Consultation outcome

Summary of responses and government response

Updated 27 December 2021

1. Introduction

As outlined in the 2018 Fisheries White Paper, Sustainable Fisheries for Future Generations, leaving the EU gives the government the opportunity to reconsider the economic link licence condition increasing the benefits to the economy, and to coastal communities in particular, from UK registered vessels that fish against our quota.

In order to consider how best to strengthen the economic link, Defra ran a consultation from 13 October to 10 November 2020 on strengthening the economic link licence condition for vessels registered in England and licensed by the Marine Management Organisation (MMO)^{[footnote 1]}.

This document provides a summary of responses to the consultation and sets out the actions the government intends to take having considered what we have been told by consultees. It does not offer a detailed opinion on the comments received.

2. Background

Current arrangements

The economic link condition currently applies to all UK registered vessels over 10 metres in length that land more than two tonnes of UK quota per annum. It requires them to demonstrate a real link to the economy of the UK by meeting one of the criteria set out in their vessel’s economic link licence condition. These criteria can be summarised as: landing at least 50% of the vessel’s quota (by volume) into the UK; employing a crew of whom at least 50% reside in UK coastal areas; making at least 50% of normal operating expenditure into UK coastal areas; or transferring quota for use by the under 10m fleet.

The proposals in this consultation relate only to vessels registered to fish against English quota, as the economic link is a devolved issue. However, we are not seeking to confine the landings requirement to English ports. Instead, we are encouraging fishers to choose the port most suited to their business, wherever that is in the UK.
Most English registered vessels meet the economic link condition by landing at least 50% of their quota in the UK. MMO landings data for 2017 to 2019 showed that 99% of English vessels landed at least 50% of their quota catch into UK ports, with around 97% landing all of their catch into the UK. While just 13 vessels, about 0.5% of the total number of English registered vessels, landed all their catch outside the UK they represent some 12% of the total value of landed catch^{[footnote 2]}.

Crown Dependencies

Also bound by the economic link condition are Crown Dependency registered vessels that fish against the English quota allocation, are over 10 metres in length and which land over two tonnes of quota stocks a year. The condition does not extend to Crown Dependency vessels fishing in their own territorial waters under their own Crown Dependency licence. For the purposes of this document, references to England include Crown Dependencies.

Objective for strengthening the economic link condition

As set out in the consultation document, the government’s objective in strengthening the economic link condition is to increase the benefits the fishing industry brings to coastal communities, through the fishing sector and the seafood supply chain, thus contributing to the wider UK economy. This is in line with the commitments made in the 2019 manifesto and the 2018 Fisheries White Paper.

To achieve this, the benefits from our policy decisions should advantage coastal communities and the seafood sector before filtering through to the wider economy. We believe that the landings and quota transfer requirements have immediate and direct effects in these areas where catch is sold and processed in the UK and quota transfers are utilised by the inshore fleet which tends to operate locally within the UK. Analysis has shown that benefits from the crewing requirement often go directly to coastal communities, where crew must live.

We recognise that there are some limitations with the different economic link criteria conditions, for example where catch is immediately exported out of the UK and not all quota transfers are fished. We set out how we intend to address these issues later in this document.

Analysis of the economic link criteria

Understanding the overall contribution that each economic link criteria makes to the economy is not straightforward. It depends on complex supply chains and the behaviour of vessel owners and crew. Our main source of analysis is A review of the effectiveness of the Economic Link by Vivid Economics (2009). This report evaluates the effectiveness of the economic link and outlines potential options for reforming the economic link condition. A number of similar suggestions were made in the consultation responses, such as extending the landing requirement to include first point of sale or processing. However, there have been many changes to the fishing industry and to the economy in the decade since the report was published, most notably the UK’s departure from the EU.

There is also some uncertainty about the potential benefits to the economy set out in the analysis that changes to the criteria might deliver. Estimates in the report are based on a number of key assumptions, including vessel behaviour and price, which may lead to conclusions that do not accurately reflect the impact of the criteria today. Furthermore, the analysis only estimates the economic benefit of the different economic link criteria, it does not set out the optimal value of the thresholds for each one. For example, the report recommends an increase in the landing requirement, but it does not recommend what that increase should be.

For these reasons we have taken a pragmatic approach to developing the policy options proposed in the consultation document. We have considered the strengths and weaknesses of the evidence and tried to find a balance between policy impacts that ensure businesses make an additional contribution to the UK economy and impacts that could discourage them from continuing their operations in England.

