mauritania/eastern central atlantic, morocco/eastern ... · seabream, pandora, european hake, etc)...

Common octopus

Octopus vulgaris

©Scandinavian Fishing Yearbook / www.scandposters.com

Mauritania/Eastern Central Atlantic, Morocco/Eastern CentralAtlantic, Portugal/Northeast Atlantic, Spain/Northeast Atlantic

Bottom trawls, Pots, Traps

January 11, 2015

Seafood Watch Consulting Researcher

DisclaimerSeafood Watch strives to have all Seafood Reports rev iewed for accuracy and completeness by external scientists with expertise in ecology,fisheries science and aquaculture. Scientific rev iew, however, does not constitute an endorsement of the Seafood Watch program or itsrecommendations on the part of the rev iewing scientists. Seafood Watch is solely responsible for the conclusions reached in this report.

Seafood Watch Standard used in this assessment: Standard for Fisheries vF2

®®

®

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .82

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .94

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .95

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .105

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .126

Table of Contents

About Seafood Watch

Guiding Principles

Summary

Final Seafood Recommendations

Introduction

Assessment

Criterion 1: Impacts on the species under assessment

Criterion 2: Impacts on other species

Criterion 3: Management Effectiveness

Criterion 4: Impacts on the habitat and ecosystem

Acknowledgements

References

Appendix A: Extra By Catch Species

Appendix B: Review Schedule

2

About Seafood WatchMonterey Bay Aquarium’s Seafood Watch program evaluates the ecological sustainability of wild-caught andfarmed seafood commonly found in the United States marketplace. Seafood Watch defines sustainableseafood as originating from sources, whether wild-caught or farmed, which can maintain or increase productionin the long-term without jeopardizing the structure or function of affected ecosystems. Seafood Watch makesits science-based recommendations available to the public in the form of regional pocket guides that can bedownloaded from www.seafoodwatch.org. The program’s goals are to raise awareness of important oceanconservation issues and empower seafood consumers and businesses to make choices for healthy oceans.

Each sustainability recommendation on the regional pocket guides is supported by a Seafood Report. Eachreport synthesizes and analyzes the most current ecological, fisheries and ecosystem science on a species, thenevaluates this information against the program’s conservation ethic to arrive at a recommendation of “BestChoices,” “Good Alternatives” or “Avoid.” The detailed evaluation methodology is available upon request. Inproducing the Seafood Reports, Seafood Watch seeks out research published in academic, peer-reviewedjournals whenever possible. Other sources of information include government technical publications, fisherymanagement plans and supporting documents, and other scientific reviews of ecological sustainability. SeafoodWatch Research Analysts also communicate regularly with ecologists, fisheries and aquaculture scientists, andmembers of industry and conservation organizations when evaluating fisheries and aquaculture practices.Capture fisheries and aquaculture practices are highly dynamic; as the scientific information on each specieschanges, Seafood Watch ’s sustainability recommendations and the underlying Seafood Reports will be updatedto reflect these changes.

Parties interested in capture fisheries, aquaculture practices and the sustainability of ocean ecosystems arewelcome to use Seafood Reports in any way they find useful. For more information about Seafood Watch andSeafood Reports, please contact the Seafood Watch program at Monterey Bay Aquarium by calling 1-877-229-9990.

®

®

®

®

®

®

®

®

3

Guiding PrinciplesSeafood Watch defines sustainable seafood as originating from sources, whether fished or farmed, that canmaintain or increase production in the long-term without jeopardizing the structure or function of affectedecosystems.

Based on this principle, Seafood Watch had developed four sustainability criteria for evaluating wildcatchfisheries for consumers and businesses. These criteria are:

How does fishing affect the species under assessment?How does the fishing affect other, target and non-target species?How effective is the fishery’s management?How does the fishing affect habitats and the stability of the ecosystem?

Each criterion includes:

Factors to evaluate and scoreGuidelines for integrating these factors to produce a numerical score and rating

Once a rating has been assigned to each criterion, we develop an overall recommendation. Criteria ratings andthe overall recommendation are color-coded to correspond to the categories on the Seafood Watch pocketguide and online guide:

Best Choice/Green: Are well managed and caught in ways that cause little harm to habitats or other wildlife.

Good Alternative/Yellow: Buy, but be aware there are concerns with how they’re caught.

Avoid/Red Take a pass on these for now. These items are overfished or caught in ways that harm othermarine life or the environment.

“Fish” is used throughout this document to refer to finfish, shellfish and other invertebrates

1

1

4

SummaryThe following Seafood Watch report provides recommendations for common octopus (Octopus vulgaris) caughtin the Northeast Atlantic (Spain and Portugal) and the Eastern Central Atlantic (Morocco and Mauritania). Thecommon octopus has low inherent vulnerability to fishing pressure due to its high fecundity, low age at maturityand a rapid growth rate.Common octopus abundance, fishing mortality and management effectiveness varies between countries. InSpain and Portugal common octopus abundances and fishing mortality are thought to be at moderate levels,however, the octopus fisheries in these countries lacks reference points and quotas. There is a considerableeffort to collect data in these fisheries through logbooks and observer coverage, but monitoring, enforcement,scientific advice and stakeholder input need improvement. Morocco and Mauritania have a history of stockoverexploitation and mismanagement and octopus stocks are both overfished and experiencing overfishing. These countries haverecently tried to revitalize their fishery management systems but there is not a credible strategy to recover octopus stocks fromdepleted levels. Monitoring and enforcement need to be improved in these countries and although scientific advice exists, too oftentotal allowable catches (TACs) have been set too high in response to social and economic need and overfishing is most likely stilloccurring.

The majority of common octopus is caught either as a target species using pots and traps or in a mixed fisheryusing bottom (otter) trawls (industrial and coastal trawlers). Pots and traps tend to have no or very low levels ofbycatch due to they are non-lethal apprehension methods; therefore bycatch concerns in these fisheries are“non-existent” or “low”. Bottom trawling has higher discard rates as it catches a wide diversity of species. Thereare many regulations in place to help constrain bycatch of species of concern but some ETP (endangered,threatened or protected species) as skates or demersal sharks are still caught. The Spanish trawl fishery hasthe lowest bycatch rate (20%) of any of the trawl fisheries assessed. The Moroccan and the Portuguese trawlfisheries similar discard rates, averaging around 40%. The Mauritanian trawl fisheries have a discard rate of60%. As such, bycatch concerns in these fisheries are assessed as “moderate” or “high”.

Bottom trawling is more destructive to the local ecosystem than pot and trap fishing and can severely damagethe local benthos. Little is known about the long-term effects of removing the common octopus from theecosystem. Habitat impacts are a “moderate” conservation concern for bottom trawl fisheries and “low”conservation concern for pots and traps fisheries. In European waters, although there is a minimal level ofmitigation measures in place (e.g. permanent and temporary closed areas), these may not protect the mostvulnerable habitats in the area. Ecosystem-based management is currently being developed by the EuropeanCommission but this process is expected to take some time to be effective. Several initiatives exist in Mauritaniaand Morocco to improve ecosystem management but they are still in early stages. Ecosystem-basedmanagement in all regions is a “moderate” conservation concern.

The combination of individual criteria results in an overall rating of “Good Alternative” for the Spanish andPortuguese pot and trap fishery and “Avoid” for the trawl fisheries in all assessed countries. However, althoughthe Spanish and Portuguese pot-caught octopus is the preferred alternative, identifying the capture method maybe difficult and information for consumers nees improvement.

5

Final Seafood Recommendations

Summary

The Common octopus (Octopus vulgaris) is a benthic cephalopod distributed on rocky, sandy and muddybottoms from the coastline to the edge of the continental shelf (Mangold 1983). This species in a strict sensemay be restricted to the Mediterranean Sea and eastern Atlantic Ocean (Mangold 1998) although have longtime been considered cosmopolitan in temperate and tropical waters (Belcari et al. 2002). The following

SPECIES/FISHERY

CRITERION1: IMPACTSON THESPECIES

CRITERION 2:IMPACTS ONOTHERSPECIES

CRITERION 3:MANAGEMENTEFFECTIVENESS

CRITERION 4:HABITAT ANDECOSYSTEM

OVERALLRECOMMENDATION

Common octopusMauritania EasternCentral At lant ic,Bottom traw ls,Mauritania

Red (1.41) Crit ical (0.00) Red (1.41) Yellow (2.45) Avoid (0.00)

Common octopusMorocco EasternCentral At lant ic,Bottom traw ls,Morocco

Red (1.41) Crit ical (0.00) Red (1.41) Yellow (2.45) Avoid (0.00)

Common octopusPortugal NortheastAt lant ic, Bottomtraw ls, Portugal

Yellow (2.64) Red (1.37) Red (1.41) Yellow (2.60) Avoid (1.91)

Common octopusSpain NortheastAt lant ic, Bottomtraw ls, Spain

Yellow (2.64) Red (1.45) Red (1.41) Yellow (2.60) Avoid (1.94)

Common octopusPortugal NortheastAt lant ic, Pots,Portugal

Yellow (2.64) Green (5.00) Red (2.00) Yellow (3.00) Good Alternative(2.98)

Common octopusSpain NortheastAt lant ic, Pots, Spain

Yellow (2.64) Green (5.00) Red (2.00) Yellow (3.00) Good Alternative(2.98)

Common octopusPortugal NortheastAt lant ic, Traps(unspecified),Portugal

Yellow (2.64) Yellow (2.71) Red (2.00) Yellow (3.00) Good Alternative(2.56)

Common octopusSpain NortheastAt lant ic, Traps(unspecified), Spain

Yellow (2.64) Yellow (2.71) Red (2.00) Yellow (3.00) Good Alternative(2.56)

6

Seafood Watch reports provides recommendations for the common octopus (Octopus vulgaris) fishery located inthe Northeast and Eastern Central Atlantic area (Spain, Portugal, Morocco and Mauritania). The Good Alternative rank for common octopus from the pot fishery in Spain and Portugal is driven by thecombination of high level of selectivity, relatively low conservation concern for stock status and habitat impacts,and high conservation concern over management of the fishery's impacts.

The Good Alternative rank for common octopus from the Portuguese and Spanish trap fishery is driven by thecombination of a medium level of selectivity, relatively low conservation concern for stock status and habitatimpacts, and high conservation concern over management of the fishery's impacts.

The Avoid rank for common octopus from the Portuguese and Spanish trawl fishery is driven by highconservation concerns over impacts on European hake populations and other by-catch species as ocellateskates, sharks and loggerhead turtles; and high conservation concern over management of the fishery'simpacts.

The Avoid rank for common octopus from the Mauritanian and Moroccan trawl fishery is driven by highconservation concerns over stock status, impacts on some overfished (e.g. axillary seabream, bluespottedseabream, pandora, european hake, etc) and protected species (sharks and ocellate skates); and managementof the fishery's impacts on octopus populations.

Eco-Certification Information

Part of the octopus trap fishery in Asturias (North of Spain) is being pre-assessed by Bureau veritas to get theMSC certificate. The fishery is undertaken by 31 vessels from 4 fishing villages which catch an average of 116tonnes of octopus per annum (data 2011). Interest in a MSC pre-assessment has been also identified in an trapoctopus fishery in the Algarve (south of Portugal).

Scoring Guide

Scores range from zero to five where zero indicates very poor performance and five indicates the fishingoperations have no significant impact.

Final Score = geometric mean of the four Scores (Criterion 1, Criterion 2, Criterion 3, Criterion 4).

Best Choice/Green = Final Score >3.2, and no Red Criteria, and no Critical scoresGood Alternative/Yellow = Final score >2.2-3.2, and neither Harvest Strategy (Factor 3.1) nor BycatchManagement Strategy (Factor 3.2) are Very High Concern , and no more than one Red Criterion, and noCritical scoresAvoid/Red = Final Score ≤2.2, or either Harvest Strategy (Factor 3.1) or Bycatch Management Strategy(Factor 3.2) is Very High Concern or two or more Red Criteria, or one or more Critical scores.

Because effect ive management is an essent ial component of sustainable fisheries, Seafood Watch issues an Avoidrecommendation for any fishery scored as a Very High Concern for either factor under Management (Criterion 3).

2

2

7

Introduction

Scope of the analysis and ensuing recommendation

The following Seafood Watch reports provides recommendations for the common octopus (Octopus vulgaris)fishery located in the Northeast and Eastern Central Atlantic (Spain, Portugal, Morocco and Mauritania) area.This fishery is undertaken by both small-scale vessels working with artisanal gears (mainly pots and traps) andcommercial trawlers fishing on the continental shelf in a multi-species fishery which includes the catch of othercephalopod species (Sepia sp., Loligo sp.) and demersal fish (Merluccius sp., Trachurus sp.). Often the termspot and trap are used interchangeably, but they are distinct gears in octopus fisheries; pots are clay or plasticvessels which the animal can enter and escape and traps only allow entry.

Recommendations are provided for the gears that catch a significant volume of common octopus which areexported to foreign markets.

Species Overview

Commercial octopus landings in the region of assessment include three species: common octopus(Octopus vulgaris) and horned octopus (Eledone cirrhosa), plus musky octopus (Eledone moschata) in the Southof Spain and Portugal. Landings are primarily the common octopus.

The common octopus is a benthic cephalopod distributed on rocky, sandy and muddy bottoms from the coastlineto the edge of the continental shelf (Mangold 1983). This species is found in temperate and tropical watersaround the world (Belcari et al. 2002). It is a short-lived species, extremely dependent on the seasonal andinterannual variability of environmental conditions (Sobrino et al. 2002), (Sonderblhom et al. 2014), (Otero etal. 2008). Common octopus (Octopus vulgaris) is one of the most important species for the industrial and thesmall-scale fleets which operate in the Iberian Peninsula and in the Northwestern Africa upwelling system(Balguerias et al. 2000).

Spain and Portugal:

In Iberian waters the common octopus stock is assessed by the International Council for the Exploration of theSea (ICES). Because it is a sedentary species, the ICES working group on cephalopod fisheries (WGCEPH)subdivides the stock into three areas: VIIIc (North of Spain), IXa-North (Portugal) and XIa-South (Guf of Cadiz,which includes the South of Portugal and Spain); although there are no genetic studies which support this stocksubdivision. The fisheries in the area are regulated by both the European Union through the Common FisheriesPolicy (CFP) and the Spanish and Portuguese national authorities.

In Spain more than 87% of octopodidae caught along the Spanish coast are common octopus. In the North,most of the O. vulgaris is caught by the artisanal fleet using traps, comprising more than 98% of octopuslandings. The rest of the O. vulgaris landings are reported by the trawl fleet. However, this species is caught bythe bottom-trawl fleet in the Gulf of Cadiz (South of Spain, ICES subdivision IXa-South), accounting for around60% of total catch on average, and the remaining 40% by the artisanal fleet using mainly clay pots and hand-jigs (ICES 2012). Subdivision IXa-South contributes to the total landings from the Division IXa with variablepercentages that ranged between 29% in 2004 and 82% in 2005, with a 52% on average through the timeseries. Possibly, such oscillations may be related to environmental changes (Sobrino et al. 2002) (Silva et al.2012) (ICES 2012).

In Portugal, common octopus is also the most important octopus species caught by both small-scale vesselsusing artisanal gears (pots and traps) and bottom trawlers. Directed trawling contributes approximately 10% ofthe total trawl landings. The majority of the catches come from artisanal polyvalent fleet. The trawl fleet

8

comprises two components: trawl fleet fishing for fish and trawl fleet fishing for crustaceans. The trawl fleetfishing for fish operates off the entire coast while the trawl fleet directed to crustaceans operates mainly in theSouthwest and South, in deep waters, where crustaceans are more abundant. Octopus catches for thecrustacean trawl fleet are negligible. In the fish trawl fleet three metiers can be identified: bottom otter trawlsdirected to cephalopods (targeting octopuses and squids); bottom otter trawls directed to horse mackerel(Trachurus trachurus) and bottom otter trawls directed to mixed fishes (trips targeting a mixture of species ashorse mackerel, hake (Merluccius merluccius), pouting (Trisopterus luscus) and axillary seabream (Pagellusacarne) among others. The bottom otter trawls directed to mixed fishes is the most important group,constituting 44% to 51% of all fish trips (ICES 2012).Most of the horned octopus E. cirrhosa and musky octopus (Eledone moschata) are caught by the bottom-trawlfleet as a by-catch in both countries and due its low commercial value most of them are discarded (Silva et al.2004).

EU fisheries management relies on data collected, managed and supplied by EU countries under the DataCollection Framework. Spanish landings data on cephalopods are collected annually both by the InstitutoEspañol de Oceanografía’s (IEO) Sampling and Information Network and by the AZTI Foundation. In Portugal thePortuguese Sea and Atmosphere Institute (IPMA, former IPIMAR) is responsible for sampling from ICES DivisionIXa under the Data Collection Framework. The sampling covers the otter bottom trawl for crustaceans and theotter bottom trawl for demersal fish.

In Europe the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) is the EU’s instrument for managing fisheries and aquaculture.The new CFP entered into force on 1 January 2014. The main objective of the new CFP is to provide the basisfor sustainable fisheries within and beyond Community waters taking into account environmental, economic andsocial aspects and applying good governance principles. It will radically transform fishing practices in Europeand includes as priorities: firm dates to ban fish discards, a legally binding commitment to fish at sustainablelevels and decentralized decision making, allowing Member States to agree to measures appropriate to theirfisheries. European countries have to adapt the CFP principles to their national legislation (EuropeanCommission 2014).

In Spain, the principal management body for fisheries is the Ministry of Fisheries. However, some of theircompetencies are delegated in the autonomous communities where regional fishing plans have beenimplemented with the objective of reducing fishing effort (IBERMIX project 2004).

In Portugal, fisheries are managed by the Portuguese Fishery Management Authority (presently Direcção Geralde Recursos Naturais, Segurança e Serviços Marítimos - DGRM). The octopus trap and pot fishery is regulatedby both the Portaria 1102-D/2000 and the Portaria 230/2012; and the trawl fishery is regulated by the Portaria1102-E/2000. These regulations include management measures such as area and time restrictions, number ofpots and traps by vessel, minimum mesh size, etc.

East Africa:In Morocco and Mauritania fish stocks are assessed internationally by the Fishery Committee for the EasternCentral Atlantic (FAO/CECAF) working group on demersal resources-subgroup north; and by local scientificinstitutes, the Mauritanian Institute of Oceanographic Research and Fisheries (IMROP) in Mauritania and theNational Institute for Fisheries Research (INRH) in Morocco. Three main bottoms are found along the northwestAfrican coast, more or less coinciding with the distribution zones of the three octopus stocks of the subregion.From north to south these are: i) the zone between Cape Bojador (26 ºN) and Cape Blanc (21 ºN) (Moroccanstock); ii) the zone between Cape Blanc (21 ºN) and the mouth of the Senegal river (16 ºN) (Mauritanian stock);and iii) the zone between the mouth of the Senegal river (16 ºN) and the border with Guinea-Bissau (12 ºN)(FAO/CECAF 2012), which is not assessed in this report. The fisheries in Morocco and Mauritania are regulatedby the Fisheries department (MPM) and the Fisheries and Maritime Economy Department (FMEM) respectively.

9

The ocean off Morocco's Atlantic coast is one of the richest fishing grounds in the world and its coastline,including the Western Sahara, a former Spanish colony, covers 4,500 km along the Mediterranean Sea andAtlantic Ocean. Fishing has been a major industry in Morocco since the 1930s and the industry experiencedtremendous growth during the 1980s. The Moroccan fish industry is strongly export-oriented, and about 80% ofproduction is supplied to EU member states (Rojo-Diaz & Pitcher 2005).

Three main fleets work in Moroccan waters: the Moroccan small-scale fleet, consisting mainly of small woodendories; the more modern coastal fleet, which consists of medium-sized trawlers, purse seiners and long-liners;and the industrial fleet, which is made up almost exclusively of large freezer trawlers. Bottom trawlers fishingfor cephalopods and demersal species represent, on average, 87% of the total of the industrial fleet, andoperate in the Sahara zone. Foreign vessels, mainly from Spain, Eastern Europe, Japan and Korea, have alsofished extensively in Moroccan waters (Baddyr & Guénette 2001) in the past (Spanish cephalopodiers leftMorocco in 1999). A new agreement EU-Morocco has been recently signed, but the octopus fishery has notbeen included.

