Search

Commission Decision of 25 February 2016 setting up a Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries, C(2016) 1084, OJ C 74, 26.2.2016, p. 4–10. The Commission may consult the group on any matter relating to marine and fisheries biology, fishing gear technology, fisheries economics, fisheries governance, ecosystem effects of fisheries, aquaculture or similar disciplines. This report is the 10th of a suite of STECF EWG reports dedicated to the evaluation of the implementation of the Western Mediterranean Sea Multi-Annual management Plan (hereafter, MAP), following EWG reports 18-09, 18-13, 19-01, 19-14, 20-13, 21-01, 21- 13, 22-01 and 22-11. The group was requested to continue the development of socio-economic indicators to be used in the evaluation of management measures for the West Med MAP in both West Med management units (EMU1 and EMU 1) (TOR1). Two roadmaps were discussed, a short term approach and a long term approach which would consider the expansion of all the mixed-fisheries bio-economic models to both management units. As a first step, the group focused on the proposal of harmonizing the economic indicators across the models implemented (TOR2). The group was than requested to further develop the approach implemented during EWG 22-01 to identify persistence hotspots of the six target species of the West Med MAP using scientific survey data (MEDITS) in combination to commercial spatial data (VMS joined with logbooks), to test existing and additional closure areas (TOR 3). The group was also requested to revise Article 8 of the 2023 fishing opportunities for the West Med MAP (COUNCIL REGULATION (EU) 2023/195), which lists the compensation mechanisms that MSs can implement within the West Med MAP to obtain additional fishing days in 2023 (TOR 4). For TOR 1 a roadmap was discussed and proposed on how to organise the work on socio-economic assessments for the West Med MAP in 2023. The EWG suggests that here should be a three-step process: a scoping exercise (done with EWG 23- 01), a meeting with stakeholders in the middle of the year to discuss their perception of the socio-economic consequences of measures of the West Med MAP and the running of scenarios during EWG 23-11 with results from socio-economic assessments. The EWG notes that the modellers have only the five-day meeting in September to run scenarios. Therefore, it would be crucial for the success of the assessments that the 6 scenarios provided by DG Mare for the EWG 22-11 and with some adjustments for EWG 23-01 will not change for EWG 23-11. It is crucial because those scenarios are already implemented in the models and the implementation of new scenarios would take a lot of time. The EWG proposes to run a few additional scenarios with only one measures to separate impacts of certain measures from the six scenarios where a mixture of measures is included. This would hopefully allow to give an indication what additional efforts may be necessary to reach MSY (in 2025 but also beyond in case the objective is not reached by 2025) and when gains from the implementation of the West Med Plan could be expected. The EWG observes that modelers need to put in additional effort and resources to improve the models for an improved assessment of the West Med MAP. The models were not originally developed for the assessment of the West Med MAP and only cover parts of the area of the Western Mediterranean. Such an improvement of the models could also include work to provide longer-term socio-economic assessments of measures where modelers need to take additional assumptions into account. The EWG notes that it would be beneficial if modelers receive a basic list of assumptions for key economic variables before the EWG 23-11 meeting in September. In 2022, for example, the increased fuel costs were an important factor regarding the economic performance of the fleets. In 2023 fuel costs have decreased but there are other cost categories with a substantial increase. The EWG concludes that DG Mare should not change the 6 provided scenarios substantially before the EWG 23-11 meeting in September. This would allow the modelers to run the models during the meeting and provide the socio-economic results. The EWG concludes that STECF and DG Mare should further discuss how resources could be provided to modelers to improve the applied models. The EWG concludes that the chairs of EWG 23-01 and 23-11 will provide a list of assumptions for the implementation of the models regarding key variables for the socio-economic assessments (short- and long-term). For TOR 2 the EWG discussed what variables and indicators the applied models include and provide. From that discussion a list of indicators was developed for which modelers will be able to provide results in the EWG 23-11 report. The EWG concludes that a list of indicators is provided for which EWG 23-11 will present results in autumn 2023. For TOR 3 the EWG notes that new closure areas for 2023 were implemented only by Spain (EMU 1) (Orden APA/80/2023). All closures areas implemented under the West Med MAP are described to allow testing if their implementation would reduce the catches of juveniles and adults of the six target species of the MAP by 15-25%. The EWG notes that the methodology followed to prioritise, developing and updating closure areas based on their conservation value on the basis of existing closures, proposed closures from EWG 22-01 and new proposals developed by EWG 23-01 based on updated MEDISEH layers is similar to the one used during EWG 22- 01. Updated MEDISEH layers were used for priority species (ARA, MUT and HKE) in combination with old MEDISEH layers for other species and distribution maps of commercial effort from EWG 22-01. Calculation of the percentage of the trawlable GSA area closed to fishing is higher in EMU 1 than EMU 2, therefore the estimation of additional closure areas on top of the existing ones foccused on this management unit. Additional closure areas to test were based on persistence hotsposts from survey data and from areas of high effort in order to impact directly on the reduction of fishing mortality. The EWG notes that the exisiting and additional closures could be tested only in EMU 2 and GSA 7 as for GSA 1, 5 and 6 the extension of the spatially-explicit model ISIS-Fish is not complete yet and it is still limited to a single species (HKE). The EWG notes that closure areas in GSA 7 were tested with two different methods. A static method comparing effort distribution data before and after the closures implementation in 2020, and a dynamic method applying ISIS-Fish. The first method showed how the establishment of the spatio-temporal closure imposed a strong seasonal constraint to the fishing effort in the Gulf of Lions, and that the fishermen community responded quite well to the new rule, although vessels increased their fishing effort along the closure border, with a typical « fishing the line » pattern, especially in the fall. The second model showed that introducing an additional closure did not improve the rebuilding of the hake stock, while changing the closures from seasonal to permanent suggested the strongest effect. The EWG notes that in EMU 2 that temporal closures for the whole fleet reduce global effort while additional spatial closures increase effort towards coastal areas (depths