Proposals for strengthening the economic link

The proposals made in the consultation document were designed to make businesses increase the contribution they make to the economy by strengthening the licence condition. They were to:

• increase the landing criterion to 70% of quota catch (by volume)
• increase the quota donation criterion from 16.5% of a vessel’s shortfall (by value (£)) to 30% and consider how it is used to help improve uptake
• increase the overall catch landed or quota donated (transferred) by removing the crewing and financial expenditure criteria

Vessel owners would have had the choice of meeting the condition through the landings requirement, by quota transfer or by using a combination of the two. This reflects the government’s view that flexibility in how vessels demonstrate a link to the economy of the UK is important in supporting the diversity of operating models that exist in the English fleet. Vessels would be able to land their catch abroad when they were unable to do so in the UK due to the absence of the necessary markets or facilities. Under the proposals the expenditure criterion would be removed on the basis that it does not contribute as much to the UK economy as the landing or quota transfer criteria. The consultation proposed removing the crewing requirement because we initially believed that a vessel meeting the crewing requirement does not contribute as much to the UK economy as it would if it met the landing or quota transfer criteria.

The landing requirement

The landing of quota catch into UK ports has the potential to produce high onshore benefits. This is true when it results in further value added economic activity such as when catch is used by the processing sector, although the economic contribution is lower when landings are immediately exported, as discussed further in the ‘Analysis of responses on the landing requirement’ section.

When deciding how much to propose increasing the landing requirement by, we looked at the potential effect of making it 100%. The three key factors against such a move were the downward pressure on price arising from a sharp rise in the volume of fish available at market, a recognition that in some cases fishers will obtain a significantly higher market price for their catch through landing and selling in other countries, and port infrastructure which would be currently unable to provide all the services and facilities required by large pelagic vessels, many of which land their catch outside the UK. For these reasons we proposed an increase in landings from the current level of 50% to 70% as an ambitious but achievable threshold to deliver further benefits to coastal communities.

The quota transfer requirement

Under our proposal in the consultation, an increased proportion of a vessel’s shortfall from meeting the landing requirement would need to be transferred to the MMO in the form of quota. This would have increased from the current rate of 16.5% to 30%. However, we will now phase this increase in over time, starting with 20% in 2022 and then, following further work with MMO and industry to improve how transfers are managed, look to increase it to 30% by 2023.

This threshold will not be for quota overall landings but to compensate for the shortfall from meeting the 70% landing requirement. The quota transfer is therefore calculated on the basis of 70% of the quota catch, minus the landings into the UK.

The total value of quota that must be transferred is determined via the equation:

• step 1: ( (Total annual landings (£)) * 0.7 – (landings into the UK (£))
• step 2: (Step 1) * 20%

A worked example could be used to show how this would differ when landing no quota catch (example 1) or some quota catch (example 2) into the UK.

Example 1: Vessel A has total annual landings of £5 million, none of which is into the UK.

• step 1: (£5 million) * 0.7 – (0) = £3.5 million
• step 2: (£3.5 million) * 20% = £0.7 million to be transferred

Example 2: Vessel B has total annual landings of £5 million, £2 million of which is into the UK.

• step 1: (£5 million) * 0.7 – (£2 million) = £1.5 million
• step 2: (£1.5 million) * 20% = £0.3 million to be transferred

The relevant PO provides the MMO with a tonnage of quota with appropriate value. This tonnage can be made up of any number of quota stocks and each stock has an individual value. As the value of individual stocks is not exactly fixed, the average landed value for that stock in the year of assessment is used as a starting point. However, values can vary round the coast in which case sales note data can be used for verification. The flexibility in the tonnage and stocks that are provided is permitted by the broad nature of the licence condition. This can result in quota being transferred of minimal value to the under 10m pool because they cannot fish it. We discuss measures to address this in the ‘Analysis of responses on quota transfers’ section.

We recognise that the current system needs to be improved and are keen to work with MMO and industry in the next phase of reform in order to improve how transfers are managed. In conjunction with this, we are increasing the quota transfer requirement to increase the benefits received from it.