In Morocco the Fisheries departament (MPM) is the national authority responsible for the monitoring andevaluation of fisheries policies. The scietific body which assists the MPM is the National Institute of FisheriesResearch (INRH). The octopus fishery is managed by a management plan first implemented in 2001. The mainpoint of the plan, which has been revised several times, is a seasonal quota which is determined before eachseason based on the results of the stock abundance survey carried out yearly by the INRH. That seasonal quotais distributed among the segments according to the following key: 63% for industrial trawlers, 26% for artisanalfishing and 11% for coastal fishing (Faraj 2009).

The cephalopod fishery in Mauritania started in 1965. Since then Japanese, Korean, Libyan, Spanish,Portuguese, Chinese and Mauritanian fleets have all exploited these resources. Currently, some 200 Mauritanianfreezer trawlers, most of them re-flagged from other nationalities, and a substantial artisanal fleet of around900 canoes fishing with pots (poulpiers), continue to fish the cephalopods in Mauritania. Since 1995 Spanishvessels returned to the fishery after several decades of absence, with around 25 freezer trawlers involved in thefishery during the last years. However, this fishery was closed when the last FPA expired in August 2012, as itwas not included in the fishing opportunities established by the new fishing protocols. Octopus (Octopusvulgaris) was the target species in this fishery followed by cuttlefish (mainly Sepia hierredda), squid (Loligovulgaris) and a miscellaneous group of many different finfish species (FAO/CECAF 2012) (CSC 2013) (STECF2013).

The Fisheries and Maritime Economy Department (FMEM) is the national authority responsible for thepreparation, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of fisheries policies in Mauritania. It is assisted by theInstitut Mauritanien de Recherches Océanographiques et des Pêches (IMROP) which is responsible for research,data collection, and the Délégation à la Surveillance des Pêches et au Contrôle en Mer, which is in charge ofcontrol and surveillance operations and the enforcement of fisheries regulations. Also, the SociétéMauritanienne de Commercialisation des produits de la Pêche (SMCP) is a public body established in partnershipbetween the State and shipowners in order to organize the marketing of fish and fish products, especiallyfrozen cephalopods, largely composed of octopuses. The current institutional and policy framework wasestablished by the FMEM in 1998. It has three objectives: sustainable exploitation of marine resources, betterintegration of fisheries within the national economy and the optimization of fishing rent.

Production Statistics

The importance of cephalopods as a world-wide fisheries resource continues to increase. Cephalopods werehistorically important, equally as target species and bycatch, in the coastal hand-fisheries of numerous countriesof the world, but now have major international fisheries directly targeting them (Guerra et al. 1994).Official landings for octopodidae species in the four countries under study from 2007 to 2011 are shown in the

10

table below (adapted from FAO FishStatJ 2011):

Table 2. Octopodidae landings in Spain, Portugal, Morocco and Mauritania in MT (FAO FishStatJ 2011)Commercial landings of octopods in Spain comprise common octopus (Octopus vulgaris) and Eledone spp. Totalannual catch ranged between 7031 MT in 2000 and 3895 MT in 2001, which represents the largest decreasealong the time series. A slight increase until reaching a peak in 2005 of 6039 MT can be observed. Afterwards,a new decreasing trend occurred until 2009 with 3935 MT, followed by a great increase in 2010 of about 46%with regard to 2009. More than 87% of octopodidae were caught along the Spanish coast (Divisions IXa andVIIIc), where common octopus (O. vulgaris) is the main species caught (Silva et al. 2012), (ICES 2012).

Due to the high demand of common octopus in the country, Spain also had a fleet of industrial bottom trawlersworking in the North of Africa (Morocco, Mauritania, Senegal and Guinea Bissau) where this species was directlycaught as a target and as a by-catch in some demersal fisheries. In 2011, 5317 tonnes of octopus were caughtin the area, mainly in Mauritania. However, due to new restrictions in the agreement EU-Mauritania, the Spanishoctopus fleet left the country in 2012.

Octopus vulgaris landings in Portuguese waters are recorded nationally since 1927 and by region and port since1970s. Biological data collection started in 1990s. When analysing octopus historical landings, a markedincrease is observed from 1000 MT, in the first years of dataseries (1920s) to a historical maximum in the mid-2000s of close to 13,000 MT. When analysing the landing dataseries, more in detail, three stability periodsdivided by quick rises are observed. Within these periods, non-significant trends are detected. The increasingcatch over the whole time period may be attributable to technical evolution of fishing methods (ICES 2013).

In Morocco, the octopus catch trend is practically the same for all the different sectors of the fleet. Between1991 and 1997, a general decrease in catch was seen. Total catch in 1997 was half of the 1991 level, that is50,000 MT. Subsequently, the situation improved until 2000, the year in which a record 107,000 MT was caughtof which 42 percent by the artisanal sector. Catches continually declined between 2000 and 2004, the year inwhich they reach a minimum of 18,000 MT. Over the last years, octopus catches in Moroccan waters havestabilized at around 30,000 MT.

Finally, overall catches of octopus in Mauritania in the period 1990-2008 have ranged from a minimum of 17,400MT in 1998 and a maximum of 44,600 MT in 1992. Mauritanian catches stabilized around 10,000-15,000 MTduring the 2000s, followed by an important decrease in 2010 (6500 MT) and a recovery in the following year(11,000 MT). After peaking in year 2000 with 13,000 MT, European (mainly Spanish) catches showed acontinuous decreasing trend. This represented a catch fall of 61% during the last 12 years period, until the end

Country FAO Code Area 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Mauritania Octopus nei Eastern Central Atlantic 11525 7605 12313 15801 16716

Morocco Octopus nei Eastern Central Atlantic 30573 53411 57738 30137 30757

Portugal Common octopus Northeast Atlantic 5238 9160 6720 10454 7199

Portugal Horned octopus Northeast Atlantic 571 174 187 253 129

Portugal Octopus nei Eastern Central Atlantic 18 299 221 129 164

Portugal Octopus nei Northeast Atlantic 3834 4417 1128 100 50

Spain Octopus nei Eastern Central Atlantic 5134 5792 6752 4759 5317

Spain Octopus nei Northeast Atlantic 5469 6835 4550 6998 5329

11

of this fishery in August 2012 (CSC 2013) (STECF 2013).

Importance to the US/North American market.

The top five nations exporting octopus into the U.S. are Spain (23%), China (19%), Philippines (18%),Indonesia (10%), and Thailand (7%) (NMFS 2014). The database documenting US imports does notdifferentiate between species or between frozen, dried, or brined octopus, so it is difficult to determine howmuch of each octopus species is imported.

Octopus imports from Spain, Portugal, Morocco and Mauritania between 2010 and 2013 are shown in the tablebelow (adapted from NFMS). Given that the major octopus species fished from these countries is the commonoctopus, O. vulgaris, it is assumed that the majority of the octopus imported into the US from these countries isO. vulgaris.

Imports from Spain have tripled in the last four years, raising from 1,093,106 kilos in 2010 to 3,550,382 kilos in2013. Imports from Portugal have nearly quadrupled from 211,874 kilos in 2010 to 792,072 kilos in 2013. It isimportant to highlight that in the last year nearly 70% of the octopus from both countries was imported frozenand 30% prepared/preserved. A very low percentage were octopus products prepared dinners.

Imports from Morocco and Mauritania seem to be less important, 283,345 and 7,962 kilos respectively in 2013.However, the Moroccan fishery has historically dominated the Japanese market, being surpassed by Mauritaniain 2004 (Globefish 2007). US sushi restaurants generally use octopus (tako) imported from Japan. It is often thecase, however, that the octopus originates elsewhere – most typically from both these countries – and is sent toJapan for processing and re-export. Moreover, as stated in the production statistics section, much of the Spanishand Portuguese octopus exported to the U.S. market in the last years really had its origin in the North of Africa(mainly Morocco and Mauritania, and to a lesser extent Senegal). It was primarily landed in Las Palmas (CanaryIslands) and later re-exported to other countries.

The total amount of common octopus imported from the four countries was 4,633,761 kilos which resulted in $29,6 million.

2010 2011 2012

Kilos Dollars Kilos Dollars Kilos

Spain

OctopusFrozen/Dried/Salted/Brine

1,093,106 7,039,347 1,329,176 12,126,260 1,850,595 16,893,304

Octopus NSPFprepared/preserved

0 0 0 0 774,793 4,726,307

Octopus live/fresh 0 0 0 0 0

Octopus productsprepared dinners

0 0 0 0 120,214

Total Spain 1,093,106 7,039,347 1,329,176 12,126,260 2,745,602 22,487,689


194,811 1,306,247 594,788 5,632,747 566,060 4,952,781


0 0 0 0 129,482

12

Table 1. Octopus imports from Spain, Portugal, Morocco and Mauritania between 2010 and 2013 (adapted fromNMFS).

Common and market names.

The only commercial name used in U.S. for Octopus vulgaris is common octopus. No other commercial nameshave been reported.

Primary product forms

Octopus is available in seafood markets or specialty grocery stores in a myriad of forms. Live, fresh, dried,frozen, cured, salted, and brined octopus are all available to the public. However, common octopus importedfrom the northeast and central Atlantic is primarily sold frozen. Other products identified in U.S. supermarketsare whole cooked octopus and canned octopus in sauce (olive oil, soybean sauce, garlic sauce, etc).

Portugal

Octopus live/fresh 17,063 100,379 406 6,181 0


0 0 0 0 0

Total Portugal 211,874 1,406,626 595,194 5,638,928 695,542 5,515,669

Morocco


26,164 306,462 18,568 259,299 62,803


0 0 0 0 0

Octopus live/fresh 0 0 0 0 0


0 0 0 0 0

Total Morocco 26,104 306,462 18,568 259,299 62,803

Mauritania


No data available

13,517 118,732 245


0 0 0

Octopus live/fresh 0 0 0


0 0 0

Total Mauritania 13,517 118,732 245

Total 1,331,144 8,752,435 1,956,455 18,143,219 3,504,192 28,819,185

13

AssessmentThis section assesses the sustainability of the fishery(s) relative to the Seafood Watch Criteria for Fisheries,available at http://www.seafoodwatch.org.

Criterion 1: Impacts on the species under assessmentThis criterion evaluates the impact of fishing mortality on the species, given its current abundance. The inherentvulnerability to fishing rating influences how abundance is scored, when abundance is unknown.

The final Criterion 1 score is determined by taking the geometric mean of the abundance and fishing mortalityscores. The Criterion 1 rating is determined as follows:

Score >3.2=Green or Low ConcernScore >2.2 and ≤3.2=Yellow or Moderate ConcernScore ≤2.2=Red or High Concern

Rating is Critical if Factor 1.3 (Fishing Mortality) is Critical

Criterion 1 Summary

COMMON OCTOPUS

Region | MethodInherentVulnerability Abundance Fishing Mortality Score

Mauritania/EasternCentral Atlantic Bottomtrawls | Mauritania

3.00: Low 2.00: High Concern 1.00: High Concern Red (1.41)

Morocco/Eastern CentralAtlantic Bottom trawls |Morocco

3.00: Low 2.00: High Concern 1.00: High Concern Red (1.41)

Portugal/NortheastAtlantic Bottom trawls |Portugal

3.00: Low 3.00: ModerateConcern

2.33: ModerateConcern

Yellow (2.64)

Spain/Northeast AtlanticBottom trawls | Spain



Yellow (2.64)

Portugal/NortheastAtlantic Pots | Portugal



Yellow (2.64)

Spain/Northeast AtlanticPots | Spain



Yellow (2.64)

Portugal/NortheastAtlantic Traps(unspecified) | Portugal



Yellow (2.64)

Spain/Northeast AtlanticTraps (unspecified) |Spain



Yellow (2.64)

14

Criterion 1 Assessment

SCORING GUIDELINES

Factor 1.1 - Inherent Vulnerability

Low—The FishBase vulnerability score for species is 0-35, OR species exhibits life history characteristics thatmake it resilient to fishing, (e.g., early maturing).Medium—The FishBase vulnerability score for species is 36-55, OR species exhibits life historycharacteristics that make it neither particularly vulnerable nor resilient to fishing, (e.g., moderate age atsexual maturity (5-15 years), moderate maximum age (10-25 years), moderate maximum size, and middleof food chain).High—The FishBase vulnerability score for species is 56-100, OR species exhibits life history characteristicsthat make is particularly vulnerable to fishing, (e.g., long-lived (>25 years), late maturing (>15 years), lowreproduction rate, large body size, and top-predator). Note: The FishBase vulnerability scores is an index ofthe inherent vulnerability of marine fishes to fishing based on life history parameters: maximum length, ageat first maturity, longevity, growth rate, natural mortality rate, fecundity, spatial behaviors (e.g., schooling,aggregating for breeding, or consistently returning to the same sites for feeding or reproduction) andgeographic range.

Factor 1.2 - Abundance

5 (Very Low Concern)—Strong evidence exists that the population is above target abundance level (e.g.,biomass at maximum sustainable yield, BMSY) or near virgin biomass.4 (Low Concern)—Population may be below target abundance level, but it is considered not overfished3 (Moderate Concern) —Abundance level is unknown and the species has a low or medium inherentvulnerability to fishing.2 (High Concern)—Population is overfished, depleted, or a species of concern, OR abundance is unknownand the species has a high inherent vulnerability to fishing.1 (Very High Concern)—Population is listed as threatened or endangered.

Factor 1.3 - Fishing Mortality

5 (Very Low Concern)—Highly likely that fishing mortality is below a sustainable level (e.g., below fishingmortality at maximum sustainable yield, FMSY), OR fishery does not target species and its contribution to themortality of species is negligible (≤ 5% of a sustainable level of fishing mortality).3.67 (Low Concern)—Probable (>50%) chance that fishing mortality is at or below a sustainable level, butsome uncertainty exists, OR fishery does not target species and does not adversely affect species, but itscontribution to mortality is not negligible, OR fishing mortality is unknown, but the population is healthy andthe species has a low susceptibility to the fishery (low chance of being caught).2.33 (Moderate Concern)—Fishing mortality is fluctuating around sustainable levels, OR fishing mortality isunknown and species has a moderate-high susceptibility to the fishery and, if species is depleted,reasonable management is in place.1 (High Concern)—Overfishing is occurring, but management is in place to curtail overfishing, OR fishingmortality is unknown, species is depleted, and no management is in place.0 (Critical)—Overfishing is known to be occurring and no reasonable management is in place to curtailoverfishing.

COMMON OCTOPUS


15


MAURITANIA/EASTERN CENTRAL ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, MAURITANIAMOROCCO/EASTERN CENTRAL ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, MOROCCOPORTUGAL/NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, PORTUGALSPAIN/NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, SPAINPORTUGAL/NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, POTS, PORTUGALSPAIN/NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, POTS, SPAINPORTUGAL/NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, TRAPS (UNSPECIFIED), PORTUGALSPAIN/NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, TRAPS (UNSPECIFIED), SPAIN

Low

Octopus vulgaris usually matures between 12 and 18 months and can live up to 24 months. The total numberof eggs laid by a female varies from 100,000 to 500,000 (Case 1999). The Common Octopus undergoesseasonal migrations (Case 1999)(Tsangridis et al. 2002), moving to coastal waters at the beginning of theyear (Quetglas et al. 1998) and congregating in shallow waters to spawn. The breeding season extends fromFebruary to October, with spawning peaks in April–May and August (Sobrino et al. 2002).Recruitment success is largely associated with the environmental oceanographic conditions (ICES 2012)(Sonderblohm et al. 2014). Therefore, oscillations in common octopus abundance may be related toenvironmental changes such as rainfall and discharges of rivers (Sobrino et al. 2002).

The Productivity-Susceptibility Analysis (PSA) is a semi-quantitative assessment tool that relies on the lifehistory characteristics of a stock and it is used to assess the susceptibility of the stock to the fishery inquestion. For invertebrate species, Seafood Watch uses a PSA to assess their inherent vulnerability. The PSAscore for common octopus is 2.5 (average age at maturity <5 years, average maximum age <10 years,reproductive strategy = demersal egg layer, density dependance = no depensatory or compensatory dynamicsdemostrated or likely), corresponding to a "low vulnerability".

Although its migratory behavior and spawning spikes do impart a certain level of vulnerability, due to its highfecundity, low age at maturity, a relatively short lifespan, and rapid growth rate O. vulgaris can be consideredas a naturally resilient organism.

Justification:

Figure 1 Results from the Seafood Watch inherent vulnerability rubric for invertebrate species (referred to asa Productivity-Susceptibility Analysis (PSA) in the text) for Octopus vulgaris (SFW criteria document, pg. 4).Attribute scores can range from 1 to 3 with higher scores signifying more resilient life history attributes.Invertebrate species with average attribute scores between 2.46 and 3 are deemed to have a ‘lowvulnerability'."

16

MAURITANIA/EASTERN CENTRAL ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, MAURITANIA

High Concern

The stock is listed as overfished by the Food and Agriculture Organization/Fishery Committee for the EasternCentral Atlantic (hereinafter FAO/CECAF) working group.

The main management advisory body for this stock is FAO/CECAF. Octopus vulgaris is regularly assessed bythe Working Group on demersal resources in the northern zone which met in Agadir (Morocco) in February2010 and in Malaga in November 2013. The results from the 2013 assessment has not yet been formallypublished and therefore the information provided may be considered as preliminary.

Reference points defined for small pelagics in the FAO Working Group held in Banjul (Gambia) in 2006 werealso adopted for the octopus stock. These are B and F for Limit Reference Points and B and F forTarget Reference Points (FAO 2006). The biomass limit reference points was B = 27,500 MT and the targetreference point was B = 30,240 MT (STECF 2013).

The Schaefer dynamic production model was used to assess the Cape Blanc (Mauritanian) stock. Resultsshowed that biomass in 2008 was below that producing the target biomass (B /B = 86%) (STECF 2013).Although B is not provided in the STECF report, back calculations show B = 26,006 MT, such thatB /B = 95%. Based on data through 2012 (calculated using a dynamic production model in a bayesianstatistical framework)the Mauritanian-EU Joint Scientific Committee found B /B = 65% (CSC2013). Current biomass is below the limit reference point (in both stock assessments); the Mauritanian CapeBlanc stock is overfished. These results were the same as those from the previous assessment in2010 (Chassot et al. 2010), despite the reduction in fishing effort and the improvement of the stock situationdetected in scientific surveys since 2006 (STECF 2013). According to the 2010 stock assessment andsubsequent work by Ono et al. (Chassot et al. 2010) (Ono et al. 2012) the stock is less than one fifth of itsvirgin size.

Ono et al. and the most recent STECF document highlight that the current stock assessment model, whichdoes not take the effect of environmental variability on the stock into account, is not the appropriate approachfor a stock whose abundance is tied to environmental forcing (Ono et al. 2012)(STECF 2013) . However, thealternative models used by Ono et al. reproduced the overfished conditions demonstrated by the currentShaffer dynamic production model (Ono et al. 2012).

Due to the Cape Blanc stock's overfished condition, abundance scores as "high concern".

MSY MSY 0.1 0.1

MSY

0.1

cur 0.1

cur cur

cur MSY

cur MSY

Justification:

The FAO/CECAF Working Group on the Assessment of Demersal Resources – Subgroup North is in charge ofassessing fisheries resources in the area. The working group use the indice B/B as Limit Reference Point,while the indice B/B is used as Target Reference Points. B /B is defined as the relationship between theestimated biomass for the last year and the corresponding biomass at the target reference point B (FAO2006).

In 2012 the fishing agreement between Mauritania and the EU ended. A Joint Scientific Committee wasconvened in April 2013 to update information on stocks. On octopus, despite recognizing a strong recovery inthe past two years, it concluded that the stocks remained overexploited in 2012. The Committee stressedthere was a degree of uncertainty in evaluation of octopus stocks due mainly to the simulation model used andto the quality of data (e.g. data on declarations of catches and discards). It also noted that the Mauritanianfleet itself has the capacity to absorb available stocks of octopus, leaving no surplus for the EU fleet (EuropeanParliament 2013). The Spanish Oceanographic (Institute Instituto Español de Oceanografía – IEO) also

BMSY

0.1 cur 0.1

0.1.

