EU fisheries ministers are often accused of disregarding science when setting fishing quotas. New research shows just how much political decisions exceed scientific advice.

In one case, the hake TAC was set 1100 per cent higher than advised.
A group of researchers analysed the decisions taken by EU fisheries ministers on how much fish should be caught, total allowable catches (TACs), from 1987 to 2011.
TACs were set higher than scientific recommendations in 68% of decisions. On average, ministers adjusted TACs to be 33 per cent higher than recommended by fisheries scientists.
Data for 44 stocks of 11 important species all across Europe were included in the study.
For some stocks TACs were routinely set more than 100 per cent above scientific advice. In the Spain, Portugal and the Bay of Biscay fisheries zone, the TAC for hake was set 1100 per cent higher than scientists proposed in 1993.
Each year the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) makes recommendations on catches to the European Commission. Based on the Commission’s proposal, fisheries ministers in the Council then decide the TACs and quotas.
“This decision-making process leads to the paradox of ministers’ protecting national interests while attempting to allocate quotas among member states for mutual benefit and to achieve conserva- tion goals,” lead author Bethan O’Leary and her colleagues write in their paper, published in Marine Pollution Bulletin.
The paper quotes John Gummer, a former UK Fisheries Minister: “If you are a fisheries minister you sit around the table arguing about fishermen – not about fish. You are there to represent your fishermen. [...] The arguments are not about conservation, unless of course you are arguing about another country.”
The researchers contend that the Commission’s proposed discards ban and introduction of transferable fishing concessions (TFCs) will not succeed in achieving sustainability “unless the process for catch allocation is reformed to place science at the heart of decision-making”.
Axel Naver
Reference:
O’Leary, B.C., Smart, J.C.R., Neale, F.C.,Hawkins, J.P., Newman, S., Milman, A.C., Roberts, C.M. (2011) Fisheries Mismanagement, Marine Pollution Bulletin 62(12):2642-2648.
doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2011.09.032 (link to paper at sciencedirect.com)



Pingback: “If you are a fisheries minister you argue about fishermen, not about fish” « CFP-reformwatch.eu
Pingback: EU Commission abandons herring management plan « CFP-reformwatch.eu
Pingback: prioritycashadvance.com loans
Pingback: Pickup Artist
Pingback: What is the CFP? « CFP-reformwatch.eu
Pingback: addtabz reviews
Pingback: เกมส์ ไอโฟน
Pingback: cafelearn72
Pingback: oh wow
Pingback: american philatelic foundation
Pingback: How to Break a Habit
Pingback: book
Pingback: mobile credit card processing
Pingback: Catering Services Melbourne
Pingback: summer-ebooks
Pingback: Funny One Liners
Pingback: gigajob.com
Pingback: GT Bikes
Pingback: seo sheffield
Pingback: googleplus
Pingback: seo nottingham
Pingback: Who are they that drink and drive
Pingback: car injuries
Pingback: claism for personal injuries
Pingback: NFL Picks
Pingback: Gazebos
Pingback: jahorina
Pingback: injury court
Pingback: vertical jump exercises
Pingback: Drug recalls
Pingback: how to build a website
Pingback: STX Lacrosse Gloves
Pingback: Free Virus Scan
Pingback: how to make a website
Pingback: the diet solution program review
Pingback: Broiled Lobster Tails
Pingback: toshiba tablet review
Pingback: Free Psychic Reading
Pingback: P90X2results
Pingback: http://antiagingskincare05.hyves.nl/
Pingback: anti aging skin care
Pingback: fifa 12 coin generator
Pingback: airsoft sniper rifles
Pingback: mujeres article
Pingback: www
Pingback: link
Pingback: blog