The crewing requirement

One of the proposals set out in the consultation was to remove the crewing requirement. This was included because we initially believed that a vessel meeting the crewing requirement does not contribute as much to the UK economy as it would if it met the landing or quota transfer criteria. However, analysis has shown that benefits from the crewing requirement often go directly to coastal communities, where crew must live, and are broadly on a par with the benefits from the other criteria. This benefit is direct and immediate. “Additionality” is harder to quantify as some vessels could continue employing UK crew even if the criterion is dropped. We believe UK owned vessels landing in the UK are more likely to keep UK crew than those that are foreign owned and land most of their catch outside the UK. There does not appear to be evidence that crewing is less effective in producing economic benefits than the landings requirement, or any other evidence that it is a less appropriate means of demonstrating an economic link.

The expenditure requirement

The financial expenditure criterion is very broad. It requires vessels owners to demonstrate a real economic link through normal operating expenditure, for example, fuel purchase. However, it could be met in ways that do not involve expenditure above that required in the normal course of business, creating a potential loophole. In practice, there has been very low take-up of this criterion with only one vessel using it during the period 2016 to 2019.

3. Overview of consultation responses

A total of 43 responses were received to the consultation launched on 13 October 2020. 25 responses were received via Citizen Space (online consultation) and 18 via email. The majority of these responses supported the government’s proposal to strengthen the economic link for English registered vessels from 2022.

37 of the responses were received from the fishing industry, with 3 responses from local authorities and a single response apiece from a Crown Dependency, an academic and an environmental non-government organisation. A breakdown of the responses by stakeholder category is presented below.

Stakeholder category	Responses
Academic	1
Fixed Quota Allocations (FQA) Holders	3
eNGOs	1
Fishing Company	5
Crown Dependency	1
Harbour Authority	2
Individuals or individual commercial fishers	9
Local Authority	3
National Fishermen’s Association	1
Non-Sector Fishing Organisation	2
Processors and Markets	2
Producer Organisations	10
Trade Association or Body	3

4. Analysis of responses on the current economic link

Question 1: Do you think that the current economic link licence condition is strong enough?

24 of the 38 respondents for this question felt that the current economic link conditions are not sufficient, with 9 responding that they are, and 5 being neutral. A common concern that was raised over the current policy is the monitoring and enforcement of the conditions, which several respondents felt was insufficient and was leading to a lack of compliance. There were calls for the economic link policy to be extended to include non-quota stocks which are currently exempt from the conditions.

Another area of concern that we heard from respondents was around the inconsistency in economic link conditions across the UK and how the government’s proposals to strengthen the policy in England could further increase the divergence across the Fisheries Administrations.

There was support from respondents around the need to review and strengthen the policy. There were calls for regular reviews to be held (for example every 3 to 4 years) of the economic link condition to ensure that the policy is fit for purpose and can be modified if required in the future. We also heard calls for the economic link policy to include a sustainability angle so that the conditions not only benefit the fishing communities but also the health of the fish stocks themselves. The measures set out in this document will strengthen the condition in a way that tries to balance the diverse views we received on how this should be done.

5. Analysis of responses on the landing requirement

Question 2: Do you agree that the landing target should be increased to 70%?

A total of 22 respondents agreed with increasing the landing requirement, 8 did not agree and 12 were neutral or did not answer.

Although the majority of responses were in favour of the proposal, a number, both for and against the increase, said there was a risk that the benefits may not all accrue to the UK economy if these additional landings are directly transported for sale overseas. We heard that an increase in landings should be used within the UK (for example sent for processing here or sold directly to our markets). We were also told about the need for flexibility in how vessels meet the economic link condition, and for further options such as using the first point of sale in order to achieve the policy’s aims.

Arguments against the proposal focused on whether UK ports had sufficient capacity and infrastructure to handle a steep upsurge in landings. Those in favour of the 70% minimum landing requirement also agreed that there should be greater government investment in domestic port infrastructure to assist with this proposal. There were also concerns about the impact on domestic markets, with the view expressed that downward pressure on prices would result from a surge in supply.

Concerns were raised about the possibility of diverging economic link conditions across the UK Fisheries Administrations though no details were given on this. The 2012 Concordat commits the UK Fisheries Administrations to including the same economic link condition in their licences. The Concordat will be replaced by a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) agreed by all the Fisheries Administrations which will allow all administrations to decide their own economic link criteria.

There were calls to increase the landing requirement beyond 70% from harbour authorities, non-sector fishing organisations and FQA unit holders. Whilst we recognise the rationale for this, we also heard about the difficulties that significant changes to fishing and supply patterns and prices would cause for parts of the industry. As noted above, ports could face pressure if they do not have the infrastructure to absorb large increases in the volume of quota that is landed. A sharp rise in landings could also reduce market prices and undermine our stated aim of enabling fishers to land where they can achieve the best market prices.