17

produced an octopus stock status report, which showed that the conservation status of this species was notpoor, but in fact almost at maximum sustainable yield biomass levels (32,000 MT), on the heels of a c. 30%reduction in the fishing effort in recent years. However, this study was not taken into consideration by theCommission, which instead drew on an assessment by the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee forFisheries (STECF) (European Parliament 2013).

MOROCCO/EASTERN CENTRAL ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, MOROCCO

High Concern

The octopus stock was listed as overfished by the FAO/CECAF working group based on the most recentpublished stock assessment (2007). Recent results from the INRH (National Fisheries Research Institute) trawlsurvey show increases in the biomass of octopus in 2013 due to favorable bioclimatic conditions. However,there is no updated information about how the stock is performing relative to reference points. Based onresults of the most recent available assessment, stock status is assessed as "high concern". The main management advisory body is the FAO Committee for the Eastern Central Atlantic Fisheries(CECAF). Octopus vulgaris is regularly assessed by the Working Group on demersal resources in the northernzone which met in Agadir (Morocco) in February 2010 and in Malaga in November 2013. However, the resultsfrom the assessments have not yet been formally published.

The last published assessment of the FAO/CECAF Working Group on the Assessment of Demersal Resources –Subgroup North was launched in 2012. The stock assessment dates back from 2007. Octopus stock status forthe three North African stocks (Dakhla (Morocco), Cape Blanc (Mauritania) and the Senegal - the Gambia stockwas assessed using the Schaefer dynamic production model. Data from 26 °N to 20°50 ’N from the threesectors of the national fleet and the Spanish industrial fleet were used in the Moroccan stock assessmentmodel. The Working Group used two different abundance estimates, the CPUEs (Catch per unit effort) fromthe ocean-going Moroccan cephalopod fishery and those of the trawl surveys between Cape Bojador andLagouira. The results indicate that the current biomass was half the target biomass B (B /B = 55%)and below the limit biomass B (B /B = 50%); the Dakhla octopus stock is overfished (Figure 1)(FAO/CECAF 2012).

The most recent INRH (National Fisheries Research Institute) trawl surveys, carried out between April andMay 2013, concluded that favorable bioclimatic conditions in spring 2013 (coinciding with the spring closedseason) greatly contributed to the improvement of the octopus status compared to that in spring 2012. Thebiomass for this species was a 130% higher than the biomass in the 2012 spring survey (El Ouadghiri 2013).

0.1 cur 0.1

MSY cur MSY

Justification:

18

Figure 2 Figure 1: Stock abundance index of Morocco's common octopus stock (Adapted from FAO/CECAF2012 and STECF 2014)

PORTUGAL/NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, PORTUGALPORTUGAL/NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, POTS, PORTUGALPORTUGAL/NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, TRAPS (UNSPECIFIED), PORTUGAL

Moderate Concern

There is no formal stock assessment for common octopus in Portugal, so neither TACs nor stock referencepoints have been set.

Although, the octopus fisheries appear not to have a negative effect on the octopus population abundance atcurrent fishing pressure (ICES 2013), a decrease in mean octopus size has been detected (ICES 2013).

When analyzing historical octopus landings data, a marked increase is observed from 1000 MT, in the firstyears of the dataseries (1920s) to a historical maximum in the mid-2000s of near 13,000 MT (Figure 2). Theincreasing catch over the whole time period may be attributable to technical evolution of fishing methods(ICES 2013). In a study carried out by (Sonderblohm et al. 2014), monthly landings per unit effort (LPUE)series of Octopus vulgaris and environmental variables were recorded in the southwest Iberian Peninsula,south Portugal. The main trend in LPUE described a moderate steady increase in LPUE during the last 10years, suggesting that octopus abundance had increased from 1990 to 2010. The study concluded that strongcorrelations of the monthly octopus LPUE series, together with the annual life cycle, suggest that after

19

environmentally controlled recruitment, population dynamics is largely fishery driven, resulting in strongseasonality in the landings (Sonderblohm et al. 2014).

There is no evidence to suggest that stock is either above or below reference points and stock inherentvulnerability is low. Stock status is assessed therefore as moderate concern.

SPAIN/NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, SPAINSPAIN/NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, POTS, SPAINSPAIN/NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, TRAPS (UNSPECIFIED), SPAIN

Moderate Concern

There is no formal stock assessment for common octopus in Spain, so neither TACs nor reference points havebeen set. Knowledge of main population features are still scarce. As an example, there is only a weak stock–recruitment relationship for Octopus vulgaris in the Gulf of Cadiz based partially on the observation that thelowest observed stock levels in 1998, 2004 and 2011 were sufficient to rebuild the stock by the next year. If avery weak stock–recruit relationship is expected in cephalopods, the possibility of recruitment overfishing isreduced, although the possibility of poor recruitment remains (ICES 2013).

Since 1997 the Spanish bottom trawl survey ARSA ("South Atlantic Region Trawl survey") has been carriedout annually during November, in the Gulf of Cádiz (ICES Sub-division IXa south) to study the distribution andrelative abundance (in number and weight) of all demersal species in the area, as well to estimate biologicalparameters of the main commercial species (ICES 2012). A similar survey is carried out each March in samearea since 1993 (”Spanish bottom trawl survey spring ARSA”). Based on these studies, abundance hasoscillated over time, with the highest values in the second half of the time series. The maximum valueswere obtained in 2005 with 3.8 kg/haul and 9 individual/haul, followed by other lesser peaks in 2007, 2009and 1999. The lowest values were obtained in 2003 with 0.3 kg/haul and 0.3 individual/haul (Figure 2) (ICES2012). Studies carried out in the Gulf of Cádiz indicate that there may be an inverse relationship betweenenvironmental factors (i.e. the amount of rainfall in the previous year and the wind strength causingupwellings) and the abundance of this species (Sobrino et al. 2002).

There is no evidence to suggest that stock is either above or below reference points and stock inherentvulnerability is low. Stock status is assessed therefore as moderate concern.

Justification:

20


Figure 3 Figure 2: Evolution of the Octupus vulgaris biomass and abundance indices during Autumn ARSAbottom trawl surveys (1997-2011). Boxes mark parametric standard error of the stratified abundance index.Lines mark bootstrap confidence intervals (α =0.80, bootstrap iterations =1000) (ICES 2012).


High Concern

The last published assessment of the FAO/CECAF Working Group on the Assessment of Demersal Resources –Subgroup North (based on data through 2008) indicates that the Cape Blanc octopus stock (Mauritanianwaters) is experiencing overfishing (F /F = 150%) (F is the target reference point, the value ofF is not provided in this report) (STECF 2013). The Mauritanian-EU Joint Scientific Committee, convenedin April 2013, concluded that the stock continues to experience overfishing based on data through 2012(F /F = 133%) (F is the limit reference point) although some improvements in the last years wereidentified (CSC 2013). The Spanish Institute of Oceanography presented an analysis of historic CPUEs at thesame meeting. This report concluded that although the octopus stock has suffered negative impacts (biomassreduction from over 40,000 MT per year to 25,000 MT in recent years), octopus yields have doubled since thestart of exploitation. CPUEs in recent years (2009-2012) have very high values of over 1000 kg/fishing day,close to historical peaks, a clear sign of the ability of the stock to recover (CSC 2013).Although conflicting information exists, it seems that the stock is experiencing overfishing and fishing mortalityis assessed as high concern. The management measures in place are starting to improve the stock.

current 0.1 0.1

current

current MSY MSY

21

Justification:

The FAO/CECAF Working Group on the Assessment of Demersal Resources – Subgroup North is in charge ofassessing fisheries resources in the area. The working group use the indice F/F as Limit Reference Point,while the indice F/F is used as Target Reference Point. F corresponds to a level of fishing mortality atwhich the increase in long-term yield from a small increase in F is 10 percent of the increase in long-termyield obtained by the same small increase in F on a virgin stock (FAO 2006).

MSY

0.1 0.1


High Concern

In Morocco, 25,242 and 29,560 MT of common octopus were landed in 2012 and 2013 respectively (ONP2013).

The last published assessment from the FAO/CECAF Working Group on the Assessment of DemersalResources – Subgroup North, based on data through 2006 (but published in 2012), indicates that theMoroccan octopus stock is experiencing overfishing (F /F = 147% and F /F = 132%)(FAO/CECAF 2012).

Overfishing is currently occuring but management measures are in place to curtail overfishing (thesemeasures are described Criteria 3.1, Harvest Management Strategy). So, fishing mortality is assessed as highconcern.

current 0.1 current MSY

PORTUGAL/NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, PORTUGALSPAIN/NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, SPAINPORTUGAL/NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, POTS, PORTUGALSPAIN/NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, POTS, SPAINPORTUGAL/NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, TRAPS (UNSPECIFIED), PORTUGALSPAIN/NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, TRAPS (UNSPECIFIED), SPAIN

Moderate Concern

There is no formal stock assessment for common octopus in Europe, so neither TACs nor reference points(F ) have been set. Fishing mortality is unknown but ICES concluded in the Workshop on the Necessity forCrangon and Cephalopod Management (WKCCM) that there appears not to be a negative effect of octopusfisheries on the octopus populations at current fishing pressure (ICES 2013). Landing data for Spain andPortugal from 2000 to 2010 is shown in Figure 3 and Figure 4. Landing data seems to be very variable amongyears. Management measures are in place to control fishing effort.

F is unknown, effective management is in place. So, fishing mortality is assessed as moderate concern.

MSY

Justification:

22

Figure 4 Figure 3: Historical landings series of Octopus vulgaris from Division IXa deployed by Portuguesefleets (ICES 2013).

Figure 5 Figure 4: Landings (in MT) of Octopods (mainly Octopus vulgaris) by country (2000-2010).

23

Criterion 2: Impacts on other speciesAll main retained and bycatch species in the fishery are evaluated in the same way as the species underassessment were evaluated in Criterion 1. Seafood Watch defines bycatch as all fisheries-related mortality orinjury to species other than the retained catch. Examples include discards, endangered or threatened speciescatch, and ghost fishing.

To determine the final Criterion 2 score, the score for the lowest scoring retained/bycatch species is multipliedby the discard rate score (ranges from 0-1), which evaluates the amount of non-retained catch (discards) andbait use relative to the retained catch. The Criterion 2 rating is determined as follows:


Rating is Critical if Factor 2.3 (Fishing Mortality) is Crtitical

Criterion 2 Summary

Only the lowest scoring main species is/are listed in the table and text in this Criterion 2 section; a full list andassessment of the main species can be found in Appendix A.

®

COMMON OCTOPUS - MAURITANIA/EASTERN CENTRAL ATLANTIC - BOTTOM TRAWLS - MAURITANIA

Subscore: 0.00 Discard Rate: 0.90 C2 Rate: 0.00

SpeciesInherentVulnerability Abundance Fishing Mortality Subscore

Pandora 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 0.00:Critical Critical(0.00)

Ocellate skates(unspecified)

1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.41)

Bluespotted seabream 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.41)

Common cuttlefish 3.00:Low 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.41)

Mammals 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:ModerateConcern

Red (2.16)

Sharks 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:ModerateConcern

Red (2.16)

Senegalese hake 2.00:Medium 5.00:Very LowConcern

5.00:Very LowConcern

Green(5.00)

COMMON OCTOPUS - MOROCCO/EASTERN CENTRAL ATLANTIC - BOTTOM TRAWLS - MOROCCO


24


Common cuttlefish 3.00:Low 2.00:High Concern 0.00:Critical Critical(0.00)

European hake 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 0.00:Critical Critical(0.00)


1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.41)

Axillary seabream 2.00:Medium 2.00:High Concern 1.00:High Concern Red (1.41)

European squid 3.00:Low 3.00:ModerateConcern

1.00:High Concern Red (1.73)

Mammals 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:ModerateConcern

Red (2.16)

Sharks 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 2.33:ModerateConcern

Red (2.16)

COMMON OCTOPUS - PORTUGAL/NORTHEAST ATLANTIC - BOTTOM TRAWLS - PORTUGAL




1.00:High 1.00:Very HighConcern

2.33:ModerateConcern

Red (1.53)

Loggerhead turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very HighConcern


Red (1.53)

Sharks 1.00:High 1.00:Very HighConcern


Red (1.53)

European hake 2.00:Medium 3.00:ModerateConcern


Mammals 1.00:High 3.00:ModerateConcern


Yellow(2.64)

Common cuttlefish 3.00:Low 3.00:ModerateConcern

3.67:Low Concern Green(3.32)

European horse mackerel 2.00:Medium 3.00:ModerateConcern


Atlantic mackerel 2.00:Medium 4.00:Low Concern 5.00:Very LowConcern

Green(4.47)

Blue whiting 3.00:Low 4.00:Low Concern 5.00:Very LowConcern

Green(4.47)

25

COMMON OCTOPUS - PORTUGAL/NORTHEAST ATLANTIC - POTS - PORTUGAL



No other main species caught

COMMON OCTOPUS - PORTUGAL/NORTHEAST ATLANTIC - TRAPS (UNSPECIFIED) - PORTUGAL



Conger eel 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 3.67:Low Concern Yellow(2.71)

Velvet swimcrab 3.00:Low 3.00:ModerateConcern


COMMON OCTOPUS - SPAIN/NORTHEAST ATLANTIC - BOTTOM TRAWLS - SPAIN




1.00:High 1.00:Very HighConcern


Red (1.53)

Loggerhead turtle 1.00:High 1.00:Very HighConcern


Red (1.53)

Sharks 1.00:High 1.00:Very HighConcern


Red (1.53)

European hake 2.00:Medium 3.00:ModerateConcern


Mammals 1.00:High 3.00:ModerateConcern


Yellow(2.64)

Common cuttlefish 3.00:Low 3.00:ModerateConcern


European horse mackerel 2.00:Medium 3.00:ModerateConcern


Atlantic mackerel 2.00:Medium 4.00:Low Concern 5.00:Very LowConcern

Green(4.47)

Blue whiting 3.00:Low 4.00:Low Concern 5.00:Very LowConcern

Green(4.47)

26

The information to create the main species table in the Spanish and Portuguese trawl fisheries was extractedfrom three reports: (Campos et al. 2007) analyzed the Portuguese trawl fleet; (Fonseca et al. 2008) analyzedthe Portuguese cephalopod trawl fishery; and the (IBERMIX project 2004) carried out by scientific bodies fromSpain and Portugal for the European Commission to identify and categorize mixed species fisheries operating inthe Atlantic Iberian peninsula waters.

Nine (9) species were assessed in these two fisheries taking into account the Seafood Watch® criteria:The catch of the species in the fishery under assessment composes >5% of that fishery’s catch (Europeanhorse mackerel, common cuttlefish, blue whiting and Atlantic mackerel);The species is overfished (European hake)The species is depleted, a stock of concern, endangered, threatened, IUCN Near Threatened: ocellateskates, sharks, mammals and loggerhead turtle. In these last cases, ocellate skates, sharks and mammalswere assessed as group of species due to the lack of specific species information.

In the Spanish and Portuguese trap fisheries two main species (velvet swimcrab and European conger) wereassessed following the Seafood Watch® Criteria: "If there are no other “main species” besides the oneassessed under criterion 1, but the total catch of other discarded and retained species is >5% (13% in thiscase), assess the top 3 species by volume of catch (if there are only 1-2 other species caught, assess thosespecies).

No bycatch species are caught in the pot fisheries in Spain and Portugal.

In the octopus trawl fisheries in Spain and Portugal, ocellate skates, sharks and loggerhead turtles limit thescore for Criterion 2.

In 2002 the Mauritanian Institute for Oceanographic Research (IMROP) published an assessment for thecommercial stocks present in Mauritanian waters (FAO/COPACE 2005). Data from this report was used for theMauritanian trawl fishery. Qualitative data from (Balguerias et al. 2000) and (Guenette et al. 2001) was used forthe Moroccan trawl fishery.Eight (8) species/group of species were included in the main species table for the Mauritanian trawl fishery:

COMMON OCTOPUS - SPAIN/NORTHEAST ATLANTIC - POTS - SPAIN



No other main species caught

COMMON OCTOPUS - SPAIN/NORTHEAST ATLANTIC - TRAPS (UNSPECIFIED) - SPAIN



Conger eel 1.00:High 2.00:High Concern 3.67:Low Concern Yellow(2.71)

Velvet swimcrab 3.00:Low 3.00:ModerateConcern


27

The catch of the species in the fishery under assessment composes >5% of that fishery’s catch: commoncuttlefish and Senegalese hake;The species is overfished: bluespotted seabream and pandora.The species is depleted, a stock of concern, endangered, threatened, IUCN Near Threatened: ocellateskates, sharks, mammals and turtles.

And eight (8) species were assessed for the Moroccan trawl fishery:

The catch of the species in the fishery under assessment composes >5% of that fishery’s catch: commoncuttlefish and European squid;The species is overfished: European hake, common cuttlefish and axillary seabream.The species is depleted, a stock of concern, endangered, threatened, IUCN Near Threatened: ocellateskates, sharks, mammals and turtles.

In the Mauritanian octopus trawl fishery several species get the lowest score: bluespotted seabream, pandora,common cuttlefish, ocellate skates and sharks. The first three species because they are overfished and theirstock remain very low; and ocellate skates and sharks due to their vulnerability to fishing pressure, as somespecies are classified as endangered by the IUCN.

A similar situation is found in the octopus trawl fishery in Morocco. The lowest scores are for: axillaryseabream, common cuttlefish, European squid, European hake, ocellate skates and sharks, due to the samereasons as explained above. In this case four species are overfished: axillary seabream, common cuttlefish,European squid and European hake.


SCORING GUIDELINES

Factor 2.1 - Inherent Vulnerability(same as Factor 1.1 above)

Factor 2.2 - Abundance(same as Factor 1.2 above)

Factor 2.3 - Fishing Mortality(same as Factor 1.3 above)

OCELLATE SKATES (UNSPECIFIED)


MAURITANIA/EASTERN CENTRAL ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, MAURITANIAMOROCCO/EASTERN CENTRAL ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, MOROCCOPORTUGAL/NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, PORTUGALSPAIN/NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, SPAIN

High

Due to their typically vulnerable life cycle, characterized by slow growth rates, late maturity and low fecundity,elasmobranch species are highly susceptible to fishing mortality. On the fishbase website ocellate skates(skates in the genus Raja) are all classified as having low resilience and high (Raja undulata; score 65) orvery high vulnerability (Raja clavata, score 76) (Fishbase 2014).

28




High Concern

There are no reference points for skates in Mauritanian waters. However, on the Mauritanian continentalshelf, demersal biomass has been reduced by 75% over the past 25 years due to overfishing (Gascuel et al.2007). Abundance decreases in some species were quite marked, with both Raja species (R. miraletus and R.straeleni) showing annual declines of close to 10% (Gascuel et al. 2007). Due to the high likelihood that skatesare overfished, stock status is scored as "high concern".


High Concern

Based on survey results from 1942, 1962, 1974, and 1990, Morocco's elasmobrach abundances have declinedseverely (except for one family, the Scyliorhinidae)(Balguerias et al. 2000). The total number of families andspecies of elasmobranch represented in the surveys decreased from 1942 to 1990 (from 13 families and 29species in 1942 to only 6 families and 6 species in 1990)(Balguerias et al. 2000). Due to the high likelihoodthat skates are overfished in Morocco, stock status scores as "high concern".

PORTUGAL/NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, PORTUGALSPAIN/NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, SPAIN

Very High Concern

Several species of rays and skates (Raja clavata, R. montagui, R. asterias, Dipturus oxyrinchus, etc) occur inIberian waters. Some have low commercial value but they are normally found in Portuguese and Spanish fishmarkets (Ictioterm 2013)(Junta de Andalucia 2001). Raja clavata and Dipturus oxyrinchus are classified asNear Threatened and Raja undulata is classified as endangered by the IUCN (Ellis 2005)(Coelho et al. 2009).

