Consultation outcome

Summary of responses

Updated 8 March 2022

1. Foreword

The UK is committed to developing a world-class fisheries management system, supporting sustainable fishing and a diverse, profitable and sustainable fleet which serves the needs of coastal communities and contributes to the UK economy.

Collaboration between UK fisheries administrations, scientists and industry is vital to ensure we work together to secure sustainability of our stocks, the environment, and a thriving industry.

The Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) is, therefore, working with the Scallop Industry Consultation Group, the Shellfish Industry Advisory Group and its species-specific sub-groups to develop a future management programme for non-quota species. It was identified through these discussions that further evidence from wider stakeholders would increase understanding around the impact of latent capacity in the over 10m scallop and shellfish fleets in England. A 6 week call for evidence was launched in July 2021.

This document provides a summary of responses to this call for evidence. The outcome of this call for evidence will be shared with devolved administrations.

2. Introduction

The purpose of the call for evidence was to seek views on 4 key areas:

• the impact of existing latent capacity in the over 10m scallop and shellfish fleets on abundance and health of scallop and shellfish stocks in English waters
• conservation and environmental impacts of existing latent capacity in the over 10m scallop and shellfish fleets in England
• economic, social and cultural impacts of existing latent capacity in the over 10m scallop and shellfish fleets in England
• future fishery management measures for scallop and shellfish stocks

The call for evidence ran for 6 weeks from 19 July 2021 to 30 August 2021.

3. Number of responses

In total, the call for evidence received 20 responses. These consisted of:

• 12 (60%) representatives of fisheries organisations and businesses
• 8 (40%) individuals

Three of the respondents wanted their responses to be kept confidential, so they have not been included in the summary of responses. We have therefore summarised 17 responses.

4. Headline messages

Most respondents expressed concerns about current levels of fishing effort on scallops and shellfish. However, there was no clear consensus from respondents about whether measures should be introduced to alter latent capacity in the over 10m scallop and shellfish fleet in England.

53% of respondents were against capping latent capacity, 41% were in favour of capping latent capacity and 6%, although they provided comments, did not directly answer the question of whether latent capacity was an issue.

From the variety of responses received from the shellfish and scallop sectors, there appeared to be a higher level of support for the capping of latent licences from the scallop sector. A number of responses from shellfish representatives highlighted concerns around latent licences being capped which would undermine flexibility to fish for a variety of species.

Overall, 9 respondents were concerned that capping latent capacity would have a negative impact on maintaining greater flexibility to allow smaller, predominantly inshore vessels to target various fisheries and to work according to the seasons, market demands and stock abundance. Seven of the respondents who supported capping latent capacity highlighted concerns around protecting the ongoing economic viability of the scallop and shellfish fleet.

5. Responses by question

5.1 Questions about the current fleet and management

Question 5 in the call for evidence document: Please provide any evidence you may have on the appropriate fleet size/capacity and effort for the over 10m scallop and shellfish fishery

Responses to this question tended to focus on the impact the level of fishing effort was having on stocks rather than the size and capacity of the fleet.

Fishing Effort

While 47% of respondents expressed concerns that current levels of activity by over 10m vessels were negatively impacting shellfish and scallop stocks in English waters, 23% of respondents suggested that current fishing levels were acceptable.

Although there were mixed views on the impact current fishing levels were having on stocks, there were shared concerns expressed across all responses about the lack of management measures or limited impact of existing measures on stocks. Issues highlighted included increases in the number of closed areas leading to more concentrated fishing activity, particularly within the inshore area, a lack of management on potting in offshore areas and the diversification of fishing activity from finfish to shellfish species.

In terms of latent capacity within the scallop fleet, one respondent suggested that it is highly unlikely that all unused scallop entitlements would be activated and fished to capacity and proposed that efforts should focus more on managing the capacity of the active fleet rather than removing unused entitlements.