We therefore intend to increase the landing requirement for English vessels to a minimum of 70% of quota from 1 April 2022.

Additionally, we want to work with the industry and other interested parties in the next phase of reform to consider further strengthening the requirement including through examining ideas in the consultation.

Question 3: Do you agree that flexibility is required in the system to allow vessels to continue to land all, or a proportion of, their catch outside the UK?

26 respondents supported the need for flexibility, with 4 against and 12 neutral or did not answer.

72% of responses mentioned the need for flexibility in meeting the condition.

In responding to the proposal to increase the minimum landing requirement (question 2 above), some respondents argued for the need for flexibility in whether to land quota catches in the UK or abroad in order to get the best prices and market demand. For example, we were told that some stocks such as saithe and plaice cannot be sold at a profit in English markets and are, therefore, landed abroad to achieve a better price.

Those who sought a tighter condition argued that flexibility would not lead to greater economic benefit to the UK if vessels could continue landing a significant proportion of their catch outside the UK. Some respondents supported short-term flexibility while the new conditions were brought into force.

We proposed dropping the two flexibilities that appeared to offer comparatively less economic benefits which are the crewing and expenditure requirements. The crewing requirement was used by 13 English vessels on 29 occasions between 2016 to 2019, and the expenditure requirement used by only one.

In response, some consultees considered that dropping the crewing requirement could have severe impacts on their business as they would be forced to change their business model to land into the UK or would be required to transfer more quota. Those consultees also expressed the view that some crews could be left unemployed as owners could source cheaper labour from overseas, and impact coastal communities in which many crew members reside, where alternative employment opportunities can be limited. We also heard about the difficulty companies face in recruiting more highly skilled operators such as skippers and engineers, and that training new recruits would take time. And that, in addition, retaining the crewing requirement could result in there being more highly trained UK crew which may not be the case if this condition is removed.

Several respondents favoured reinstating the approach taken in the (repealed) Merchant Shipping Act 1988, which prohibited foreign-owned companies and nationals from owning vessels registered on the UK fishing vessel register. This would be counter to wider government policy on the role of foreign investment in the UK economy and the Trade and Cooperation Agreement. We believe that ensuring all vessels with access to English quota demonstrate a link to the UK would provide a stronger benefit to the UK economy.

Having considered the concerns raised around removing the crewing requirement we undertook further analysis which showed that the crewing requirement is an effective way to meet the economic link objective. Increasing income accruing to UK resident crew could provide a significant economic benefit to the UK coastal communities where crew reside. As a result, we think there is an argument to not only retain but strengthen the crewing condition, increasing the requirement for 50% of the crew to be UK residents by 20% to 70%. This will make a significant economic contribution as crew income provides a direct benefit to coastal communities, which may be lost if the requirement was removed.

No comments were received on the proposal to remove the financial expenditure requirement and we will therefore proceed with this.

We intend to remove the expenditure compliance option from 1 April 2022 for the reasons outlined earlier on in this response. Rather than removing the crewing requirement, we will strengthen it so that 70% of the crew are UK residents from 1 April 2022.

Further work on this area will be taken forward in the next phase of reform.

6. Analysis of responses on quota transfers

Question 4: Are quota donations the best alternative way for vessels to demonstrate a link to the UK?

A common theme among the respondents was that it was better to have more than one option or criteria, to provide some flexibility in how vessels meet the condition.

Responses were inconclusive about what the best alternatives should be, with the strongest support being in favour of quota transfers. Some responses suggested that using transferred quota could help support the loss of international swaps or deal with choke under the landing obligation. Other options suggested included:

• a requirement that a vessel has a genuine physical UK office from which vessel operations are controlled
• corporation tax/record of tax submissions to UK HMRC
• investment in the training of UK fishermen so that more skills are brought into the industry
• a requirement that the first sale of catch is made in the UK through a UK registered corporate entity
• a requirement to have UK nationals as paid directors of the company

We believe there is merit in looking at these options more closely which we will do in the next phase of reform. A concern raised about quota transfers was how economically beneficial they are in circumstances where the pot of transferred quota is not always fully utilised and where larger, pelagic vessels transfer offshore quota to the inshore fleet which may not be able to catch this quota either because it is in waters they cannot access or they do not have the necessary equipment. Additionally, consultees reported that some of the transferred quota does not have a domestic market and, therefore, it may not be viable to catch if it cannot be sold in the UK. Market dilution was also raised as a concern, where transferred quota could outstrip demand.