The Working Group on Fisheries Benthic Impact and Trade-offs (WGFBIT) develops methods and performs assessments to evaluate benthic impact from fisheries at regional scale, while con- sidering fisheries and seabed impact trade-offs. In this report, new fishery benthic impact assessments (ToR A) are shown out for several sub- regions in (French Mediterranean, Celtic Seas). For other regions, updates of the whole assess- ment or specific steps only were presented. To further standardise the different components of the WGFBIT approach across all (sub-)re- gional assessments, a more detail overview of those components was compiled. These compo- nents were slightly different among those regions, related to variation in data availability, envi- ronmental characteristics and implementation possibilities among the (sub-)regions. In WGFBIT, assessments are sometimes based on trawl or grab data, which are sampling differ- ent components of the seafloor ecosystem and can have consequences on the created sensitivity layer. Therefore, there is looked in more detail how the sensitivity outcome (and layers) can dif- fer due to the use of benthic data gathered with different gears (grab/core, trawl or video). The preliminary comparability analyses are performed on different levels: (1) based on co-located sampling; (2) comparing sensitivity maps of the (sub-) area, based on different gears. There were differences observed in longevity distribution at locations sampled with different gears and dif- ferences in data and models lead also to differences in the sensitivity layers. The WGFBIT seafloor assessment framework is not the only way to assess benthic impacts from physical disturbance. A discussion session was held on how the future workflow on advice that ICES WGFBIT assessment contribute to, will be organized. Marine sediments harbour significant levels of biodiversity that play a key role in ecosystem functions and services such as biogeochemical cycling, carbon storage and the regulation of cli- mate. Through the removal of fauna, changes in physico-chemical nature and resuspension of sediment, bottom trawling may result in significant changes in the ecosystem functioning of shelf seas. An assumption of the current PD model is that high community biomass implies higher ecosystem functioning. However, total community biomass does not necessarily reflect changes in species and functional trait composition which play a key role in regulating ecosystem func- tions. ToR D is working on an improved understanding of the link between species functional effect traits and proxies and processes for specific ecosystem functions to improve our ability to predict the impact of fishing disturbance on benthic ecosystem functioning more accurately. Links between species traits and biogeochemical parameters and the impact of trawling on these links are being explored using multivariate ordination analyses using different fauna and bioge- ochemical datasets collected in the North Sea, Celtic Sea, Kattegat, Baltic Sea and the eastern Mediterranean. Changes due to trawling in the trajectories of species densities over time and the concurrent changes in the bioturbation and bioirrigation potential of communities are being modelled using a combination of data-driven mechanistic model and a biogeochemical model. We report on the different data analysis methods that ToR D members have developed over the last year. ICES Published Refereed