Fleet composition

Two respondents outlined that there are several large vessels within the crab fishing fleet that are able to operate in all year weather conditions, whereas smaller vessels can be more adversely affected by weather. These respondents highlighted that this meant that grounds were constantly being fished and were not ‘weather rested’ during the year.

Another respondent highlighted that as well as being able to carry a variety of gear, large vessels were able to travel to more distant fishing grounds, providing them with an advantage over smaller vessels which were restricted to waters further inshore and subject to significant regulation. The capacity and efficiency of the larger vessels also seemed to increase pressure on stocks during each fishing trip, and one respondent suggested that the capacity of this section of the fleet had increased.

One respondent highlighted that most of the vessels targeting scallops are multipurpose vessels which can diversify to fish for other species. They suggested that this supports the argument for greater flexibility for vessels to hold permits to fish for a diverse range of species.

Question 6 in the call for evidence document: Please provide any evidence you may have to help us understand the use and value of your fishing licence/permit/entitlement

Value of licences, permits and entitlements

Seven respondents demonstrated that the values and usage of permits, entitlements and licences can be variable. Two respondents advised that market conditions influenced the variable, and often high cost of shellfish permits and scallop entitlements. Another respondent noted that costs associated with purchasing or upgrading a permit had increased over the past 10 years.

Use of licences and entitlements

Respondents provided a number of examples of the uses for permits, licences and entitlements.

53% of respondents highlighted the importance of maintaining flexibility around the use of licences to allow those fishing to hold multiple licences. This flexibility was seen as benefitting stocks as fishing effort was spread across a range of fisheries and species throughout the year, rather than being concentred in one area or focusing on one species. It also enabled those fishing to respond to stock needs and market demands for example the demand from Christmas markets.

Other respondents focused on how inactive licences are used to increase the capacity of existing licences through aggregating them with other active licences, and how these are used as guarantees for bank loans and business evaluations due to their high value. These factors contribute to the reluctance of some licence holders to sell on inactive licences.

One respondent, with interests in both the scallop and shellfish sectors, suggested that preventing unused licences from becoming active again would help to manage the overall pressure on stocks, and would provide a degree of regulation of market prices for the species actively being targeted.

Another respondent suggested that industry should not be penalised for the lack of recent usage of some licences, due to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic and factors associated with the UK leaving the EU.

Question 7 in the call for evidence document: Please provide any evidence you may have to help us understand if latent capacity is an issue

41% of respondents, the majority from the scallop sector, called for latent capacity in the 10m and over scallop and shellfish sector to be capped. While respondents attributed this to potential increases in fishing pressure on stocks from unused licences becoming active, there was no evidence provided on the likelihood of these unused licences becoming active.

Another respondent noted that increases in the number of large vessels in English waters, particularly in the potting sector, was having a detrimental impact on stocks and on the inshore fleet, but it was not clear whether this was caused by unused licences becoming active.

A number of respondents reiterated points made previously, around the need to maintain unused licences to support flexibility to fish for a variety of species, particularly for smaller vessels which rely on inshore fisheries. Other respondents highlighted issues they viewed as of greater importance than latent capacity to stock and fleet sustainability, such as the implications of the implementation of the provisions for non-quota species contained within the UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement and vessel displacement.

5.2 Questions about fishery management measures

Question 8 in the call for evidence document: Please provide any evidence of effective or ineffective management measures to manage latent capacity

82% of respondents suggested management measures to reduce overall effort on stocks. A wide variety of recommendations were provided in response to this question, however there were some common themes. Pot limitation and other gear reduction schemes were supported by 35% of respondents, while 18% of respondents proposed the introduction of closed areas and the benefit closed areas could have on stocks and fishing grounds.