Skate and ray fisheries are currently managed under a common TAC, although this complex comprisesspecies that have different vulnerabilities to exploitation. TAC advice is based on the status of the maincommercial species, with species-specific advice for other species also provided where relevant.Three commercial skate species (thornback ray, spotted ray, and cuckoo ray) show increasing trends inrelative abundance in fishery-independent trawl surveys. There is evidence of a long-term decline to depletedlevels in the relative abundance of one commercial species (Dipturus batis complex). Trends in the relativeabundance of two other commercial species (blonde ray, undulate ray) are unclear. The starry ray isan abundant non-commercial species and is almost exclusively discarded, and stock trends are decreasing.Discard survivorship is not known (STECF 2013).

Due to depletion of species within this group in addition to Raja undulata's IUCN status, stock status scores as"very high concern".


High Concern

No reference points have been set for these species in Mauritanian waters. However, (Gascuel et al. 2007)

29

estimated that the biomass of demersal species has been reduced by 75% in Mauritanian waters over thepast 25 years and they considered that it was due to overfishing (Gascuel et al. 2007). No managementmeasures to curtail overfishing on skates are in place.

Fishery contribution is unknown, but population of some species is depleted and no reasonable managementto curtail overfishing is in place. Therefore fishing mortality is considered as "high concern".


High Concern

Skates and rays are not assessed by the FAO/CECAF working group nor by the INRH and no reference pointshave been set for these species. Moreover, the available information for these species in the area is veryscarce. However, (Balguerias et al. 2000) studied the changes produced in the faunistic communities inMorocco in response to fishing. They suggested that the changes observed were caused by a combination offactors, including economic incentives as well as oceanographic variations and competition for food, whichultimately favoured benthic cephalopod populations at the cost of most fish populations (including skates andrays). Some skates present in the area are depleted and management measures to protect them have notbeen found. Therefore fishing mortality is considered as "high concern".


Moderate Concern

Demersal elasmobranch in this region are caught in mixed target and non-target fisheries. Most catches ofelasmobranchs in the Bay of Biscay (North of Spain) are from trawler fleets operating in Divisions VIIIa, b, dand IXa. Elasmobranch catches from western Iberian waters (ICES Division IXa) are mainly from thePortuguese polyvalent fleet and in particular from the métiers using nets or trammel nets.

There are no reference points set for these species. Skate and ray fisheries are currently managed under acommon TAC, although this complex comprises species that have different vulnerabilities to exploitation. TACadvice is based on the status of the main commercial species, with species-specific advice for other speciesalso provided where relevant. However, TACs alone cannot adequately manage these stocks as catches maystill be taken in mixed fisheries and discarded, even after the TAC is exhausted. Therefore, ICES recommendsthat new management measures such as closed areas/seasons or effort restrictions may better protectdemersal elasmobranchs. In particular, measures to protect spawning/nursery grounds would bebeneficial (STECF 2013) (ICES 2013e). There is ban on landing Raja undulata (undulate skate) in EU waters.

Due to its typically vulnerable life cycle, elasmobranch fishes are highly susceptible to fishing mortality. Inthese animals, overexploitation can occur even with low levels of fishing mortality (Stevens et al. 2000) andonce they start to decline it can take decades for populations to recover (Anderson 1990)(Coelho et al. 2009).Trawls normally catch smaller-sized and mostly immature specimens when compared to longlines, meaningthat they likely have a more detrimental effect on shark populations (Coelho et al. 2009). ICES recommends ageneral reduction in effort in XIa for 2014 (see figure) (STECF 2013)(ICES 2013e).

The contribution of this fishery to the mortality of occelate skates is unknown, but susceptibility of thesespecies to the trawl fishery is moderate to high. Therefore, fishing mortality is considered as "moderateconcern".

Justification:

30

Factor 2.4 - Discard Rate

Figure 6 Figure 5: ICES advice in rays and skates 2014 (Area and effort reduction)


40-60%

The vast majority of octopus sourced from the Saharan Bank and Ras Nouadhibou areas is caught by meansof bottom trawling. The discard rate (weighted discard rate) in the Moroccan O. vulgaris fishery is estimatedto be 45% (Kelleher 2005). The O. vulgaris trawl fishery in Mauritania has 60% bycatch, primarily composedof juveniles of other species (Pechecops & CFFA 2006).

Bycatch in the Mauritanian trawl fishery is around 60%.


40-60%

The industrial cephalopod fishery in Morocco is associated with higher rates of discarding (Belhabib et al.2013). The discard rate in the Moroccan O. vulgaris fishery was estimated to be 45% by Kelleher (2005).Balguerias (1997) estimated that in the 70s, 66% of the industrial cephalopod fleet catches were discardedand in the 80s, discards represented 46% of the retained catch. Haddad (1994) estimated that 30% of thecatch was discarded in the 1990s and Rojo-Diaz and Pitcher (2005) estimated that 45% was discarded in the2000s.

PORTUGAL/NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, PORTUGAL

40-60%

Several studies on the selectivity of fishing gear and the bycatch and discards by Portuguese fisheries havebeen published. Finfish bottom trawls targeting hake, horse mackerel, monkfish and megrim in the IberianPeninsula are reported to have discards rates of 30-60%, primarily of target species which are undersizedwith some non-commercial bycatch (European Commission 2011). Hake discards are almost all below MLS(Minimum Landing Size), but mackerel and horse mackerel are discarded at a range of sizes, suggesting amixture of economic and MLS factors are at play (European Commission 2011).

31

The catches and discards of trawlers, seiners and trammel netters were studied in the Algarve (southernPortugal) using observers onboard commercial fishing vessels. Species diversity was high, with 236 speciesrecorded as occasionally, frequently or regularly discarded. Mean discard rates per trip were 0.13, 0.20, 0.27,0.62 and 0.70, respectively, for trammel nets, demersal purse seines, pelagic purse seines, fish trawls andcrustacean trawls, with high variability in terms of discard volume and discard rate (Borges et al. 2001).

Other studies report discards as high as 72% for the Southcoast trawl fishery (Costa et al. 2008).

Although some conflicting information exists, the discard rate in the trawl fishery seems to be between 40 and60%.

SPAIN/NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, SPAIN

20-40%

Finfish bottom trawls targeting hake, horse mackerel, monkfish and megrim in the Iberian Peninsula arereported to have discard rates of 30-60%, primarily of undersized target species with some non-commercialbycatch. In the hake fishery, high-grading is particularly high at the beginning of the fishing season due toindividual vessel quota allocation and can reach 90% of catch (European Commission 2011). Cephalopodtrawls also catch finfish species targeted in the finfish bottom trawl.Discards rates for the finfish trawl fishery in the Algarve (South of Portugal) were estimated to be as high as62% (Borges et al. 2001).

However, (Coll et al. 2014) estimated historical total discards for the Spanish trawl fishery in the Gulf of Cadizand they concluded that total discards in the area had decreased in the last years reaching a percentage ofless than 20% in 2010 (see figure 16).

Some conflicting information exists about the discard rates in the Spanish trawl fishery. However, they seem tobe lower than in the Portuguese trawl fishery. Therefore, a conservative approach is taken and a discard rateof 20-40% selected.

Justification:

32

COMMON CUTTLEFISH


Figure 7 Figure 16: Discards rates in Spanish fisheries (Coll et al. 2014)


Low

Sepia officinalis is generally found in the eastern North Atlantic and in the Mediterranean Sea. Populationshave also been recorded along the west coast of Africa. The common cuttlefish is an active predator, feedingon molluscs, young fish, and crabs. During spring and summer, males and females migrate to warmer waterin order to spawn. The eggs are attached to objects on the sea floor such as shells and seaweeds. Youngcuttlefish reach maturity at 14-18 months of age, and the average life span is 1-2 years (Encyclopedia of life2014).

Inherent vulnerability was calculated using the Seafood watch guidelines for invertebrates. Due to its highfecundity, low age at maturity, a relatively short lifespan, and rapid growth rate Sepia sp. is considered as anaturally resilient organism and inherent vulnerability results as "low".

Justification:

33


Figure 8 Results from the Seafood Watch inherent vulnerability rubric for invertebrate species (referred to asa Productivity-Susceptibility Analysis (PSA) in the text) for Sepia officinalis (SFW criteria document, pg. 4).Attribute scores can range from 1 to 3 with higher scores signifying more resilient life history attributes.Invertebrate species with average attribute scores between 2.46 and 3 are deemed to have a ‘lowvulnerability'."


High Concern

The FAO/CECAF Working Group on the Assessment of Demersal Resources – Subgroup North assessed thestock of common cuttlefish in West Africa in 2007. Biomass was below both the target (B ) and limit (B )reference points (B /B = 12%, B /B = 15%) The abundance indices of the scientific trawl surveyshow a strong drop from 2003 onwards and in 2007 trawl survey yields were close to 0 kg/30 minutes (seefigure 9) (FAO/CECAF 2012). CPUEs of the Mauritanian trawlers also collapsed. The working group concludedthat in Mauritanian waters (Cape Blanc) cuttlefish stocks appeared to be in a worse state than in Moroccanwaters and they estimated that the 2004 expert opinion that the stock was overfished was stillvalid (FAO/CECAF 2012).

The stock is listed by the FAO/CECAF working group as overfished. Therefore, abundance is considered as"high concern".

0.1 MSY

curr 0.1 curr MSY

Justification:

34


Figure 9

Figure 9: Indices of abundance (kg/30 min) of Sepia officinalis off Mauritania and Morocco obtained fromtrawl surveys (2000–2006) (FAO/CECAF 2012)


High Concern

The FAO/CECAF Working Group on the Assessment of Demersal Resources – Subgroup North assessed WestAfrican Common cuttlefish stock in 2007 and concluded that the Dakhla Sepia spp. stock was overexploited(B /B =15% and B /B =13%). The model used the total cuttlefish catch data series for the zonebetween 20°50’ N and 26 °N from 2001 to 2006 and two series were used as abundance indices, theMoroccan freezer cephalopod trawl CPUE series and the trawl survey abundance indices (see figure 9)(FAO/CECAF 2012).

The stock is listed by the FAO/CECAF working group as overexploited. Therefore, abundance is considered as"high concern".

cur MSY cur 0.1

35



High Concern

Cuttlefish species are taken as a bycatch in the same cephalopod fishery as octopus. The cuttlefish catch canbe composed of several different species among which Sepia hierredda is most abundant. The bulk of thecatch for this species (around 75% of the total catch) is reported by the Mauritanian national fleet, whichoperates in a shallower area than the EU fleet used to do (CSC 2013). Catches from this fleet showed adecreasing trend from 1990 onwards (FAO/CECAF 2012) (from 5100 MT in 1992 to 1600 MT in 2011),followed by a stabilization at around 2200 MT in 2012. The European (mainly Spanish) catches reachedmaximal values in the period 1999-2001, followed by a sharp drop during the last years, with only 200 MT in2012, the year when the fishery was closed (STECF 2013).

The joint EU-Mauritania scientific committe concluded in the last stock assessment meeting that the stock wasoverfished and recommended a reduction in the current fishing effort for the cuttlefish stock (FAO/CECAF2012). Although F /F for the cuttlefish stock was not calculated by the FAO/CECAF working group due tothe inconsistency of the data provided by the Mauritanian trawlers, the working group concluded that the stockwas experiencing overfishing. Management that is reasonably expected to curtail overfishing is in place.Therefore, fishing mortality is assessed as "high concern".

cur MSY


Critical

The FAO/CECAF Working Group on the Assessment of Demersal Resources – Subgroup North assessed thestock of Common cuttlefish in West Africa in 2007. They concluded that Fishing effort in the year before wasfar greater than that which would produce the B biomass (F /F = 563% and F /F = 507%)(FAO/CECAF 2012) The working group also highlighted that in most of the fisheries cuttlefish is both a targetspecies and a bycatch of the octopus fishery. For that reason, any recommendation covering cuttlefish shouldalso take into account eventual effects on the octopus stock and the Working Group therefore made tworecommendations: for the Dakhla, Cape Blanc and Senegal– the Gambia stocks, fishing effort should bereduced and cuttlefish catches in the Dakhla stock by the cephalopod fishery should be followed to ensure thateffort is not directed away from octopus towards cuttlefish (FAO/CECAF 2012).

A severe level of overfishing is occurring in this fishery, and it is unclear whether management is effectivelycurtailing overfishing. Fishing mortality is therefore ranked as "critical".

0.1 cur 0.1 cur MSY


40-60%




36

COMMON CUTTLEFISH


40-60%



Low

Sepia officinalis is generally found in the eastern North Atlantic and in the Mediterranean Sea. Populationshave also been recorded along the west coast of Africa. The common cuttlefish is an active predator, feedingon molluscs, young fish, and crabs. During spring and summer, males and females migrate to warmer waterin order to spawn. The eggs are attached to objects on the sea floor such as shells and seaweeds. Youngcuttlefish reach maturity at 14-18 months of age, and the average life span is 1-2 years (Encyclopedia of life2014).

Inherent vulnerability was calculated using the Seafood watch guidelines for invertebrates. Due to its highfecundity, low age at maturity, a relatively short lifespan, and rapid growth rate Sepia sp. is considered as anaturally resilient organism and inherent vulnerability results as "low".

Justification:

37


Figure 10 Results from the Seafood Watch inherent vulnerability rubric for invertebrate species (referred to asa Productivity-Susceptibility Analysis (PSA) in the text) for Sepia officinalis (SFW criteria document, pg. 4).Attribute scores can range from 1 to 3 with higher scores signifying more resilient life history attributes.Invertebrate species with average attribute scores between 2.46 and 3 are deemed to have a ‘lowvulnerability'."


Moderate Concern

Since 1997 the Spanish bottom trawl survey ARSA has been carried out annually in autumn, during November,in the Gulf of Cádiz (ICES Sub-division IXa south) to study the distribution and relative abundance (in numberand weight) of all demersal species in the area, as well to estimate biological parameters of the maincommercial species (ICES 2012). Another similar survey is carried out in the same area since 1993 (”Spanishbottom trawl survey spring ARSA”) in March. The most abundant species present in the survey are thecuttlefish Sepia officinalis and Sepia elegans (ICES 2012). Common cuttlefish abundance is stable, with amean value of 0.7 kg/haul and 3 ind/haul, respectively. A remarkable peak was detected in the first year(1997), corresponding with the highest values of the time series (2.8 kg/haul and 8 ind/haul) (ICES 2012).Length frequency distributions showed a wide size range (4-35 cm) with a clear mode in 10-12 cm in most ofthe years, corresponding with spring-autumn recruitment in the study area (Ramos et al. 1996).

Reference points for this stock have not been set. Although the abundance of the stock seems to be constant,there is no evidence to suggest that stock is either above or below reference points. Stock inherent

38



vulnerability is low. Therefore, abundance is considered as "moderate concern".


Low Concern

The trend of cuttlefish annual landings by Subarea/Division is shown in the figure below. Total landings rangedbetween 1,636 MT in 2000 and 1,129 MT in 2001. Since 2001, landings increased to 2005 and 2007, whenthey reached two new maxima values similar to 2000. Afterwards, landings decreased slightly up to 1224 MTin 2010. Division IXa contributed with 70% of total cuttlefish landed by the Spanish fleet, with the 70% oflandings in this Division corresponding to the Subdivision IXa-South (Gulf of Cadiz). Sepia officinalis and Sepiaelegans are present in landings from Divisions IXa-South, where Sepia officinalis makes up about 93% ofcuttlefish landed (see figure 10). (ICES 2012)

No reference points have been set for this stock. However, cuttlefish landings have remained relatively stablesince 2000 (see figure 10) and the octopus fishery doesn't seem to be adversely affecting the species(cuttlefish have a much more narrow distribution than octopus, octopus is fished across a much larger area)(ICES 2012). The common cuttlefish population is not depleted and the species has low inherent vulnerabilityto fishing pressure. Therefore, fishing mortality is assessed as "low concern".

Justification:

Figure 11 Figure 10: Cuttlefish landings by area in Iberian waters (ICES 2012)


39

40-60%






20-40%




Justification:

40

CONGER EEL




PORTUGAL/NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, TRAPS (UNSPECIFIED), PORTUGALSPAIN/NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, TRAPS (UNSPECIFIED), SPAIN

High

European conger is assessed on the Fishbase website as having very low resilience (minimum populationdoubling time more than 14 years (K=0.06; tm=5-15 (female tm>10); Fec=3,000,000) and very highvulnerability (86 of 100) (Fishbase 2014)


High Concern

The European conger eel (Conger conger Linnaeus, 1758) is a marine fish widely distributed in the NEAtlantic, Mediterranean and western Black Sea. However, knowledge about its early life history, such asspawning area(s) and season(s), duration of the leptocephalus phase and larval migratory route(s), is verylimited, since few studies on this species have been reported (Correia et al. 2002). Neither stock assessment

41



nor reference points have been set for this species in European waters.

There is no evidence to suggest that stock is either above or below reference points and stock inherentvulnerability is very high. Therefore stock abundance is assessed as "high concern".


Low Concern

In ICES area 27 (European waters) an annual average catch of 14 MT was reported from 2006 to 2012 (ICESdata). 15% of this catch was reported by Spain and Portugal in ICES subarea XIa where the trap octopusfishery mainly occurs.

European conger is caught during the nights, on rocky bottoms using octopus traps, fish traps and bottomlonglines. There is not available information about the amount of catch which corresponds to each gear. About 3% of the catch in the octopus trap fishery corresponds to European conger. It is important to note thatnear 50% of the conger caught in the octopus trap fishery is released alive, undamaged, due to the small sizeof the specimens (Xunta de Galicia 2006), (Alberto Garazo pers. comm.).

Fishery does not adversely affect species, but contribution to mortality may not be negligible. Therefore,fishing mortality is assessed as "low concern".


< 20%

Discarding in artisanal fisheries is not particularly well documented, though gear types such as traps, pots andother small-scale gear are generally thought to have low discards rates (<15%). Traps are highly selectivetargeting common octopus, spiny lobster and some bony fishes. Undersize or non-commercial catches canusually be released alive so catches such as berried lobsters can be returned to the sea (EuropeanCommission 2011).

Normally traps are baited with small pieces of oily fish such as sardines or mackerels (Xunta de Galicia 2006).

The trap fishery is thought to have low discards rates. The amount of bait used, although unknown, issignificant. However, artificial baits are being introduced. Therefore, discard rate in this fishery is assessed aslower than 20%.

Justification:

A comprehensive survey to describe the octopus trap fishery in the Northwest of Spain was undertaken in2006. The results show that the target species, common octopus (Octopus vulgaris) is the most abundantspecies, representing 86.7% of weight of the total catch, while the remaining 13.3% is distributed among 85different species. Crustaceans represent 5.8% by weight, being the velvet crab (Necora puber) the mostabundant species. Fish species accounted for 16.3% by number and 6.3% by weight. Wrasses, blennids andgadoids are the most represented species (Xunta de Galicia 2006). In this survey the bait used in the fisherywas also recorded. Five species are normally used as bait: mackerel (38%), sardine (23%), horse mackerel

42

EUROPEAN HAKE



(14%), bogue (4%), blue whiting (1%), other cupleids (4%) and other mixed species (13%) (Xunta de Galicia2006).

A new artificial bait is being introduced in the Galician trap fishery (North of Spain). This bait, known locally as"membrillo", is more expensive than the natural bait used in the area. However, advantages lie in itsstorability, durability and light weight, making it a good substitute for natural bait.

MOROCCO/EASTERN CENTRAL ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, MOROCCOPORTUGAL/NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, PORTUGALSPAIN/NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, SPAIN

Medium

European hake is classified on the Fishbase website as having low resilience (minimum population doublingtime 4.5 - 14 years (K=0.02-0.63; tm=2-8; tmax=20; Fec=7 million) and high vulnerability (65 of 100)(Fishbase 2014). However, based on the Seafood Watch Productivity-Susceptibility Analysis (PSA)method, European hake scores 2.16667 which results in a "moderate" inherent vulnerability.