The point was also made that quota transfers should not be used as they could be perceived to be an act of charity towards the inshore fleet. It was suggested instead that quota should be allocated directly to vessels that are UK registered and owned. We believe the quota transfer criterion remains the best and most economically beneficial alternative to the landings criterion. On average, c.£3 million worth of quota is transferred to the U10m fleet every year as a result of the economic link condition. In recognition of the fact that, whilst this criterion is one option it is still a requirement and not, as the term donation implies, voluntary, should operators choose to use it, we are changing the terminology from quota donations to quota transfers.

There are a number of potential shortcomings with the current system which mean that quota is not being fully utilised. We have heard that sometimes quota is transferred to the inshore fleet at times at which it is unable to fish for it. We also understand that Producer Organisations hold substantial amounts of quota that are not always utilised each year, as do the non-sector. Some of this unused quota may be able to be fished by the inshore fleet and could be included in the annual transfers. It is our intention to work with POs and other parts of the industry during the next phase of reform to further strengthen and reform this criterion, doing so in the context of wider quota reforms and improvements to the way the quota pools for the non-sector work.

We intend, therefore, to increase the quota transfer level to 20% from 1 April 2022 while improving the current quota transfer and allocation system. Further work will be undertaken in the next phase of reform on this issue.

Question 5: Do you agree that guidance should be put in place to increase the usefulness of donated quota?

Of the 31 responses we received for this question, the majority of respondents (28) were in favour of having guidance in place for quota transfer purposes, with only 2 against and 1 neutral. However, concerns were raised that increasing the transfer from 16.5% to 30% would disproportionately affect those who currently use the crewing requirement to meet the economic link condition and do not currently land in the UK.

Responses were light on detail, but some made clear that guidance needed to be used to drive greater transparency so that the public was aware of how transfers were being utilised. Respondents who were not in favour of quota transfers in principle did not want to see any guidance in place.

We recognise concerns, as set out under question 4, about the efficiency and applicability of the quota transfer option when meeting the economic link criteria.

We therefore intend to work with MMO and industry to develop and put in place clear guidance on increasing the usefulness and transparency of quota transfers. We also intend to take this opportunity to explore ways in which we could make the economic link more transparent.

Question 6: Do you agree that some of this quota should be used for new purposes and our suggestions? If applicable, please provide details of new purposes you think would be appropriate.

20 respondents agreed that some quota could be used for new purposes, with 3 against and 18 neutral/did not answer. Some of the suggestions on how best to use quota transfers included:

• providing quota for all sectors of the fishing industry and not just exclusively for the under 10m vessel fleet
• use transfers to alleviate choke issues
• use transfers for scientific purposes such as for data collection
• use transfers as incentives for sustainable fishing practices
• allocate transfers to new entrants
• ensure that transfers were fished by UK owned vessels so that those who were transferring quota did not simply get it given back to them

However, there remain challenges in ensuring transferred quota can be fished. One option might be to make some of this quota available for scientific research. However, there is already scientific quota available (2% of Total Allowable Catch) and we would need to understand whether more quota would be useful for this purpose. There is, therefore, an opportunity to enable the quota transfer criteria to help support both fuller quota utilisation and vessels in meeting the landing obligation. But this is difficult, and we want to get this right.

We intend therefore to collaborate with industry and interested parties in the next phase of reform of the economic link to explore options around better utilisation of quota transfers.

7. Summary of policy actions

Several important themes featured in the consultation responses which we believe should be included as key principles to underpin our economic link policy:

• flexibility in meeting the economic link condition
• transparency in how the condition is being met and the benefit it is delivering
• monitoring to ensure the condition is enforced consistently across the sector
• collaboration with industry to help ensure our policy delivers the intended benefits, particularly for coastal communities

On the basis of these principles above, and having considered all the consultation responses, we intend to strengthen the economic link licence condition for vessels registered to fish against English quota in the following ways:

The landing requirement

We will be implementing the proposed increase in landings from 50% to 70% from 1 April 2022 as an ambitious but achievable threshold to deliver further benefits to coastal communities.