Commission Decision of 25 February 2016 setting up a Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries, C(2016) 1084, OJ C 74, 26.2.2016, p. 4–10. The Commission may consult the group on any matter relating to marine and fisheries biology, fishing gear technology, fisheries economics, fisheries governance, ecosystem effects of fisheries, aquaculture or similar disciplines. This report deals with the monitoring of the performance of the Common Fisheries Policy. European Commission Published Refereed

Commission Decision of 25 February 2016 setting up a Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries, C(2016) 1084, OJ C 74, 26.2.2016, p. 4–10. The Commission may consult the group on any matter relating to marine and fisheries biology, fishing gear technology, fisheries economics, fisheries governance, ecosystem effects of fisheries, aquaculture or similar disciplines. This report contains a review of Joint Recommendations submitted by Member States Regional Groups for the implementation of the Landing Obligation in 2024 and beyond. European Commission Published Refereed

The JRC presented a brief review of the current STECF system in place to provide advice on Mediterranean fisheries management and data collection issues. JRC highlighted some structural risks and inefficiencies that currently exist. The review explored some examples of integrated actions that could reduce or mitigate such risks. Such actions as part of a long-term strategy would lead to a proactive advisory process as opposed to the current more reactive sequence of individual steps considered by STECF. STECF notes this initiative from the JRC and aims to revisit the topic in time for development of the next management plan stage, post 2025. On 21 February 2023, the Commission adopted the Fisheries and Ocean package consisting of four documents: the Communication on the functioning of the CFP, the Action Plan “Protecting and restoring marine ecosystems for sustainable and resilient fisheries”, the Energy transition initiative and the report on the functioning of the Common Market Organisation (CMO). The package brings together all different aspects of the EU’s policy on fisheries and the Ocean, looking at the future, and at how we can ensure that fisheries continue to grow in resilience and sustainability. With this package, the European Commission plans on launching a policy discussion with all institutions and stakeholders the EU’s policy on fisheries and the Ocean European Commission Published Refereed

Commission Decision of 25 February 2016 setting up a Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries, C(2016) 1084, OJ C 74, 26.2.2016, p. 4–10. The Commission may consult the group on any matter relating to marine and fisheries biology, fishing gear technology, fisheries economics, fisheries governance, ecosystem effects of fisheries, aquaculture or similar disciplines This report documents the outcomes of STECF Expert Working Group 22-09: 2022 stock assessments of demersal stocks in the western Mediterranean Sea from the meeting held remotely from 5th to 11th September 2022. A total of 20 fish stocks considered and 18 were fully evaluated. Two stocks had prior advice from 2021 with catch advice for 2022 and 2023, and this is reiterated here. The EWG reports age based assessments, target Fs, with short term forecasts for 15 of the remaining 18 stocks, of these 15, 12 were also analysed for biomass reference points. Catch advice for three stocks was based on ICES category three evaluations of biomass indices. The content of the report gives the STECF terms of reference; the basis of the evaluations; assessments, reference point calculations; summaries of state of stock and advised catch or F based on either the MSY approach for assessed stocks and category 3 based advice for those without assessments. The report contains the full stock assessment reports for the 15 assessments, the exploration of assessments and category 3 evaluations for the remaining three stocks. The report also contains the STECF observations and conclusions on the assessment report. These conclusions come from the STECF Plenary meeting November 2022. European Union Published Refereed