Justification:

Figure 13 Results from the Seafood Watch inherent vulnerability rubric for fish species (referred to as aProductivity-Susceptibility Analysis (PSA) in the text) for Merluccius merluccius (SFW criteria document, pg. 4).Attribute scores can range from 1 to 3 with higher scores signifying more resilient life history attributes. Fishspecies with average attribute scores between 1.80 and 2.33 are deemed to have a ‘moderate vulnerability'."


High Concern

The FAO/CECAF Working Group on the Assessment of Demersal Resources – Subgroup North assessed theEuropean hake stock in Moroccan waters in 2007 (FAO 2007). The results from the assessment indicate thatthe white hake stock is overfished, with catch exceeding the natural production of the stock. The currentbiomass is both below the target (B ) and limit (B ) reference points (B /B =21%,B /B =23%) (FAO/CECAF 2012).

The stock is listed by the FAO/CECAF working group as overfished. Therefore, abundance is considered as"high concern".

0.1 MSY curr 0.1

curr MSY

43



Moderate Concern

ICES assesses European hake for the VIIIc and IXa sub-divisions (Southern stock). The EU agreed on arecovery plan in 2005 (EC Reg. No. 2166/2005, Appendix 7.4.7.1). The plan aims to rebuild the stock to safebiological limits, achieve a spawning-stock biomass above 35,000 MT by 2016. However, no biomass referencepoints were identified. In the 2013 advice for European hake, ICES highlighted that SSB has increased since1998 and was above the average in 2012. Since 2005, most annual recruitment values were above thehistorical mean (see figure 11).

Stock status is assessed as "moderate concern" because hake has a moderate inherent vulnerability and thereare no stock reference points.


Critical

The FAO/CECAF Working Group on the Assessment of Demersal Resources – Subgroup North assessed theEuropean hake stock in Moroccan waters in 2007 (FAO/CECAF 2012). The results from the assessmentindicate that the white hake stock is overexploited, with catch exceeding the natural production of the stock(F /F =374%). Current fishing effort was greater than that which would maintain the biomass at itscurrent level.

Overfishing is ocurring and it is unclear whether the management measures in place are effective at curtailingoverfishing. Fishing mortality is therefore considered as "critical".

curr MSY


High Concern

Hake is caught by a multigear fleet (otter trawlers, pairtrawlers, gillnetters, longliners, and artisanal). In thetrawl fleet, hake is caught together with megrim, anglerfish, blue whiting, horse mackerel, mackerel andcrustaceans. Discards occur mainly in the trawl fisheries that target smaller fish than gillnetters andlongliners. Total catch (2012) = 16.6 kt, where 14.6 kt are landings (4.37 kt trawlers, 4.1 kt other fleets, and6.1 kt unallocated) and 2.1 kt discards (13% of the total catch). The EU agreed on a recovery plan in 2005.The aim of the plan is to rebuild the stock to safe biological limits, set as a spawning-stock biomass above35,000 tonnes by 2016, and to reduce fishing mortality to 0.27. The main elements of the plan are a 10%annual reduction in F and a 15% constraint on TAC change between years. Fishing mortality has decreased inrecent years but was well above the 2012 F proxy (F=0.24) (see figure 11).Trawl fisheries contribute with a percentage of around 30% of the total fishing mortality of European hake inthe area. Like octopus, European hake is also caught in both the crustacean and the fish trawl fisheries.Therefore, the octopus trawl fishery is considered to have a high impact on the fishing mortality for thisspecies and this section is assessed as "high concern".

MSY

Justification:

44


Figure 14 Figure 11: ICES advice. European hake Southern stock (ICES 2013d)


40-60%



40-60%



45




20-40%




Justification:

46

LOGGERHEAD TURTLE





High

Due to their typically vulnerable life cycle, characterized by slow growth rate (0.37 to 6.5 cm yr–1), latematurity (turtles would take from 23.5 to 29.3 yr to reach 80 cm CCL, considered an approximation of the sizeat maturity) and low fecundity, turtles are highly susceptible to fishing mortality (Casale et al. 2011).

Marine turtles are considered as having "high inherent vulnerability" by the Seafood Watch criteria.


Very High Concern

Sea turtles are threatened worldwide by many human-related activities, from direct exploitation to the indirecteffects of climate change. Caretta caretta is assessed as endangered by the IUCN (Marine turtle specialist

47



group 1996). Degradation of nesting habitats, fishing-induced mortality, boat collisions and pollution areconsidered the most important threats (Casale et al. 2007)(Casale et al. 2011).

The loggerhead turtle is listed by an international scientific body as endangered. Therefore, this section isconsidered as "very high concern".


Moderate Concern

In 2007 and 2008, the Chelonia Association evaluated the incidental catch of loggerhead turtles (Carettacaretta) in bottom trawlers, and concluded that about 5,000 turtles are caught annually in the Gulf of Cadizand the Spanish Mediterranean (Biton 2009).

The average number of turtles caught by trawlers in the Gulf of Cadiz (South Spain), where the octopusfishery is being assessed, was between 1-3 by vessel and campaign, lower than in the Mediterranean Sea,due to the lower number of turtles present in this area (Biton 2009). Although TEDs (turtle excluderdevices) were found to be effective in reducing turtle captures in this study, there is no a legal obligation ofusing these devices in the trawl fishery.

Limited records on Bycatch Per Unit Effort (BPUE) of loggerhead turtles in the Northeast Atlantic show a lowlevel of impact in this region (0.008, based on 4 records) (Wallace et al. 2013). Due to the limited number ofrecords, this information source does not influence the scoring for fishing mortality.

Although the unknown bycatch matrix scores the impact of bottom trawl on turtles as low, in this case fishingmortality is assessed as "moderate concern" due to the special characteristics of the area.


40-60%




Although some conflicting information exists, the discard rate in the trawl fishery seems to be between 40 and

48

60%.


20-40%




Justification:


49

PANDORA






Medium

Red pandora is assessed on the Fishbase website as having medium resilience (minimum population doublingtime 1.4 - 4.4 years (K=0.18-0.53; tm=1; tmax=7; Fec=60,200)) and moderate to high vulnerability (49 of100) (Fishbase 2014).


High Concern

The FAO/CECAF working group assessed this stock in 2006 (FAO/CECAF 2012), abundance indices series (inkg/30 minutes) for Pagellus bellottii in Mauritania obtained during the assessment surveys showed a continualdecline in the abundance index and the collapse of the species in the Mauritanian zone. The FAO/CECAFworking group concluded that the red pandora stock was overexploited as the biomass was below than thetarget biomass, B (B /B =17%) as well as the limit biomass (B /B =17%).

The stock is listed by the management body as overfished. Abundance is therefore ranked as "high concern".

0.1 curr 0.1 curr MSY


Critical

The Pagellus bellottii CPUE series for the Senegal, Mauritanian and Gambian industrial fleets fluctuated greatlyover the period under analysis (1990–2006). From 1996 to 2004, the highest yields were obtained inMauritania by the pelagic trawlers with a peak in 1998. The FAO/CECAF working group concluded that fishingeffort was greatly above that producing a sustainable yield at current biomass levels (F /F =325%).

Overfishing is occurring and the stock susceptibility to the octopus fishery is moderate. Although managementis in place, it is unclear whether it is effectively curtailing overfishing, therefore, fishing mortality is assessedas "critical".

curr MSY


40-60%



50

SHARKS



MAURITANIA/EASTERN CENTRAL ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, MAURITANIAMOROCCO/EASTERN CENTRAL ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, MOROCCO

High

Due to their typically vulnerable life cycle, characterized by slow growth rates, late maturity and low fecundity,elasmobranch species are highly susceptible to fishing mortality. Some shark species are present in the areasuch as common smouthound (Mustelus mustelus), tope (Galeorhinus galeus) or other deep-sea sharks(Gascuel et al. 2007), (Oceana 2008). These former species are classified as vulnerable by the IUCN. On thefishbase website both are classified as having very low resilience and high to very high vulnerability (74 of100) (Fishbase 2014).


High

Due to their typically vulnerable life cycle, characterized by slow growth rates, late maturity and low fecundity,elasmobranch species are highly susceptible to fishing mortality. Some shark species are present in the ICESarea IXa such as common smouthound (Mustelus mustelus), tope (Galeorhinus galeus) or other deep-seasharks (Etmopterus sp.) (Coelho & Erzini 2008) (Junta de Andalucia 2001). These former species are bothclassified as vulnerable by the IUCN and as having very low resilience and high to very high vulnerability (74 of100) on the fishbase website (Fishbase 2014).Shark species have high inherent vulnerability.


High Concern

In a survey carried out by (Gascuel et al. 2007) in Mauritanian waters it was seen that total demersal biomasshas been reduced by 75% on the Mauritanian continental shelf over the past 25 years due to overfishing. Inthe same survey Common Smoothhound (Mustelus mustelus) showed a strong biomass decrease but only inthe deepest strata (see figure 14 and 15). There is not available information about other demersal sharkspecies but other sharks are known to occur in the area.

Reference points have not been defined for these species, so there no evidence to suggest that shark stocksare either above or below reference points. Shark stocks inherent vulnerability is high. Therefore, this sectionis assessed as "high concern".

Justification:

51

Figure 17 Figure 14: Mean annual rate biomass decrease Common smoothhound (Mustelus mustelus).Adapted from (Gascuel et al. 2007).

Figure 18 Figure 15: Trend in (a) biomass for the 24 studied taxa and (b) for the total biomass caught by thebottom trawl (Gascuel et al. 2007).


High Concern

(Balguerias et al. 2000) carried out a study on the changes produced in the faunistic communities in Moroccoin response to fishing. They used results from surveys carried out on the bank in 1942, 1962, 1974, and 1990.

52


The data suggested some changes in the community. Within the elasmobranchs (Chondrichthyes), all familiesbut one (Scyliorhinidae) experienced severe decline in relative abundance. Also the total number of familiesand species represented in the surveys decreased from 1942 to 1990 (from 29 to only 6 species) (Balgueriaset al. 2000).

Updated information on demersal shark stocks have not been found and reference points have not beendefined for these species in the area. There is no evidence to suggest that stocks are either above or belowreference points and sharks stocks inherent vulnerability are high. Therefore, this section is considered as"high concern".


Very High Concern

Tope and smoothound are classified as a vulnerable by the IUCN (Serena et al. 2009)(Walker et al. 2006). Noprecautionary points have been agreed for these two species (STECF 2013).Angel shark is critically endangered and its population is decreasing (Morey et al. 2006). In the Gulf of Cadizthis last species has a high commercial value but it seems to be near extinct. There are few recent records ofcaptures of angel shark and it may be extirpated from areas of former habitat (STECF 2013).Some species are listed by the IUCN as endangered or threatened. The abundance section is considered as"very high concern".


Moderate Concern

In Oceana’s investigations into shark fisheries, an incidence of shark mislabeling was found in the Cadiz fishmarket, in the south of Spain. Here, Oceana documented several boxes of sharks, with their fins missing,labelled as hake (Merluccius senegalensis). Indeed, these sharks caught by Spanish vessels and mislabeled as“hake” were likely either tope sharks (Galeorhinus galeus) or deep-sea sharks. They were likely intentionallymislabeled to hide the fact that they were caught in Mauritanian waters without authorization. Tope sharksand most deep-sea sharks are threatened according to IUCN Red List criteria, and neither are scientificallyassessed nor managed in Mauritanian waters. Officially, there are no reported catches of deep-sea sharksfrom Spanish vessels in Mauritanian waters (Oceana 2008). Spain no longer fishes in Mauritanian waters, butsharks are likely to still occur as bycatch in the octopus trawl fisheries in Mauritania.

No reference points for these species have been set and no management measures are in place to avoid thecatch of demersal sharks. Fishery contribution is unknown, but populations are depleted and no reasonablemanagement to curtail overfishing is in place. According to the SFW unknown bycatch matrix fishing mortalityto sharks in bottom trawls is assessed as "moderate concern".


Moderate Concern

There is little information about shark stocks statuses in Morocco. However, (Balguerias et al. 2002) studiedthe changes produced in the faunistic communities in Morocco in response to fishing and suggested that thechanges observed were caused by a combination of factors, including economic incentives as well as

53


oceanographic variations and competition for food, which ultimately favored benthic cephalopod populations atthe cost of most fish populations (included sharks).

No reference points have been set for demersal shark species but some species (e.g: angel shark) present inthe Moroccan waters are vulnerable or endangered. Fishery contribution mortality is unknown, but somepopulations are depleted and no reasonable management to curtail overfishing is in place. According to the SFW unknown bycatch matrix fishing mortality to sharks in bottom trawls is assessed as"moderate concern".


Moderate Concern

Catch for tope is not fully documented and the catch data are considered unreliable (due to the historical useof generic landings categories). However, catches for tope shark have increased in the last few years and in2007, almost 900 MT were caught by European Union vessels. Other species are also caught and labeledcommercially as “tope”, including the blue shark and various other small sharks (Oceana 2011). ICESrecognizes that there is no reliable data for this species (STECF 2013). No management measures arecurrently in place for this shark classified as globally Vulnerable. Based on their approach to data-limitedstocks, ICES recommends that catches should be reduced by 20% and measures to identify pupping areasshould be taken (STECF 2013).

Smooth-hounds (Mustelus mustelus) are taken as a bycatch in mixed demersal and gillnet fisheries. Catchesof smooth-hounds are not fully documented and the data is considered highly unreliable (due to the historicaluse of generic landings categories). Although landings data are preliminary and underestimate true landings,it is clear that catches have increased in recent years. This increase may reflect the increased abundanceand/or improved marketing opportunities for the species (given the zero TAC for spurdog). Based on ICESapproach to data-limited stocks, ICES advises that catches should be reduced by 4% (STECF 2013).

Other shark species present in the area such as Squatina squatina are currently on the EU prohibited specieslist.

Fishery contribution is unknown, but population of some species are depleted. According to the SFW unknownbycatch matrix fishing mortality to sharks in bottom trawls is assessed as "moderate concern".


40-60%



54


40-60%



40-60%






20-40%



Some conflicting information exists about the discard rates in the Spanish trawl fishery. However, they seem tobe lower than in the Portuguese trawl fishery. Therefore, a conservative approach is taken and a discard rate

55

of 20-40% selected.

Justification:


56

Criterion 3: Management EffectivenessManagement is separated into management of retained species (harvest strategy) and management of non-retained species (bycatch strategy).

The final score for this criterion is the geometric mean of the two scores. The Criterion 3 rating is determinedas follows:

Score >3.2=Green or Low ConcernScore >2.2 and ≤3.2=Yellow or Moderate ConcernScore ≤2.2 or either the Harvest Strategy (Factor 3.1) or Bycatch Management Strategy (Factor 3.2) is VeryHigh Concern = Red or High Concern

Rating is Critical if either or both of Harvest Strategy (Factor 3.1) and Bycatch Management Strategy (Factor3.2) ratings are Critical.

Criterion 3 Summary


SCORING GUIDELINES

Factor 3.1 - Harvest Strategy

Seven subfactors are evaluated: Management Strategy, Recovery of Species of Concern, ScientificResearch/Monitoring, Following of Scientific Advice, Enforcement of Regulations, Management Track Record,and Inclusion of Stakeholders. Each is rated as ‘ineffective,’ ‘moderately effective,’ or ‘highly effective.’

Region / MethodHarvestStrategy

BycatchStrategy Score

Mauritania / Eastern Central Atlantic / Bottom trawls /Mauritania

1.00 2.00 Red(1.41)

Morocco / Eastern Central Atlantic / Bottom trawls /Morocco

1.00 2.00 Red(1.41)

Portugal / Northeast Atlantic / Pots / Portugal 2.00 0.00 Red(2.00)

Portugal / Northeast Atlantic / Traps (unspecified) /Portugal

2.00 2.00 Red(2.00)

Portugal / Northeast Atlantic / Bottom trawls / Portugal 1.00 2.00 Red(1.41)

Spain / Northeast Atlantic / Pots / Spain 2.00 0.00 Red(2.00)

Spain / Northeast Atlantic / Traps (unspecified) / Spain 2.00 2.00 Red(2.00)

Spain / Northeast Atlantic / Bottom trawls / Spain 1.00 2.00 Red(1.41)

57

5 (Very Low Concern)—Rated as ‘highly effective’ for all seven subfactors considered4 (Low Concern)—Management Strategy and Recovery of Species of Concern rated ‘highly effective’ and allother subfactors rated at least ‘moderately effective.’3 (Moderate Concern)—All subfactors rated at least ‘moderately effective.’2 (High Concern)—At minimum, meets standards for ‘moderately effective’ for Management Strategy andRecovery of Species of Concern, but at least one other subfactor rated ‘ineffective.’1 (Very High Concern)—Management exists, but Management Strategy and/or Recovery of Species ofConcern rated ‘ineffective.’0 (Critical)—No management exists when there is a clear need for management (i.e., fishery catchesthreatened, endangered, or high concern species), OR there is a high level of Illegal, unregulated, andunreported fishing occurring.

Factor 3.1 Summary

Subfactor 3.1.1 – Management Strategy and Implementation

FACTOR 3.1 - MANAGEMENT OF FISHING IMPACTS ON RETAINED SPECIESRegion / Method Strategy Recovery Research Advice Enforce Track Inclusion

Mauritania / EasternCentral Atlantic /Bottom trawls /Mauritania

ModeratelyEffective

Ineffective ModeratelyEffective

ModeratelyEffective

Ineffective Ineffective ModeratelyEffective

Morocco / EasternCentral Atlantic /Bottom trawls /Morocco

ModeratelyEffective


ModeratelyEffective

Ineffective Ineffective ModeratelyEffective

Portugal / NortheastAtlantic / Pots /Portugal

ModeratelyEffective

N/A ModeratelyEffective

ModeratelyEffective


HighlyEffective

Portugal / NortheastAtlantic / Traps(unspecified) /Portugal

ModeratelyEffective


ModeratelyEffective


HighlyEffective

Portugal / NortheastAtlantic / Bottomtrawls / Portugal

ModeratelyEffective


ModeratelyEffective


HighlyEffective

Spain / NortheastAtlantic / Pots /Spain

ModeratelyEffective


ModeratelyEffective


HighlyEffective

Spain / NortheastAtlantic / Traps(unspecified) / Spain

ModeratelyEffective


ModeratelyEffective


HighlyEffective

Spain / NortheastAtlantic / Bottomtrawls / Spain

ModeratelyEffective


ModeratelyEffective


HighlyEffective

58

Considerations: What type of management measures are in place? Are there appropriate management goals,and is there evidence that management goals are being met? To achieve a highly effective rating, there must beappropriate management goals, and evidence that the measures in place have been successful atmaintaining/rebuilding species.

MAURITANIA / EASTERN CENTRAL ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, MAURITANIA

Moderately Effective

Mauritania is not a traditional fishing nation and its government has, for many years, granted licenses toforeign fishing companies as an important source of income for this state. So far, licenses were granted solelyon the basis of vessel size (tonnage) – a very imprecise measure for targeted management of fish stocks. In1998, the Ministry of Fisheries and Maritime Economy (MPEM) established measures to reduce fishing effort.Although the number of active vessels was reduced, fishing effort was not. In 2006 Mauritania, with supportfrom various other nations and development projects, decided to establish a fisheries management systemand adopted its first management plan, which focused on octopus fisheries. In 2012, a comprehensive newfisheries protocol entered into force on a provisional basis. Among other measures, the protocol set precisequotas for each species and defined the number of ships and maximum catch per species. License fees werealso increased. In order to monitor compliance with the various quotas, catches of demersal fish must belanded in Mauritania’s only fishing port, namely Nouadhibou. Illegal or pirate fishing has decreased because ofthe increase in the level of monitoring, control and surveillance (Agnew et al. 2010).