The quota transfer requirement

A judgement had to be made on what increase would result in demonstrable economic gains without creating a target that could make businesses unviable. As a result, we intend to increase the current threshold over time. We recognise that there are shortcomings in the current system and are keen to work with MMO and industry during the next phase of reform in order to improve how transfers are managed. Therefore, we will increase the quota transfer requirement from 16.5% to 20% from 1 April 2022. In the next phase of reform, we intend to consider additional ways this quota could be used. The consultation document suggested several ways for doing this.

The crewing requirement

Having consulted on removing the crewing requirement and considered the responses, we now intend to retain this criterion and strengthen it by increasing the percentage from 50% to 70% from 1 April 2022 based on the responses we received and further consideration of available evidence. We also intend to work with MMO to improve the efficiency of how the crewing requirement can be monitored and enforced.

We will carry out a review on how the strengthened arrangements provide additional benefits to the UK economy in the next phase of reform. Any further changes to this, or any other, economic link criteria would be subject to consultation.

The expenditure requirement

We will remove this criterion from 1 April 2022. There may be merit in considering ways that the condition could be met through specific types of expenditure and a number of suggestions for doing so, such as investment in science, were made in the consultation responses. The detail of any such proposals would need to be worked through, and require further consultation, before being introduced. This will not be possible in time for the changes being introduced from April 2022, but it is something we will consider in the next phase of reform.

Implementation

These policy changes leave three strengthened routes for vessel owners to demonstrate a link to our economy: through landing a greater share of their quota into the UK; meeting an increased crewing requirement or by transferring more quota that can be used by the English pool, or by a combination of the 3.

The consultation implied that vessel owners would be given 12 months’ notice of the changes that were to be implemented from 1 January 2022. Due to delays in issuing the government response, this notice period would have been reduced to 3 months. Therefore, in order to give vessel owners the chance to adapt to the strengthened measures we are implementing them on 1 April 2022.

This means that vessel owners will continue complying with the current regime until 31 March 2022, then new licence conditions will be issued covering the strengthened measures. We understand that this may prove problematic for some owners who may not land in the UK in the first three months of the year due to the nature of their fisheries. As a result, whilst the conditions will be separate, MMO will assess compliance over the whole of the year and the licence conditions will be worded to reflect that. The requirements that vessels have to comply with across the whole year will therefore be a weighted average between the existing conditions and strengthened measures.

8. Breakdown of responses by each stakeholder category

Stakeholder category	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4	Q5	Q6
Academics	1	1	1	1	1	1
Crown Dependency	1	1	1	1	1	1
Fishing Company	3	3	4	3	2	2
FQA Holders	3	3	2	2	2	2
Harbour Authority	2	2	1	1	1	0
Individuals	8	8	8	8	8	5
Local Authority	3	3	2	2	2	2
National Fishermen’s Association	1	1	1	1	1	1
Non-Sector Fishing Organisation	2	1	1	2	1	1
Producer Organisation	9	10	10	10	9	7
Processers and Markets	2	1	2	2	2	2
Trade Association or Body	3	2	1	3	1	1
Total responses per question	38	36	34	36	31	25

Annex I: list of organisations who responded

This list in alphabetical order.

British Ports Association

Cornelis Vrolijk Holding BV

Cornwall Council

Eastern England Fish Producer Organisation

Heart of the South West Growth Hub

Hooktone Limited

Hull City Council

Isle of Man

Lowestoft Fish Market Alliance

Macduff Shellfish

Marine Conservation Society

National Federation of Fishermen’s Organisations

New Life Fishing, Grimsby

New Under 10 Fishermen’s Association

North Atlantic Holdings Limited

North Sea Fisheries Limited

North Sea Fishermen Organisation

Northern Ireland Fishermen’s Association

Plymouth Council

Renaissance of East Anglian Fisheries

South Coast Skippers Council

South Devon & Channel Shellfishermen

South West Handline Fishermen’s Association

South Western Fish Producer Organisation

Thanet Fishermen’s Organisation

Team Humber Marine Alliance

Tor Bay Harbour Authority

UK Association of Fish Producer Organisations

UK Fisheries Limited

UK Seafood Industry Alliance

University of Southampton

Waterdance Limited

Western Fish Producer Organisation.

1. In the Crown Dependencies, the Isle of Man’s Department of the Environment, Food and Agriculture issues UK licences to all Isle of Man registered fishing vessels and the economic link licence condition will apply as set out below in this document. The economic link licence condition will apply to Jersey and Guernsey registered vessels that hold a licence issued by the Marine Management Organisation. ↩

2. Marine Management Organisation, English landings data set 2017 to 2019. ↩