The ICES Workshop on ICES reference points (WKREF2) was tasked review the WKREF1 report and based on the outcome develop updated guidelines for the ICES reference points system and recommendations for ACOM consideration. The WKREF1 report has suggested 5 key recom- mendations to simplify and harmonise the ICES reference points framework representing a ma- jor change to the current guidelines. At WKREF2, we detailed discussions and four key concerns were raised about the proposed approach. The first related to the simplification of rules to define Blim. Around two thirds of category 1 stocks would end up as WKREF1 “Blim Type 2” where Blim would be set as a fraction of B0. The Allee effect or “depensation” maybe more important than previously thought and should be furthered explored for ICES stocks since it has important consequences for Blim. A number of challenges and issues around defining Blim using the current guidelines were documented. Some suggestions on improvement criteria were discussed including using classifiers to define spas- modic stocks and using change point algorithms to address non-stationary productivity regimes. However, further work is need to make these approaches operational and there was no consen- sus that the WKREF1 Blim types should replace the current guidelines. WKREF1 recommended that the FMSY proxy should be based on a biological proxies and should be less than the deterministic FMSY. It was pointed out that the stochastic FMSY estimated in EqSim for example, is lower than the deterministic FMSY and that the current guidelines ensure that the FMSY should not pose a more than 5% risk to Blim. A large amount of work described in WD 1 was carried out to develop an MSE framework to consistency and robustness test a candidate refer- ence point system for North East Atlantic stocks. However, WKREF2 recommended that further work needs to be carried out to condition and test the simulation framework before the conclu- sions could be adopted by ICES and incorporated into the guidelines. A number of considerations for defining MSY related reference points were discussed including using model validation and prediction skill to ensure that ICES provide robust and credible ad- vice. There is evidence that density dependence (DD) is important in the majority of ICES stocks (68% in recruitment and 54% in growth). The correct prediction of the shape and strength of density-dependence in productivity is key to predicting future stock development and providing the best possible long-term fisheries management advice. A suggested approach to use surplus production models (SPMs) to account for DD in FMSY was suggested and discussed but there was no consensus on whether that approach was appropriate. There was consensus that the FECO approach as a means of adapting target fishing mortality to medium-term changes in productiv- ity should be included in the guidelines subject to a benchmark and ACOM approval. While WKREF1 and 2 focused mainly on Category 1 stocks ToR c) called for a “simplified and harmonised set of guidelines for estimating MSY and precautionary reference points applicable in the advice framework across various ICES stock categories.” Ideally the ICES assessment cat- egories should provide equivalent risk across all stocks. This issue was discussed but no recom- mendations emerged. There was no consensus a revised reference point framework was proposed at WKREF2. How- ever, it was agreed that it should be presented here for further discussion at ACOM and other fora. The key feature of the suggested approach is that the stock status evaluation is treated in- dependent of the Advice Rule (AR). The main feature of the system is that the biomass trigger is not linked to a stock status evaluation, it is linked to the expected biomass when fishing at the target fishing mortality, in contrast to the current ICES approach. It also entailed that FMSY would also become an upper limit of fishing mortality and that the advised fishing mortality would be set at or lower than that level. WKREF2 did not discuss what to do in situations where SSB< Blim or alternative forms of HCR for the advice rule. Building community understanding and con- sensus around simplified and harmonised guidelines has yet to be achieved. A further workshop WKREF3 will be required to achieve that aim. The report includes 6 recommendations for ACOM consideration. ICES The main objective of the workshop was to review the recommendations of WKREF1 and con- sider how these might feed into a new reference points framework and guidelines for ICES. There were a number of presentations on the wider issues of best practice for reference points, the Allee effect, density dependence and the WKIRISH approach. The starting point was to try and develop a set of simplified and harmonised guidelines based on the WKREF1 report rather than evolving the current guidelines to include the WKREF1 conclusions. A key aspect of the meeting was to allow for discussions in order to build a shared understanding of the strengths and weakness of the current framework and of the new framework emerging from WKREF1. Published Non Refereed

The Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) requires EU Member States to achieve and maintain good environmental status (GES) across their marine waters. WKBENTH3 convened as a hybrid meeting to evaluate benthic assessment methods and indicators for their potential to meet the criteria described under the MSFD Descriptor 6 (seabed integrity). They evaluated a suite of indicator methods, proposed by participants. Those included five indicator methods de-scribing the ‘Condition of the Benthic Habitat’, primarily linked to D6C5, and six indicator meth-ods for ‘Physical Disturbance on Benthic Habitats’, primarily linked to D6C3. Variants of some of the indicators as well as some other commonly used diversity indices were also assessed. A common dataset with broad regional representation was used to compare and contrast indi-cator performance with 17 benthic invertebrate datasets drawn from a range of pressure gradi-ents (14 over gradients of commercial bottom trawling intensity, 2 over gradients of eutrophica-tion and 1 over a pollution gradient). A meta-analysis of the mean response to trawling across all locations showed that most indicators had, on average, declined at the high trawl impact rel-ative to the baseline and a significant effect of trawling was detected for the indicators Commu-nity Biomass, Species Richness, Fraction of long-lived species, Median longevity, Fraction of sen-tinel species - SoS, Relative Margalef diversity index DM’, Shannon Index and Inverse Simpson. The complementarity of the different indices was computed using Spearman correlation coeffi-cients between each of the indices for all gradients, ordering indicators with Ward’s hierarchical clustering. One of the key findings was the identification of four groups of indices that showed clear patterns of association. Considering the link of indicators to different benthic community properties, WKBENTH3 proposed that the assessment of D6 should be carried out selecting a number of indicators drawn from different cluster groups to ensure that components of diver-sity, species sensitivity and abundance (density and/or biomass – or other proxy linked to benthic habitat functioning) are addressed. WKBENTH3 further ranked model-based benthic sensitivity and impact outputs across broad habitat types (BHTs) in eight different subdivisions in order to contrast indicator responses. The ranking showed a broad congruence, however, every subdivision had variation in ranking of BHTs among indicator methods. Further work is needed to determine the cause of those discrep-ancies and to look more closely at the values and the response curves generated. WKBENTH3 developed a worked example of how to estimate thresholds for GES based on the approach of ‘detectable change’. The approach was applied to each of the different pressure gra-dients and to muddy sand habitats. It was not able to estimate thresholds for all gradients da-tasets as the confidence intervals around some relationships were very wide. Experts highlighted that the assessment of seabed integrity needs to ensure that cross-regional, regional, national and local scale assessments can “talk” to each other and that they are complementarity in terms of what aspects of the ecosystem the respective indicators are capturing and what pressure they are tracking (linked to manageable human activity). Cross-regional assessments will inform whether assessments are measuring the same or similar things, allowing for such crosschecking. ICES Published Refereed