In 2013 Mauritania signed a 2 year protocol with the EU (with the option to extend for 4 years). Somemeasures included in this protocol were: European octopus fishermen are no longer permitted to fish foroctopus as the stocks are overexploited; the fishing ban area for pelagic fish has been extended from 12 to 20nautical miles; 2 percent of the catches of pelagic fish must be handed over to the Government, which intendsto distribute these fish to the poor at low cost or free of charge; 60 percent of crew members working oninternational vessels operating in the exclusive economic zone must come from Mauritania (worldoceanreview2014). Other technical measures in place for this fishery are: minimum landing size (500 g gutted), fishingbans in spring and autumn, mesh size regulations and by-catch restrictions. Spatio-temporal closures werealso recommended by the EU-Mauritania scientific committee in its most recent meeting (2013) (CSC 2013).

Although the new management regime has not been in place long enough to fully assess its impact, thereduction of fishing effort over the last few years has improved the condition of the octopus stock (CSC 2013).While some stocks targeted in the trawl fishery are overexploited, the most recent assessments of thesespecies date from before the new management measures went into effect. Due to the newness of the currentmanagement strategy and the corresponding difficulty evaluating its effectiveness, management strategy isscored as "moderately effective".

MOROCCO / EASTERN CENTRAL ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, MOROCCO


Due to the overexploitation of the octopus stock and following the departure of the EU cephalopod fleet in1999, a management plan for the octopus fishery was established in 2001. In this management plan anannual TAC for the octopus fishery was set and area and time restrictions and fishing gear regulations wereintroduced (Faraj 2009).

In 2004 this plan was revised and new measures introduced. The first objective was to adjust the TAC withthe introduction of a seasonal quota, determined before each fishing season based on results of the stockabundance survey carried out yearly by the INRH (National Fisheries Research Institute from Morocco). That

59

seasonal quota was distributed among the segments according to the following key: 63% for industrialtrawlers, 26% for artisanal fishing and 11% for coastal fishing. A restructuring fund was also created toreduce the number of artisanal and coastal vessels limiting their number to 3,000 artisanal boats and 100coastal trawlers; and area restrictions were also extended. These and other measures introduced in this planare still in place as: the use of an individual transferable quota for the industrial fleet; the distribution of theTAC for the artisanal fleet among fishing areas taking into account the number of boats and the extension ofthe annual fishing ban if the recruitment or the reproduction are not sufficiently progressed (Faraj 2009).

Despite the Ministry of Fisheries and Agriculture's efforts to protect the octopus population, the stock remainslisted as overfished (FAO/CECAF 2012). However, the overfished determination is from 2007, based on datathrough 2006, so it is possible that the stock has improved due to the new management measures. Due tothe newness of the current management strategy relative to the stock assessment data and the correspondingdifficulty evaluating its effectiveness, management strategy is scored as "moderately effective".

PORTUGAL / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, POTS, PORTUGALPORTUGAL / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, TRAPS (UNSPECIFIED), PORTUGAL


There are several problems associated with assessing stock size and biomass of cephalopod populations,including their short life-span (usually up to only 2 years), variable growth rates and a weak relationshipbetween stock size and juvenile recruitment (ICES 2012). Therefore, Neither TACs nor target reference pointshave been set for this fishery in European waters, rather, management centers around effort restrictions. Theoctopus trap and pot fishery is regulated in Portuguese waters by the Portaria 1102-D/2000. The currentlegislation defines the number of licenses in operation, minimum mesh size depending on gear, maximumnumber of traps (effort limitation) for artisanal catches and the minimum landing weight (750 gr.) (ICES2013). Octopus landings in Portuguese waters have been recorded nationally since 1927 and by region andport since 1970s. Biological data collection started in the 1990s (ICES 2013).

There are no abundance estimates fro octopus in Portugal (there is no stock assessment).

The recent increase in the commercial importance of cephalopods has meant that, although the stocks are notpresently subject to quota management, a viable method of assessment would be needed if cephalopodswere included under the Common Fisheries Policy quota system (Pierce, G.J., Robin, J-P & Portela, J.M. 1996).The need for management is also supported by the relatively high importance of cephalopod fisheries in someareas. In the report of the Workshop on the Necessity for Crangon and Cephalopod Management (WKCCM)ICES recommends that in the event of lack of sound scientific information for moving into management rightaway, there is still a need to monitor cephalopods by means of assessment. Monitoring would allowformulating measures and have them readily available in the event that populations reach unexpected lowlevels jeopardizing sustainability. The first measures to be taken, could be those that assure the protection ofspawning grounds and recruits and also, for some populations, to restrict and avoid increase of effort.Interactions between fleets are a point to be taken into account when managing populations exploited bymixed fisheries (ICES 2013).

According to (ICES 2005) Portugal does not collect information on discards for most commercial stocks as partof its fisheries stock assessment programmes along the western European coast (Pramod et al. 2008). In theartisanal fishery in the North of Portugal was estimated that around 40% of Octopus vulgaris wentunregistered (CIIMAR 2011). Although the EU is working to combat illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing,the national management strategy doesn't effectively address this problem. Therefore, this section isconsidered moderately effective.

60

PORTUGAL / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, PORTUGAL


The octopus trawl fishery in Portugal is governed by four regulations: Portaria 1102-E/2000 which regulatesfishing with trawl, Portaria 1423-B/2003 which changes the Portaria 1102-E/2000, to introduce the licensingfor the mesh sizes of 55 mm and 70 mm in the crustacean trawl fishery and Portaria 27/2001 (updated byPortaria 402/2002) which establishes the minimum landing size for most of the fish, crustacean and molluscspecies caught in Portuguese waters. Some closed areas/seasons for trawling have been established. NeitherTACs nor reference points have been set for cephalopods fisheries in European waters and managementmeasures in the area are therefore centered around effort restrictions (IBERMIX project 2004).

There are no abundance estimates fro octopus in Portugal (there is no stock assessment).

There are several problems associated with assessing stock size and biomass of cephalopod populations,including their short life-span (usually up to only 2 years), variable growth rates and a weak relationshipbetween stock size and juvenile recruitment (ICES 2013). However, he recent increase in the commercialimportance of cephalopods has meant that, although the stocks are not presently subject to quotamanagement, a viable method of assessment would be needed if cephalopods were included under theCommon Fisheries Policy quota system (Pierce, G.J., Robin, J-P & Portela, J.M. 1996). The need formanagement is also supported by the relatively high importance of cephalopod fisheries in some areas. In thereport of the Workshop on the Necessity for Crangon and Cephalopod Management (WKCCM) ICESrecommends that in the event of lack of sound scientific information for moving into management right away,there is still a need to monitor cephalopods by means of assessment. Monitoring would allow formulatingmeasures and have them readily available in the event that populations reach unexpected low levelsjeopardizing sustainability. The first measures to be taken, could be those that assure the protection ofspawning grounds and recruits and also, for some populations, to restrict and avoid increase of effort.Interactions between fleets are a point to be taken into account when managing populations exploited bymixed fisheries (ICES 2013).Portugal has one of the highest discard rates among European countries (Pramod et al. 2008). According to(ICES 2005) Portugal does not collect information on discards for most commercial stocks as part of itsfisheries stock assessment programmes along the western European coast (Pramod et al. 2008). However,the principal aim of fisheries management under the new Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) is to ensure highlong-term fishing yields for all stocks and to reduce unwanted catches and wasteful practices to the minimumthrough the gradual introduction of a landing obligation. T

Some efforts are being undertaken by the EU to ensure high long-term yields for all stocks in Europeanwaters. Therefore, this section is considered moderately effective.

SPAIN / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, POTS, SPAIN


The octopus pot fishery is regulated by the decree 1428/1997 in the Gulf of Cadiz (Xa-South). Fishing effort isregulated by limiting the number of pots permitted per vessel (1000). The use of cheaper pots made of plasticor PVC was also banned in the Order AAA/627/2013. The use of pots in northern Spain is not allowed.Management strategies are aimed at controlling minimum landings size (1 Kg) and reducing fishing effort viatechnical measures such as the number of pots per vessel, fishing days and daily vessel quota. Two annualtemporary fishing bans have been also set, one in May to protect spawners and the other one betweenSeptember and November to protect recruitment.

61

There are no abundance estimates fro octopus in Spain (there is no stock assessment).

The recent increase in the commercial importance of cephalopods has meant that, although the stocks are notpresently subject to quota management, a viable method of assessment would be needed if cephalopodswere included under the Common Fisheries Policy quota system (Pierce, G.J., Robin, J-P & Portela, J.M. 1996).The need for management is also supported by the relatively high importance of cephalopod fisheries in someareas. In the report of the Workshop on the Necessity for Crangon and Cephalopod Management (WKCCM)ICES recommends that in the event of lack of sound scientific information for moving into management rightaway, there is still a need to monitor cephalopods by means of assessment. Monitoring would allowformulating measures and have them readily available in the event that populations reach unexpected lowlevels jeopardizing sustainability. The first measures to be taken, could be those that assure the protection ofspawning grounds and recruits and also, for some populations, to restrict and avoid increase of effort.Interactions between fleets are a point to be taken into account when managing populations exploited bymixed fisheries (ICES 2013).

Some effective management is in place, but there is a need for increasing the number of managementmeasures (e.g., set a TAC for octopus, etc) and for abundance estimates (there is no stock assessment).Therefore, this section is considered moderately effective.

Justification:

SPAIN / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, TRAPS (UNSPECIFIED), SPAIN


Between 2006 and 2009 an octopus recovery plan in Northern Spain was developed. From 2010 onwardsperiodical management plans have been approved. Currently management strategies are aimed at controllingminimum landings size (1 Kg) and reducing fishing effort via measures such as limiting the number of traps byvessel, fishing days and daily vessel quotas. The current management plan also includes a program tomonitor fleet activity through monitoring onboard fishing vessels and periodical controls in fishmarkets (Gepeto project 2014). Major problems with the implementation of the management plan are thecontrol and monitoring of catch quotas and minimum landing size; and compliance with area and timerestrictions (Gepeto project 2014) (DOG 2013}.


The problems arising from the implementation of these technical measures have been reviewed inrecent years. In the Gepeto project (Fisheries Management & Transnational Objectives), funded by theEuropean Union, the octopus management plan was evaluated and it was concluded that there should besome clear long-term objectives for the management plan and there should be continuous monitoring,allowing reviews and follow-up indicators in order to correct any errors with the measures agreed byauthorities and the fishing sector (Gepeto project 2014).

Transparency and participation are being enhanced by the new EU fisheries policies. Howeverfisherman involvement fishery resource management is low. The octopus management plan in Galician waters(North of Spain) involved consultation with District Fishermen's associations from Coruna, Lugo andPontevedra (DOG 2013). However, when the management plan was approved by the authorities, 65% of thefishermen rejected the plan due to disagreements with the management measures implemented (El Pais

62

Subfactor 3.1.2 – Recovery of Species of Concern

Considerations: When needed, are recovery strategies/management measures in place to rebuildoverfished/threatened/ endangered species or to limit fishery’s impact on these species and what is theirlikelihood of success? To achieve a rating of Highly Effective, rebuilding strategies that have a high likelihood ofsuccess in an appropriate timeframe must be in place when needed, as well as measures to minimize mortalityfor any overfished/threatened/endangered species.

2013).

As stated previously, IUU fishing is also a concern in the Spanish octopus fishery due to the level of unreportedlandings (Pierce, G.J., Robin, J-P & Portela, J.M. 1996). Although the EU is working to combat illegal,unreported and unregulated fishing, the national management strategy doesn't effectively address thisproblem.

Although a management plan is in place for the octopus fishery, management strategy/implementation can notbe considered more than "moderately effective" due to the problems arising from the implementation of themanagement measures.

SPAIN / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, SPAIN


Two different regulations apply to fishing activities in Spanish waters: Central Administration regulations inexternal waters (CA) and the Regional Administration regulation in internal waters (RA) (ICES 2013). Bottom-trawl activity is only regulated by the Central Administration, which, in 1993 established a Royal Decree632/1993 which contained regulations to control vessel characteristics, limit fishing to areas outside six milesof coastline and limit weekly fishing effort (ICES 2013), (STECF 2008).

Since 2004, consecutive Fishing Plans have been established in the Gulf of Cadiz with the aim to reduce thefishing effort of the bottom-trawl fleet (order APA/3423/2004, APA/2858/2005, APA/2883/2006,APA/2801/2007, ARM/2515/2009, ARM/58/2010, ARM/2457/2010). The main aspect of these fishing planswas the closed fishing season implemented in autumn, with a gradual increase in the number of days (45, 60,and 90 days per year). Currently, the closed season lasts for 45 days in autumn when the recruitment peak isbelieved to occur in these fishing grounds. This measure is aimed to reduce the illegal landing of immaturespecimens, protecting small octopus until minimum legal weight is reached in these two months (ICES 2013),(STECF 2008).


TACs are also set for some bycatch species in the trawl fishery (horse mackerel, European hake, etc).Moreover, the new CFP does away with the wasteful practice of discarding through the introduction of alanding obligation. To allow fishermen to adapt to the change, the landing obligation will be introducedgradually, between 2015 and 2019 for all commercial fisheries (species under TACs, or under minimum sizes)in European waters (European Commission 2014).

However, as shown in (Pierce et al. 1996),(Coll et al. 2014) and (Otero et al. 2005) IUU fishing is a commonpractice in Spanish waters. Although monitoring and enforcement is widely promoted by the EU legislation,IUU fishing is not effectively prosecuted by the Spanish authorities. Therefore, managementstrategy/implementation is considered "moderately effective".

63

MAURITANIA / EASTERN CENTRAL ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, MAURITANIAMOROCCO / EASTERN CENTRAL ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, MOROCCO

Ineffective

Most of the species analysed by the Demersal species Working Group – CECAF (Committee for the EasternCentral Atlantic Fisheries) North show a decline in recent years. Of the stocks targeted in the multispeciesbottom trawl, several were assessed as overfished, including the white hake (Merluccius merluccius) inMorocco, the red Pandora (Pagellus acarne) in Morocco, blue spotted seabream (Pagrus caeruleostictus) inMauritania and Senegal, octopus (Octopus vulgaris) in Dakhla, Cap Blanc and Senegal-Gambia, cuttlefish(Sepia spp.) in Dakhla, Cap Blanc and in Senegal-Gambia (FAO/CECAF 2012).

The recovery of stock concerns for both Mauritania and Morocco is ranked as ineffective because of the lack ofrecovery of species retained in the fishery.

PORTUGAL / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, POTS, PORTUGALSPAIN / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, POTS, SPAIN

N/A

The vase-like pots used to catch octopus are passive capture gears without any net or other devices to retainthe species caught. The Common Octopus (O.vulgaris) in this area is not a stock of concern and there are notother species caught in the fishery. There has been no stock assessment for this species so its status isuncertain, but no indication that it is depleted. Therefore this section is not applicable.

PORTUGAL / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, TRAPS (UNSPECIFIED), PORTUGALSPAIN / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, TRAPS (UNSPECIFIED), SPAIN

N/A

The Common Octopus (O.vulgaris) in this area is not a stock of concern. There has been no stock assessmentfor this species so its status is uncertain, but no indication that it is depleted.

Traps are very selective gears. Very few species can be found caught jointly with Octopus. Bycatches of morayeels, conger and crustaceans occurs but they are not stocks of concern. Therefore this section is notapplicable.

PORTUGAL / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, PORTUGALSPAIN / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, SPAIN

Ineffective

Common octopus is caught off the Iberian Coast (Spain and Portugal) by commercial trawlers fishing on thecontinental shelf in a multi-species fishery which includes the catch of other cephalopod species (cuttlefish,european squid) and demersal fish (european hake, horse mackerel, skates and rays, etc). Following theSeafood Watch criteria, european hake and some species of skates/rays and demersal sharks caught in theoctopus fishery are stocks of concern because they are overfished, depleted or endangered.

For the European hake, the EU agreed on a recovery plan in 2005. The aim of the plan is to rebuild the stockto safe biological limits in 2016 reducing fishing mortality. However, although fishing mortality has decreased inrecent years it was above the F proxy in 2012 (ICES 2013a).MSY

64

Subfactor 3.1.3 – Scientific Research and Monitoring

Considerations: How much and what types of data are collected to evaluate the health of the population and thefishery’s impact on the species? To achieve a Highly Effective rating, population assessments must be conductedregularly and they must be robust enough to reliably determine the population status.

There are no any reference point set for skates and rays. These fisheries are currently managed under acommon TAC, although this complex comprises species that have different vulnerabilities to exploitation.Therefore, TACs alone cannot adequately manage these stocks and ICES recommends new managementmeasures to protect these species (STECF 2013). For demersal sharks ICES recognizes that there is notreliable data for this species and no management measures are currently in place for some species classifiedas globally Vulnerable (STECF 2013). Management for these species lacks an adequate rebuilding or recoverystrategy and there are not effective practices designed to limit mortality of these species. Therefore, recoveryof stocks of concern is considered as "ineffective".



The FAO/CECAF Working Group on demersal resources was created during the fifteenth session of the FisheryCommittee for the Eastern Central Atlantic (CECAF) in 2000 (FAO/CECAF 2012). It is split in two subgroups:North and South. The overall objective of the Group is to contribute to the improved management of demersalresources in Northwest Africa through assessment of the state of the stocks and the fisheries to ensure thebest sustainable use of the resources for the benefit of the coastal countries. The FAO/CECAF WG regularlyassesses commercial stocks within its area of competence and makes recommendations for the managementof the stocks assessed but also recommends research topics for next meetings (FAO/CECAF 2012).The IMROP (Institut mauritanien des recherches océanographiques et des pêches) is the research institutioninvolved in the sustainable development and rational exploitation of fish resources in Mauritanian waters. Thisinstitution aims to develop an integrated management approach to fisheries balancing ecological, economicand social indicators.

Mauritania does not carry out catch and effort sampling in its ports, but since 1990, it has been obligatory forvessel captains to keep a logbook which provides information on effort deployed by their vessels as well as thequantities of catch in the Mauritanian Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). The data collected by this system arestored in a database managed by the Mauritanian maritime surveillance organisation and sent to IMROP for itsuse. This data is used for both the FAO/CECAF WG and the IMROP for the stock assessments (FAO/CECAF2012).

In the 6th meeting of the Scientific Committee Mauritania-EU held in 2013 the committee made severalrecommendations to improve the knowledge about the octopus stock in Mauritania: it was necessary toimprove the reliability of the data (including estimates as well as possible misreporting), to develop alternativeor supplementary assessment methods (including age-structured models), to include spatial approaches in theassessment and to take into account the impact on the environment (ecosystem approaches) (CSC 2013).

Some data related to stock abundance and health is collected, but data may be insufficient to maintain thestock. Therefore the scientific research is considered "moderately effective".



65

Subfactor 3.1.4 – Management Record of Following Scientific Advice

Considerations: How often (always, sometimes, rarely) do managers of the fishery follow scientific

In Morocco the Scientific Institute of Marine Fisheries (ISPM) was created in 1954. There is a network of fiveregional centers and 7 stations in major harbors throughout Morocco. In 1996, the institute became known asthe Institut National de Recherche Halieutique (INRH). Research is based around the following topics:understanding of upwelling systems and identification of main production areas, environment - fisheriesresources relationship studies, assessment of the fishery resources, assessment of the biological and socio-economical impact on fisheries and on the marine environment, sea mapping of the fishing areas, etc. Annualscientific surveys are undertaken to assess the state of the octopus stock (EDMED 2014). The management ofthe fishery is based in the results of these surveys.

The Fishery Committee for the Eastern Central Atlantic (CECAF) was created by FAO to promote thesustainable utilization of the living marine resources within its area of competence in the West Coast of Africa.Some functions and responsibilities of the committee include: to keep under review the state of the resourceswithin its area of competence and of the industries based on them, to promote, encourage and coordinateresearch in the area related to the living resources thereof and to draw up programs required for this purposeand to organize such research as may appear necessary, to promote the collection, interchange,dissemination and analysis or study of statistical, biological, environmental and socio-economic data and othermarine fishery information, to establish the scientific basis for regulatory measures leading to the conservationand management of marine fishery resources, etc. The FAO/CECAF working group last assessed the stock in2007 (based on data through 2006).

Although assessments of the octopus stock are regularly undertaken, some aspects of the octopus biology inthe area remained unknown until very recently (Faraj 2009). Therefore, the research and monitoring isconsidered moderately effective.

