Indicaciones Geográficas Protegidas** or any other quality label internationally recognised. Quality is our main weapon.
WF: Has Spain been favoured in the distribution of Europe’s aid to fishing?
EE: I don’t like talking about nationalisation of funds. Funds belong to the sector as a whole.
If we are the main fishing country in the EU, we need to have compensation in figures. It is right to say that under the new European Fisheries Fund (EFF) that will start in 2007, one in three Euros comes to Spain. We have worked with the Commission and the industry for the EFF to take into account the real necessities of the sector. So, Spanish demands are completely met.
WF: Should all kind of aid to the industry be suspended?
EE: Not at all. If we talk about direct aid, then we are talking about de minimis. The amount of de minimis for Spain is €22m distributed in three years. This fund is intended for exceptional situations. Another kind of aid is the European Fisheries Fund and the Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance (FIFG), the grant that the sector has had until now. However, I would like to stick up for the fishing sector. It receives aid as any other industrial activity does. The only difference is that the fishing sector has a specific tool inside the EU. But this is for a reason. If we go back to the origins of the EU and after the initial phase based on coal, we find that agriculture and fishing have been the main community policies. Anyway, I ask myself: does any other sector from any other country have aid for I+D+I? Yes, it does. Does it have aid for training? Yes, it does. Doesn’t it have grants for extending its industrial installations? Yes, it also does. The main difference with other sectors is the direct aid that fishermen receive when the fleet comes to a standstill. But then again, any other kind of company having economic problems can also opt for direct grants.
WF: Are subsidies contributing to over-exploit a resource that it is already scarce?
EE: There is not that kind of aid. The fishing funds are intended for I+D+D, for investments in aquaculture, for modernisation of the fleet taking into account quality, traceability and fish handling demands among others. They are also destined for engine renewals. However, it does not mean an increase in fishing capacity but quite the opposite. Who argues today about aid for security at sea? I think no one would. Who argues today about funds for fish to arrive to consumers in the best hygienic conditions? No one does. Who argues about funds for aquaculture developments or campaigns addressed to consumers for them to buy fish from responsible and sustainable fishing?
* The Denominación de Origen (D.O.) is a prestigious product classification which is awarded to food products that are produced in designated Spanish regions according to stringent production criteria. It serves as a guarantee of quality.
** Quality label