Technical measures

The following suggestions were made amongst respondents for improved and increased technical measures for shellfish and scallop fisheries:

• pot limitation schemes to manage/reduce the number of pots used
• gear modifications for pots and nets to minimise bycatch
• closed areas or flexible real-time closures to allow grounds to rest with fishing effort managed prior to closures to prevent significant increases in fishing prior to fisheries opening again
• reduction of the total number of dredges used to increase protection of fishing grounds
• increased Minimum Landing Sizes (MLS) for shellfish and scallop species and greater consistency in applying these measures, as currently different sizes are applied across some inshore and offshore areas
• use of voluntary measures to increase management of scallop and shellfish fisheries, such as the South Devon Inshore Potting Agreement which reduces risks of gear conflict and introduces measures such as escape gaps in pots
• increased vessel monitoring systems and gear in/out monitoring technology

Fleet measures

Various suggestions were provided by respondents in relation to fleet measures. 53% of respondents supported the introduction of precautionary Total Allowable Catches (TACs). Some respondents focused on applying this to all sized vessels through a staggered introduction and careful management to prevent TACs becoming tradeable assets. And 41% of respondents put forward various ideas around the application of a fishing track record.

The following additional suggestions were provided for measures to manage shellfish and scallop fleet size and activity:

• applying individual vessel tonnage limits based on a specified track record period - this would remove the need to cap unused licences as only vessels with recorded activity during the reference period would be allocated tonnage
• attaching the track record to the licence rather than the vessel if fishing track records are used as qualifying conditions for vessels to access a fishery
• introduce a definition of latency as ‘permits that are on inactive fishing vessels’ or ‘on fishing vessels that do not land any shellfish species’
• freezing unused licences rather than removing them entirely, as a means of managing fishing effort
• removing the ability (in England and Scotland) to aggregate entitlements and permits, to prevent licences being broken down into various components, which creates difficulties when applying track record reference periods to licences
• ring-fencing active scallop entitlements in certain areas, for example in sea area VII as defined by the International Council for the Exploration of the Seas

5.3 Further evidence

Question 9 in the call for evidence document: Please provide any other relevant evidence you would like to include in relation to latent capacity in the over 10m scallop and shellfish fleet in England

71% of respondents used this section to reinforce comments they had made in response to previous questions. This included mixed views on the capping of latent licences. Some suggested that capped licences may create an operational and financial advantage to a limited sector of the fleet. However, other respondents argued that capped licences may help to create management harmonisation in UK waters in relation to scallop entitlements.

Respondents also highlighted:

• the divergent needs and fishing activities and patterns across the inshore and offshore fleets
• the restrictive impact of current legislation on the shellfish and scallop sectors
• the impact of increased fishing effort and gear on the stocks and the need for improved management, for example pot limitation schemes and a reduction in dredges
• the need to maintain the principle of “legitimate expectation” in relation to the purchase of a licence in good faith, so that it can continue to be used

6. List of organisations that responded

Organisations that wished for their responses to be kept confidential have not been included in this list.

• Leach Fishing Enterprises
• Brighton & Newhaven Fish Sales Ltd
• Western Fish Producers’ Organisation Ltd
• Waterdance Ltd
• South Western Fish Producer Organisation Ltd
• Scottish White Fish Producers Association
• South Devon and Channel Shellfishermen Ltd
• Macduff Shellfish
• Scallop Industry Consultation Group
• Cornish Fish Producers Organisation
• Natural England

7. Next steps

Defra continues to place the utmost importance on the protection and sustainable management of scallops, shellfish and other non-quota species, and supporting our fishing industry and our coastal communities.

The evidence provided in response to this call for evidence highlighted mixed views on the issue of latent capacity and in particular whether it should be capped in the over 10m scallop and shellfish fleet. It did highlight broader concerns around the sustainability of shellfish and scallop stocks and the responses provided proposed a range of alternative management measures.

In the absence of a clear view on the issue of latent capacity, Defra will continue to work with established industry groups, using this evidence to inform, prioritise and develop policy measures within the wider context of the development of Fisheries Management Plans which will cover capacity/effort for particular fisheries or species as a critical element in managing mortality of stocks.