PORTUGAL / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, POTS, PORTUGALPORTUGAL / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, TRAPS (UNSPECIFIED), PORTUGALPORTUGAL / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, PORTUGALSPAIN / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, POTS, SPAINSPAIN / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, TRAPS (UNSPECIFIED), SPAINSPAIN / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, SPAIN


Strong efforts have been made in the last years by the members of the ICES Working Group on CephalopodFisheries and Life History (WGCEPH) to assess cephalopod fisheries in ICES areas. In the last WGCEPHmeeting in Lisbon in June 2014 an assessment of Octopus vulgaris in the Gulf of Cádiz was presented but ithas not yet been published (Ignacio Sobrino, pers. comm.)

However, knowledge of main population features in cephalopods are still scarce. The principal problemassessing octopus stocks in European waters is the difficulty of obtaining accurate information on octopuscatches. Some octopus are sometimes pooled together, artisanal fishing is not reported and speciesidentification can be unreliable (Pierce et al. 1996).

Some data related to stock abundance and health is collected. However, some octopus population features arestill unknown. More research in this area is necessary. Therefore scientific research is considered "moderatelyeffective".

66

recommendations/advice (e.g. do they set catch limits at recommended levels)? A Highly Effective rating isgiven if managers nearly always follow scientific advice.



Management recommendations for each stock in CECAF waters are given by the demersal species WorkingGroup – CECAF North (for Mauritanian waters). In the report of the sixth session of the scientific sub-committee the group highlighted the necessity of making the managers and politicians aware of the sharpdecline of demersal stocks in their countries so that they can apply the recommendations made by theWorking Group. In the WG meeting held in 2006 they pointed that many of their recommendations in the latermeeting were not taken in consideration by the authorities and most of the stocks were still overexploited(FAO/CECAF 2012).

A new fisheries partnership agreement was signed by Mauritania and the EU in 2013. This new protocolprovides new restrictions for European vessels working in the area. However, it is currently being boycotted bymost owners of the foreign fishing fleets on the grounds that it is too stringent. As a result of the boycott,virtually no new licences have been purchased and many international fishing companies have withdrawn theirvessels from Mauritanian waters (worldoceanreview 2014). This highlights a wider problem in Mauritania,namely that good management regimes are often implemented in a half-hearted manner by the Government,or are circumvented by means of exemptions. If in doubt, the Government invariably opts to make a quickprofit instead of protecting fish stocks (worldoceanreview 2014). In addition, Mauritania has non-public fishingagreements with China, which take an undisclosed, but high amount of octopus (and other species) via trawlin Mauritanian waters that is not factored into scientific advice or management for this stock (Pala 2013).

Management has a track record of regularly not complying with scientific advice. However, in 2013 Mauritaniasigned a protocol with the EU which included some measures to protect the octopus stock, as scientistsrecommended. Although the new management regime has not been in place long enough to fully assess itsimpact, the reduction of fishing effort over the last few years has improved the condition of the octopus stock(CSC 2013). Scientific advice is therefore considered moderately effective.



The demersal species Working Group – CECAF North, provides management recommendations for each stockin CECAF waters. In Morocco, the ministry of fisheries and agriculture determines the octopus seasonal quotabased on the results of the stock abundance trawl survey undertaken by the National Institute of FisheriesResearch (INRH) before each season (Faraj 2009). However, in the report of the sixth session of the scientificsub-committee, the group highlighted the necessity of making the managers and politicians aware of thesharp decline of demersal stocks in their countries so that they can apply the recommendations made by theWorking Group (CSC 2013). It is deduced therefore that there is not fluent communications betweenresearchers and managers in these fisheries. So, this section is assessed as moderately effective.

67

Subfactor 3.1.5 – Enforcement of Management Regulations

Considerations: Do fishermen comply with regulations, and how is this monitored? To achieve a Highly Effectiverating, there must be regular enforcement of regulations and verification of compliance.



Taking the best available scientific advice as a basis for defining management measures is one of the CommonFisheries Policy's (CFP) principles of good policy-making. Such measures include setting fishing opportunitiesand monitoring their efficiency in delivering policy objectives and targets. Several scientific advisory bodieswork in European waters. The Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF), was setup in 1993 to advise the Commission on Fisheries Management. It is not a permanent body, but a pool ofexperts who contribute to its work either on a temporary basis as members, or on a demand basis as expertsin working groups. STECF reports directly to the European Commission. The International Council for theExploration of the Sea (ICES) is an intergovernmental body founded in 1902 to conduct and coordinateresearch into the marine ecosystems of the North Atlantic. ICES provides advice to a number of governmentsand regional fisheries management organizations, including the EU. It publishes Popular Advice by fish speciesand by region on its website; the Commission's Joint Research Centre complements the advisory bodies' workby supporting the coordination and management of the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee forFisheries and the implementation of the data collection regulations. It also conducts studies on fisheriesmanagement issues relevant to the implementation of the Common Fisheries Policy.

However, the majority of the cephalopod species are so far only managed by some technical measures withlittle respect to environmental impact and sustainability of the fisheries. Possible impacts on the ecosystemand the stocks have so far only been considered from a scientific point of view. Although in some casesregional management initiatives exist and some management measures have been introduced followingscientific advice (e.g. MLS or temporary fishing bans) (Ignacio Sobrino, pers. comm.), the fisheries targetingcephalopods in European waters are generally unregulated in TAC and effort. Moreover, for regulatedcephalopod fisheries, including common octopus, regulations did not appear to be based on real stock statusknowledge, but more on administrative reasons aimed to avoid conflict between spatial occupation of gearexploiting these species (Mora et al. 2014).

Although several advisory bodies work advising the European commission in fisheries management, there isnot yet a reliable assessment for this species and the available scientific information can not be embodied inproper management measures. Cephalopods stocks are not presently subject to quota management and aviable method of assessment for these species is necessary. Therefore, scientific advice for the octopusfishery is only considered "moderately effective".


Ineffective

In Mauritania, the industrial fishery statistics come from catch and effort data declared by the vessel captainsand extracted from the daily fishing logbooks. This covers all vessels active in the waters of the country.Landing data are currently being collected. Other data are also available from 1975 in the database of the

68

Canary Island laboratory of the IEO on fishing activity of Spanish vessels in Mauritania and Senegal. It shouldbe noted that the port of Las Palmas was where nearly all foreign vessels land their catch (FAO/CECAF 2012).

However, and although a monitoring system is in place, domestic catches were reconstructed to be threetimes as high as official landings data reported by Mauritania to the FAO (Belhabib et al. 2013). Severalhundred thousand tons officially caught by foreign vessels operating as ‘Mauritanian chartered vessels’ havenot been reported to the global community via FAO statistics (Gascuel et al. 2007). Illegal catches also affectmarine protected areas, as the Banc d’Arguin National Park.

Compliance is known to be poor. Therefore, enforcement is considered ineffective.


Ineffective

Fisheries catches in the Moroccan Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) were reconstructed by (Belhabib et al. 2013)including commercial small-scale, commercial large-scale, illegal and unregulated fisheries, non-commercialrecreational and subsistence fisheries, and foreign catches. Estimated domestic catches suggest that in thedata supplied by the Moroccan authorities to FAO over 41.5% of catches are unreported (Belhabib et al.2013). Illegal cephalopod fishing are one of the main illegal domestic fishing activities, mainly practiced alongthe Saharan coastline . (Barreira et al. 1998) reported about 12,000 pateras, the majority of which areoperating illegally (over the quota announced by the government). According to (Belhabib et al. 2013) thenumber of pateras working illegally remained stable in 2010. This illustrates that the Moroccan governmentneeds to improve its fisheries monitoring system to include small-scale fishing and unregulated fishing andalso questions the impacts of the fishing access agreements signed by Morocco on the local economy andfisheries sustainability (Belhabib et al. 2013). Therefore, enforcement of the trawl fishery is consideredineffective.

PORTUGAL / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, POTS, PORTUGALPORTUGAL / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, TRAPS (UNSPECIFIED), PORTUGALPORTUGAL / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, PORTUGAL

Ineffective

There is a control system to enforce EU common fishery policy rules. It is designed to: ensure that only theallowed quantities of fish are caught, collect the necessary data for managing fishing opportunities, ensure therules are applied to all fishers in the same way, with harmonized sanctions across the EU, ensure thatfisheries products can be traced back and checked throughout the supply chain. The system is delineated inthe Control Regulation which entered into force on 1 January 2010 and which thoroughly modernized the EU'sapproach to fisheries control. In particular, it brought the system into line with the strong measures which theEU had adopted in 2008 to combat illegal fishing (European Commission 2014).

In Portugal efforts to conserve the biodiversity of coastal marine ecosystems are constrained by politicaluncertainty and bureaucracy. A marked under-reporting of total catches has been observed, suggestinginadequate monitoring and data recording mechanisms in the country. Unreported catches are dominated bydiscards, a wasteful practice that was addressed by the revised CFP (Leitao et al. 2014).

The majority of the octopus catches come from artisanal fleets. There is a substantial overcapacity deployed.The existence of black market landings of underweight octopus (recruits) is well known. In the recent yearsthere has been a decreasing average of total weight of landings of legal-sized octopus (ICES 2013). For thepot and trap fishery, the current legislation defines the number of licenses in operation, minimum landing

69

Subfactor 3.1.6 – Management Track Record

Considerations: Does management have a history of successfully maintaining populations at sustainable levelsor a history of failing to maintain populations at sustainable levels? A Highly Effective rating is given if measures

weight and maximum number of traps and pots by vessel (effort limitation) for artisanal fleets but in manycases this maximum number of traps by vessel is not respected (CIIMAR 2011).

Trawl fisheries accounted for the largest part of unreported catches, with 54% of total unreported catches,while accounting for 21% of total reported landings. Finfish accounted for 94% (115,000 MT·year−1) ofunreported catches, followed by cephalopods (2,400 MT year−1) and crustaceans (1,800 MT·year−1) (Leitaoet al. 2014).

Enforcement and monitoring are believed to be inadequate and compliance is known to be poor. Enforce istherefore assessed as "ineffective".

SPAIN / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, POTS, SPAINSPAIN / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, TRAPS (UNSPECIFIED), SPAINSPAIN / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, SPAIN

Ineffective

In Spain fishing control responsibilities are shared between the General Administration, which has exclusivejurisdiction over sea fishing in offshore waters, and the Autonomous Communities, with exclusive jurisdictionover inland fisheries, aquaculture and shellfish fisheries.

Despite many stakeholders being involved in fisheries monitoring and management, evidence of substantialunreported landings and failures of the control system is available for many European countries, includingSpain (Mora et al. 2009).

In 2007, a special report by the European Court of Auditors highlighted many deficiencies and failures ofcontrol, inspection and sanction systems of six European countries, including Spain. According to theCommission’s report, procedures launched for sanctioning infringements of the CFP rules are generallylengthy, sanctions are inadequately low and the risk of being caught is not high enough. Additionally, the EUCourt of Auditors report noted numerous shortcomings in the inspection systems and catch recording systems,a lack of effective monitoring and a lack of sufficiently dissuasive penalties for those who breach the law(ClientEarth 2011)(Mora et al. 2009).

In a project developed to address gaps in current data collection for assessment of cephalopods stocks inEuropean waters (Pierce, G.J., Robin, J-P & Portela, J.M. 1996) it was concluded, from the evaluation of theaccuracy of official fishery statistics, that in the artisanal fishery in Spain around 40% of Octopus vulgaris, andup to 90% of Loligo vulgaris landings, went unregistered.

A study conducted by (Coll et al. 2014) estimated the total removals of marine resources by Spain for theSpanish Mediterranean Sea and Gulf of Cadiz regions from 1950 to 2010. Unreported removals and discardsrepresented important portions of total removals in the study area. They accounted for, on average, 43% oftotal removals between 1950s and 2010, and were composed of black market sales, subsistence fishing,artisanal fishing, recreational fishing and illegal catch, in addition to discarding.

Enforcement and monitoring is believed to be inadequate and compliance is known to be poor. therefore,enforce is assessed as "ineffective".

70

enacted by management have been shown to result in the long-term maintenance of species overtime.


Ineffective

Fisheries in Mauritania have been historically the subject of exploitation by foreign fleets, particularly fromEurope (Gascuel et al. 2007) and more recently from China (Pala 2013).There are two distinct fishing sectors active in Mauritanian waters. The industrial sector is operated almostexclusively by foreign fleets under fishing access agreement or joint ventures, and more recently flags ofconvenience; and the artisanal sector, mainly consistent of canoes under 12 m long, pirogues and Tarifianpurse-seine boats of 14 to 15 m (Josse and Garcia 1986).

Over almost half a century, fishing pressure on the coastal areas, the extent of foreign fishing and a lack ofreliable catch data created serious concerns over the Mauritanian resources sustainability. This, along with ahigh corruption profile and a low governance rate (MRAG 2005) frames a perfect opportunity for overfishingand under-reporting by the industrial fleet, and overcapitalization by the domestic artisanal fleet (Agnew et al.2010), (Belhabib et al. 2013).

New management measures were introduced in 2013 by the Mauritanian government to protect octopus andpelagic stocks (CSC 2013). However, the effectivity of these measures on other demersal species is unclear.

Although the most important stocks are regularly assessed by the FAO/CECAF working group and the IMROPin Mauritanian waters, some of them are currently overfished such as: the octopus (Octopus vulgaris), theblack hake (M. polli and M. senegalensis), Pagellus bellotti and Pagrus caeruleostictus; which have resulted instock declines. Therefore, track record is assessed as ineffective.


Ineffective

Fishing in Morocco has been a major activity since the 1930s, and the industry experienced tremendousgrowth during the 1980s (Rojo-Diaz, P & Pitcher, T.J. 2005). However, heavy exploitation by both national andforeign vessels (Baddyr & Guénette 2001), a lack of monitoring and enforcement because of existing economicdifficulties (Kaczynski, V.M. 1989), and an emphasis on short-term profits from resource exploitation ratherthan long-term sustainable benefits (Kaczynski, V.M. 1989) resulted in over-exploitation of important demersalstocks, shifting stocks (Balguerias et al. 2000) (Baddyr & Guénette 2001) and increasing illegal, unreportedand unregulated fisheries (Belhabib et al. 2013).

Management measures introduced in a new management plan in 2004 are still in place (Faraj 2009).However, some stocks such as: common cuttlefished or European hake, are currently overfished.

Management measures currently in place have resulted in stock declines. Track record is therefore assessedas ineffective.

71

Subfactor 3.1.7 – Stakeholder Inclusion

Considerations: Are stakeholders involved/included in the decision-making process? Stakeholders areindividuals/groups/organizations that have an interest in the fishery or that may be affected by the managementof the fishery (e.g., fishermen, conservation groups, etc.). A Highly Effective rating is given if the managementprocess is transparent and includes stakeholder input.



Although TACs have not been set for the octopus stock in European waters, effort and size restrictions are inplace and are deemed moderately effective. According to (ICES 2013) there appears not to be a negativeeffect of octopus fisheries on the octopus populations at current fishing pressure. Fisheries appear to justbeing taking a good part of the population that probably are not needed for sustaining the populations.However, because there are no stock assessments, it is unknown whether the current management is settingTACs to maintain stock abundance at appropriate levels. Also, ICES notes that increased management ofcephalopod fisheries in the region is necessary, finding some evidence of growth overfishing in the Portugueseoctopus fishery.

Available scientific literature includes studies in which cephalopods trophic importance is evaluated, providingdata on their distribution and abundance (Torres et al. 2013) and find it necessary to collect more data todetermine cephalopods’ true importance in the marine food chain, their ecosystem role and their trophicrelationships with both their prey and their predators (ICES 2013).

It is uncertain whether measures enacted by management maintain stock abundance at appropriate levels.Also, little is known about the role of cephalopods in the ecosystem and long-term maintenance of ecosystemintegrity can not be assured. Track record is considered "moderately effective".



An Advisory Council for the Management and Development of Fisheries (CCNADP) to organize cooperationbetween the public and private stakeholders on the fisheries sector was created in Mauritania in 2002.However, management methods implemented are rather centralized although a National Fisheries Federation(NPF) exists. Co-management as a system of governance - understood in the sense of shared responsibilityand a transfer certain powers from the central government to users and/or local communities can not in anyway be mentioned today in Mauritania (FAO 2011).

Every three years there is a working group meeting to assess marine resources in Mauritanian waters. Inthese meetings fishermen and the Mauritanian fisheries administration are invited to participate (IgnacioSobrino, pers. comm.)

However, inclusion of stakeholder input in the decision-making process in respect to the industrial fleet is notvery effective. So, when the fisheries partnership agreement EU- Mauritania expired on the 31st July 2012meant the cessation of most of the fishing activities of the EU fleets in this fishing ground. The new protocol

72

was published in December 2012 (COUNCIL DECISION of 18 December 2012). However, the conditions ofthese protocols were very restrictive and not profitable for most EU fleets, which mostly abandoned theMauritanian fishing ground in April-May 2012 (pelagic trawlers) or July-August 2012 (shrimper and cephalopodfleets). In fact, the cephalopod fishing opportunities were excluded by these protocols although the Spanishoceanographic institute with the collaboration of ANACEF, the Spanish cephalopod producers organization,submitted a study to show that the octopus stock in Mauritania was not overfished.

Some agencies have been created to organize cooperation between the government and private stakeholders,but decisions are not made transparently. Therefore, stakeholder inclusion is considered as "moderatelyeffective".



There is little information available about stakeholder involvement in Morocco. However, in 2004 when themanagement plan for the octopus fishery was revised there were a series of meetings of operators andprofessionals with the Moroccan Fisheries Ministry in order to decide the quota for this fishery (Infosamak2005). The focus of these meetings was on achieving sustainable harvests without destroying the octopusresources (Rojo-Diaz, P & Pitcher, T.J. 2005). Several international marine projects have been undertaken inthe last years in the area (Developing of MPA in Mediterranean waters (WWF), the small-scale artisanalproject funded by the Millenium Challenge Corporation, etc) and all of them highlighted the importance ofstakeholder engagement to avoid future disputes (Walton et al. 2013). Moreover, the Halieutis Plan launchedby the Moroccan government in 2009 to achieve healthy marine ecosystems by 2020 includes a socialcomponent to encourage proactive management through the creation of the Observatory on employment forthe fishing sector (Lazraq, S. 2009).

Although stakeholder involvement in the management process seems to be improving, stakeholder input is stilllimited. So, stakeholder inclusion is considered moderately effective.


Highly Effective

The new EU fisheries policies enhance transparency and participation. The creation of the RAC's (Regionaladvisory councils) is one of the pillars of the reform of the Common Fisheries Policy of 2002. They aim atallowing a bigger participation of the stakeholders of the fishing industry, in relation to the resourcesmanagement in European waters. The South Western RAC (CCR.S) covers the Atlantic area going from theend of Brittany point in the North to the Straits of Gibraltar in the South as well as the ultraperipheric regionsof Madera, Azores and the Canarias Islands (VIII and X CIEM zones and the COPACE divisions 34.1.1., 34.1.2,34.2.0). The CCR.S gathers for its two thirds representatives from the fishing sector (fishermen, ship-owners,organizations of producers, transformers, wholesale fish merchants and organizations of market) of fiveMembers States (Portugal, Spain, France, Belgium and Netherlands). And for one third, it is composed bymembers organizations from the civil society (aquaculture, consumers' and environmental NGO's, women ofsailors, recreational fishing...) (CCR.S 2014).

73

Factor 3.2 - Bycatch Strategy

SCORING GUIDELINES

Four subfactors are evaluated: Management Strategy and Implementation, Scientific Research and Monitoring,Record of Following Scientific Advice, and Enforcement of Regulations. Each is rated as ‘ineffective,’ ‘moderatelyeffective,’ or ‘highly effective.’ Unless reason exists to rate Scientific Research and Monitoring, Record ofFollowing Scientific Advice, and Enforcement of Regulations differently, these rating are the same as in 3.1.