Commission Decision of 25 February 2016 setting up a Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries, C(2016) 1084, OJ C 74, 26.2.2016, p. 4–10. The Commission may consult the group on any matter relating to marine and fisheries biology, fishing gear technology, fisheries economics, fisheries governance, ecosystem effects of fisheries, aquaculture or similar disciplines. This report documents the outcomes of STECF Expert Working Group 22-16: 2022 stock assessments of demersal stocks in the Adtiat ic, Ionian and Aegean Seas from the meeting held in Rome from 17th to 23th October 2022. A total of 16 fish stocks were considered and 15 were fully evaluated. The EWG reports age based assessments, target Fs, with short term forecasts for 9 stocks of the remaining 6 stocks, four of these do not have short term forecasts as he assessments are not suitable, and one is given ICES category 3 advice. The content of the report gives the STECF terms of reference; the basis of the evaluations; assessments, summaries of state of stock and advised catch or F based on either the MSY approach for assessed stocks and category 3 based advice for those without assessments. The report contains the full stock assessment reports for the 14 assessments, the exploration of assessments and category 3 evaluations for the remaining stock. The report also contains the STECF observations and conclusions on the assessment report. These conclusions come from the STECF Plenary meeting November 2022. European Union Published Refereed

Commission Decision of 25 February 2016 setting up a Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries, C(2016) 1084, OJ C 74, 26.2.2016, p. 4–10. The Commission may consult the group on any matter relating to marine and fisheries biology, fishing gear technology, fisheries economics, fisheries governance, ecosystem effects of fisheries, aquaculture or similar disciplines. This report is from STECF Expert Working Group 21-15: 2021 stock assessments of demersal stocks in Adriatic, Ionian and Aegean Seas from the meeting held remotely from 18th to 22th October 2021. A total of 9 fish stocks were evaluated. One stock had prior advice from 2020 for 2021 and 2022, and this is reiterated here. Index advice for 2022 and 2023 is provide for one other stock. The EWG reports age based assessments and short term forecasts for 5 of the remaining 7 stocks and surplus production assessments for two stocks. The content of the report gives the STECF terms of reference, the basis of the evaluations and advice, summaries of state of stock and advised based on either the MSY approach for assessed stocks or the precautionary approach for category 3 based advice. The report contains the full stock assessment reports for the 7 assessments, the exploration of assessments and category 3 evaluations for the remaining five stocks. The report also contains the STECF observations and conclusions on the assessment report. These conclusions come from the STECF Plenary meeting November 2021. European Union Published Refereed

Commission Decision of 25 February 2016 setting up a Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries, C(2016) 1084, OJ C 74, 26.2.2016, p. 4–10. The Commission may consult the group on any matter relating to marine and fisheries biology, fishing gear technology, fisheries economics, fisheries governance, ecosystem effects of fisheries, aquaculture or similar disciplines. Within a management strategy evaluation harvest control rules were tuned and robustness tested for the anchovy and sardine stocks in the Adriatic Sea. This investigation was done in support of GFCM and a continuation of the preliminary report (EWG 21-adhoc-02). For the sardine stock no meaningful MSE could be conducted. For the anchovy stock two HCRs were identified to be achieving the management targets and being robust. European Commission Published Non Refereed

Commission Decision of 25 February 2016 setting up a Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries, C(2016) 1084, OJ C 74, 26.2.2016, p. 4–10. The Commission may consult the group on any matter relating to marine and fisheries biology, fishing gear technology, fisheries economics, fisheries governance, ecosystem effects of fisheries, aquaculture or similar disciplines. This report, on methods for supporting stock assessment in the Mediterranean (STECF-21-02), addresses the data checking and preparation for stock assessment once the data has been submitted following the annual data calls. The report provides an overview of the data errors and quality control carried out on both commercial landings data and MEDITS survey data. The analyses reported also address the small fraction of commercial catch with sampling gaps, and how these are assigned appropriate length frequency distributions. The results of these check and assignments are provided by species, GSA and country. Quality checks were carried out on Medits data check consistency of the main reporting files and highlighting where data inconsistencies occurred. Additionally the total landings reported to the European Commission under the Black & Med-Sea data call, the Fisheries Independent Data call and the Annual Economic Report data call were compared at species aggregated to GSA. Some important differences were observed and these are reported. In addition the EWG reviewed a technical report on the sampling of commercial catch in the Greek Fisheries, the review and some suggested further work are included in this report. European Union, Joint Research Centre Published Refereed