5 (Very Low Concern)—Rated as ‘highly effective’ for all four subfactors considered4 (Low Concern)—Management Strategy rated ‘highly effective’ and all other subfactors rated at least‘moderately effective.’3 (Moderate Concern)—All subfactors rated at least ‘moderately effective.’2 (High Concern)—At minimum, meets standards for ‘moderately effective’ for Management Strategy butsome other factors rated ‘ineffective.’1 (Very High Concern)—Management exists, but Management Strategy rated ‘ineffective.’0 (Critical)—No bycatch management even when overfished, depleted, endangered or threatened speciesare known to be regular components of bycatch and are substatntially impacted by the fishery

EcoFishMan is a project funded by the European Commission that aims to develop and contribute to theimplementation of a new integrated fisheries management system in Europe based on increased stakeholderinvolvement: An ecosystem-based sustainable management system under a precautionary framework that willdefine maximum acceptable negative impact, target elimination of discards, and maintain economic and socialviability (EcoFishMan 2014). In the Algarve (South of Portugal) the Centre of Marine Sciences (CCMAR),supported by the Ministry of Fisheries (DGRM) has scheduled some meetings with local fishermen starting on04/30/2014. Based in the results of the EcoFishMan project, they are interested in involving stakeholders todevelop a management plan for the octopus trap and pot fishery to avoid traditional disputes between regionalfishing groups (Sonderblhom pers comm.). Similar activities have been also undertaken in Spain.

Transparency and participation are being enhanced by the new EU fisheries policies. However, these newmeasures there are not fully in place and increased involvement of fishermen in the fishery resourcemanagement is necessary. Due to recent improvements in stakeholder input and transparency inthe management process is, stakeholder inclusion is considered as "highly effective".

FACTOR 3.2 - BYCATCH STRATEGY

Region / MethodAllKept Critical Strategy Research Advice Enforce

Mauritania / Eastern Central Atlantic /Bottom trawls / Mauritania

No No ModeratelyEffective

ModeratelyEffective

ModeratelyEffective

Ineffective

Morocco / Eastern Central Atlantic /Bottom trawls / Morocco


ModeratelyEffective

ModeratelyEffective

Ineffective

Portugal / Northeast Atlantic / Pots /Portugal

Yes All Species Retained

Portugal / Northeast Atlantic / Traps(unspecified) / Portugal


ModeratelyEffective

ModeratelyEffective

Ineffective

Portugal / Northeast Atlantic / Bottomtrawls / Portugal


ModeratelyEffective

ModeratelyEffective

Ineffective

74

Subfactor 3.2.2 – Management Strategy and Implementation

Considerations: What type of management strategy/measures are in place to reduce the impacts of the fisheryon bycatch species and how successful are these management measures? To achieve a Highly Effective rating,the primary bycatch species must be known and there must be clear goals and measures in place to minimizethe impacts on bycatch species (e.g., catch limits, use of proven mitigation measures, etc.).

Spain / Northeast Atlantic / Pots /Spain

Yes All Species Retained

Spain / Northeast Atlantic / Traps(unspecified) / Spain


ModeratelyEffective

ModeratelyEffective

Ineffective

Spain / Northeast Atlantic / Bottomtrawls / Spain


ModeratelyEffective

ModeratelyEffective

Ineffective



Measures to control bycatch in the trawl fishery included maximum bycatch limits, minimum mesh size andminimum landing size are in place.The new fishing agreement between Mauritania and the EU signed in 2012 included some changes in bycatchmanagement. For demersal species (including black hake), the new fishing zone starts six miles further fromthe coast than it did under the previous protocol and the bycatch limit has increased from 25% to 30%. Thereis a general requirement to land all catches. For demersal fish other than black hake, the 10% by-catchallowance has been maintained, while the 5% by-catch limit for shellfish, squid and cuttlefish under theprevious protocol has been abolished. Furthermore, the ban on bycatch of octopus and hake has been lifted(European Parliament 2013). In order to monitor compliance with the various quotas, catches of demersal fishmust be landed in Mauritania’s only fishing port, namely Nouadhibou (Agnew et al. 2010).

Compliance with these measures were very difficult to control in the industrial fleets due to the lack ofmonitoring and enforcement (FAO/COPACE 2005). However, illegal or pirate fishing has decreased because ofthe increased levels of monitoring, control and surveillance (Agnew et al. 2010).

Bycatch reduction techniques are used but management has not been in place long enough to evaluate theireffectiveness. Management strategy scores as "moderately effective".



The new fisheries agreement between Morocco and the EU includes bycatch limits for all fleets (e.g. 0% ofcephalopods and crustaceans, 5% of deep-sea sharks for bottom trawlers) and the octopus fishery is notpermitted in the protocol (i.e. EU vessels cannot fish for octopus in Moroccan waters). Vessels authorized tofish in the Moroccan fishing zone under the protocol shall take observers on board (25% of authorized vesselswith a tonnage of more than 100 GT and ten voyages per year and per category for other EU fishing vesselswith a tonnage less than or equal to 100 GT) to verify the percentages of bycatch and estimate the quantity of

75

Subfactor 3.2.3 – Scientific Research and Monitoring

Considerations: Is bycatch in the fishery recorded/documented and is there adequate monitoring of bycatch tomeasure fishery’s impact on bycatch species? To achieve a Highly Effective rating, assessments must beconducted to determine the impact of the fishery on species of concern, and an adequate bycatch datacollection program must be in place to ensure bycatch management goals are being met

discards of species of marketable finfish, crustaceans and cephalopods.

Bycatch management strategy scores as "moderately effective" because although management measuressuch as bycatch limits are in place, management has not been in place long enough to evaluate itseffectiveness.

PORTUGAL / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, TRAPS (UNSPECIFIED), PORTUGALPORTUGAL / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, PORTUGALSPAIN / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, TRAPS (UNSPECIFIED), SPAINSPAIN / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, SPAIN


In European waters the new CFP does away with the wasteful practice of discarding through the introductionof a landing obligation. This change in regime serves as a driver for more selectivity, and provides morereliable catch data. To allow fishermen to adapt to the change, the landing obligation will be introducedgradually, between 2015 and 2019 for all commercial fisheries (species under TACs, or under minimum sizes)in European waters. Under the landing obligation all catches have to be kept on board, landed and countedagainst the quotas. Undersized fish cannot be marketed for human consumption purposes. The landingobligation will be applied fishery by fishery. Details of the implementation will be included in multiannual plansor in specific discard plans when no multiannual plan is in place. These details include the species covered,provisions on catch documentation, minimum conservation reference sizes, and exemptions (for fish that maysurvive after returning them to the sea, and a specific de minimis discard allowance under certain conditions).Quota management will also become more flexible in its application to facilitate the landing obligation(European Commission 2014). Some of the bycatch species caught in the octopus fishery in Portugal andSpain are species under TACs such as European hake (13,123 MT in 2014) or horse mackerel (35,000 MT in2014) (ICES 2013a).

Bycatch management strategy scores as "moderately effective" because the new bycatch managementmeasures have not been in place long enough to evaluate their effectiveness.



The FAO/CECAF Working Group on demersal resources' overall objective is to improve the management ofdemersal resources in Northwest Africa through fisheries stock assessments and to ensure the bestsustainable use of the resources for the benefit of the coastal countries. The FAO/CECAF WG regularlyassesses commercial stocks within its area of competence and makes recommendations for the managementof the stocks assessed but also recommends research topics for future meetings (FAO/CECAF 2012).

The IMROP (Institut mauritanien des recherches océanographiques et des pêches) is the research institutioninvolved in the sustainable development and rational exploitation of fish resources in Mauritanian waters. Thisinstitution aims to develop an integrated management approach to fisheries, balancing ecological, economic

76

and social indicators (IMROP 2014).

Mauritania does not carry out catch and effort sampling in its ports, but since 1990, vessel captains areobligated to keep a logbook recording effort deployed by their vessels and the quantities of catch in theMauritanian Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). The data collected by this system are stored in a databasemanaged by the Mauritanian maritime surveillance organisation and sent to IMROP for its use.

There is no bycatch data available for trawl fisheries and some concerns exist about the impact onEndangered, Threatened and Protected (ETP) species. The new EU-Mauritania fishery agreement establishesthat Mauritanian scientific observers will monitor at least two vessels per year for each fishing category, butthis number seems quite low to monitor by-catch.

Scientific research support and collection of observer data exists, but coverage is limited. Therefore scientificresearch/monitoring scores as "moderately effective".



The Fishery Committee for the Eastern Central Atlantic (CECAF) was created by FAO to promote thesustainable utilization of the living marine resources within its area of competence in the West Coast of Africa.Every five years the CECAF assesses commercial stocks in the area.

In Morocco the Institut National de Recherche Halieutique (INRH) is the research institution involved in thesustainable development and rational exploitation of fish resources in Moroccan waters. Research is basedaround the following topics: understanding of upwelling systems and identification of main production areas,environment - fisheries resources relationship studies, assessment of the fishery resources, assessment of thebiological and socio-economical impact on fisheries and on the marine environment, sea mapping of thefishing areas, etc. An annual scientific report is published about the state of the marine resources (EDMED2014).

There are no reports found of routine observers in the cephalopod fishery. A brief research mission wascarried out by FAO observers on board a shrimp-fishing trawler in 1999 to study discards in Morocco (Rojo-Diaz, P & Pitcher, T.J. 2005). A plan to monitor 2160 fishing vessels using VMS is being developed by theMinistry of fisheries but its implementation is facing out the opposition of vessel owners (Finances news2014).

Vessels authorized to fish in the Moroccan fishing zone under the new EU-Morocco protocol are obligated totake on board observers appointed by Morocco on the terms set out below: each quarter, 25% of authorizedvessels with a tonnage of more than 100 GT shall take on board observers; Industrial pelagic fishing vesselsshall take a scientific observer on board for the entire period of activity in the Moroccan fishing zone; other EUfishing vessels with a tonnage less than or equal to 100 GT shall be observed during a maximum of tenvoyages per year and per category of fishing (European Commission 2013b).

Collection of observer or effective video monitoring data exists, but coverage or analysis is limited. Thereforescientific research/monitoring scores as "moderately effective".

77

Subfactor 3.2.4 – Management Record of Following Scientific Advice

Considerations: How often (always, sometimes, rarely) do managers of the fishery follow scientificrecommendations/advice (e.g., do they set catch limits at recommended levels)? A Highly Effective rating isgiven if managers nearly always follow scientific advice.

PORTUGAL / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, TRAPS (UNSPECIFIED), PORTUGALPORTUGAL / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, PORTUGAL


Present forms of fisheries monitoring and record-keeping in Portugal involve VMS, logbooks, docksidemonitoring and digital record keeping at auction sites. Effort monitoring data is collected via logbooksfrom vessels longer than 10 m and via vessel monitoring systems (VMS) for vessels longer than 15 mcontaining a sheltered deck (Pereira 1999).

The PNAB (National Monitoring Program), in force since 2003, is the main program that collects and analyzesbiological data for the national fisheries. Under this program data on fishing effort, catches and discards ofmarine species are collected aboard commercial vessels. The IPMA (former IPIMAR) (Instituto Português doMar e da Atmosfera) is the scientific body responsible for discard sampling from ICES Division IXa under theEU Data Collection Program (DCP). The IPMA is involved in projects such as Marine Important Bird Areas(IBAs) and the IPMA observers record incidental catches of birds and marine mammals. Observers of theSafesea (Sustainable local fisheries and promotion of a safe sea for cetaceans) and MarPro (Conservation ofmarine protected species in mainland Portugal) projects also record incidental catches in Portuguesefisheries. Sampling of the bottom trawl fishery covers both the Otter Bottom Trawl for Crustaceans and theOtter Bottom Trawl for demersal fish. Portugal regularly submits by-catch information to ICES, which providesadvice on the overall exploitation of the bycatch species (rays, sharks, marine mammals, etc) for Europeanwaters.

Although collection of observer and effective video monitoring data exists, coverage of the artisanal fisheries islimited (CIIMAR 2011). Therefore, scientific monitoring/research is considered "moderately effective".

SPAIN / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, TRAPS (UNSPECIFIED), SPAINSPAIN / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, SPAIN


The IEO (Spanish Oceanographic Institute) is responsible for monitoring discards, monthly by sea area andgear, of the entire Spanish fleet except for the Basque fleet which is covered by AZTI-Tecnalia. Since 2002,under the National Sampling program of the Data Collection framework, the discard sampling programme hasbeen conducted for different "métiers" (a "métier" is a homogeneous subdivision, either of a fishery by vesseltype, or of a fleet by voyage type) for all species covered by the Regulation, including cephalopod species(ICES 2012). However, due to budget cuts, observer coverage has been reduced since 2008. For example, thelast time that the Spanish government sent data to ICES about marine mammal bycatch was in 2009 (ICES2014)

Collection of observer and video monitoring data exists, but coverage is limited. Therefore scientificresearch/monitoring is considered "moderately effective".

78

Subfactor 3.2.5 – Enforcement of Management Regulations

Considerations: Is there a monitoring/enforcement system in place to ensure fishermen follow managementregulations and what is the level of fishermen’s compliance with regulations? To achieve a Highly Effectiverating, there must be consistent enforcement of regulations and verification of compliance.



See factor 3.1.4



See factor 3.1.4

PORTUGAL / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, TRAPS (UNSPECIFIED), PORTUGAL


See factor 3.1.4



See factor 3.1.4



Seea factor 3.1.4



See factor 3.1.4


Ineffective

See factor 3.1.5


Ineffective

79

See factor 3.1.5

PORTUGAL / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, TRAPS (UNSPECIFIED), PORTUGAL

Ineffective

See factor 3.1.5


Ineffective

See factor 3.1.5


Ineffective

See factor 3.1.5

80

Criterion 4: Impacts on the habitat and ecosystemThis Criterion assesses the impact of the fishery on seafloor habitats, and increases that base score if there aremeasures in place to mitigate any impacts. The fishery’s overall impact on the ecosystem and food web and theuse of ecosystem-based fisheries management (EBFM) principles is also evaluated. Ecosystem Based FisheriesManagement aims to consider the interconnections among species and all natural and human stressors on theenvironment.

The final score is the geometric mean of the impact of fishing gear on habitat score (plus the mitigation of gearimpacts score) and the Ecosystem Based Fishery Management score. The Criterion 2 rating is determined asfollows:


Rating cannot be Critical for Criterion 4.

Criterion 4 Summary


SCORING GUIDELINES

Factor 4.1 - Impact of Fishing Gear on the Habitat/Substrate

Region / MethodGear Type andSubstrate

Mitigation ofGear Impacts EBFM Score

Mauritania / Eastern Central Atlantic /Bottom trawls / Mauritania


0.00: No EffectiveMitigation


Yellow(2.45)

Morocco / Eastern Central Atlantic /Bottom trawls / Morocco




Yellow(2.45)

Portugal / Northeast Atlantic / Pots /Portugal

3.00: LowConcern



Yellow(3.00)

Portugal / Northeast Atlantic / Traps(unspecified) / Portugal

3.00: LowConcern



Yellow(3.00)

Portugal / Northeast Atlantic / Bottomtrawls / Portugal


0.25: MinimalMitigation


Yellow(2.60)

Spain / Northeast Atlantic / Pots / Spain 3.00: LowConcern



Yellow(3.00)

Spain / Northeast Atlantic / Traps(unspecified) / Spain

3.00: LowConcern



Yellow(3.00)

Spain / Northeast Atlantic / Bottom trawls/ Spain


0.25: MinimalMitigation


Yellow(2.60)

81

5 (None) - Fishing gear does not contact the bottom4 (Very Low) - Vertical line gear3 (Low)—Gears that contacts the bottom, but is not dragged along the bottom (e.g. gillnet, bottom longline,trap) and is not fished on sensitive habitats. Bottom seine on resilient mud/sand habitats. Midwater trawlthat is known to contact bottom occasionally (2 (Moderate)—Bottom dragging gears (dredge, trawl) fished on resilient mud/sand habitats. Gillnet, trap, orbottom longline fished on sensitive boulder or coral reef habitat. Bottom seine except on mud/sand1 (High)—Hydraulic clam dredge. Dredge or trawl gear fished on moderately sensitive habitats (e.g., cobbleor boulder)0 (Very High)—Dredge or trawl fished on biogenic habitat, (e.g., deep-sea corals, eelgrass and maerl)Note: When multiple habitat types are commonly encountered, and/or the habitat classification is uncertain,the score will be based on the most sensitive, plausible habitat type.

Factor 4.2 - Mitigation of Gear Impacts

+1 (Strong Mitigation)—Examples include large proportion of habitat protected from fishing (>50%) withgear, fishing intensity low/limited, gear specifically modified to reduce damage to seafloor and modificationsshown to be effective at reducing damage, or an effective combination of ‘moderate’ mitigation measures.+0.5 (Moderate Mitigation)—20% of habitat protected from fishing with gear or other measures in place tolimit fishing effort, fishing intensity, and spatial footprint of damage caused from fishing.+0.25 (Low Mitigation)—A few measures are in place (e.g., vulnerable habitats protected but other habitatsnot protected); there are some limits on fishing effort/intensity, but not actively being reduced0 (No Mitigation)—No effective measures are in place to limit gear impacts on habitats

Factor 4.3 - Ecosystem-Based Fisheries Management

5 (Very Low Concern)—Substantial efforts have been made to protect species’ ecological roles and ensurefishing practices do not have negative ecological effects (e.g., large proportion of fishery area is protectedwith marine reserves, and abundance is maintained at sufficient levels to provide food to predators)4 (Low Concern)—Studies are underway to assess the ecological role of species and measures are in placeto protect the ecological role of any species that plays an exceptionally large role in the ecosystem.Measures are in place to minimize potentially negative ecological effect if hatchery supplementation or fishaggregating devices (FADs) are used.3 (Moderate Concern)—Fishery does not catch species that play an exceptionally large role in theecosystem, or if it does, studies are underway to determine how to protect the ecological role of thesespecies, OR negative ecological effects from hatchery supplementation or FADs are possible andmanagement is not place to mitigate these impacts2 (High Concern)—Fishery catches species that play an exceptionally large role in the ecosystem and noefforts are being made to incorporate their ecological role into management.1 (Very High Concern)—Use of hatchery supplementation or fish aggregating devices (FADs) in the fishery ishaving serious negative ecological or genetic consequences, OR fishery has resulted in trophic cascades orother detrimental impacts to the food web.

Factor 4.1 - Impact of Fishing Gear on the Habitat/Substrate

MAURITANIA / EASTERN CENTRAL ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, MAURITANIAMOROCCO / EASTERN CENTRAL ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, MOROCCOPORTUGAL / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, PORTUGALSPAIN / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, BOTTOM TRAWLS, SPAIN

Moderate Concern

82

The impact of bottom trawling on the habitat is well documented. All the components involved in trawling havethe capability to affect the seabed. Doors, chains, weights and net can go various cm into the seabed (up to30 cm) depending on the sediment and the technique used, destroying benthic ecosystems (Oceana 2008).Trawling reduces habitat complexity, species richness and biomass, and increases the presence of oportunisticspecies by altering the species composition. Bottom trawling also resuspends sediment, lowers the nutritivequality of sediment, and reduces primary and microbial production. Turbidity impedes the normal functioningof benthic organisms’ feeding and respiratory structures, resulting in hypoxia or anoxia (Morgan &Chuenpagdee 2003). Homogenization of habitats risks loss of ecological function and natural heritage values.Losses may also reduce resilience thereby predisposing the system to sudden and dramatic change ( Hiscocket al. 2006).

If bottom trawling occurs on muddy areas, where the octopus trawl fishery mainly is carried out, the impacton the habitat is considered moderate.


Low Concern

The fishing gear known as alcatruz in Spain and Portugal is an entrapment device used specifically for thecommon octopus fishery. This type of fishing gear consists of a vase-like pot and its effectiveness in catchingoctopus is based on the octopus' behavior: territorial, "hermitlike". So, the common octopus voluntarily entersthe pot seeking shelter and can leave it at any moment. The pots are normally checked every two to five days.The pots are made of plastic or clay and they are normally rigged to long lines containing 50-70 pots (Sobrinoet al. 2011).

This is a passive, lightweight fishing gear which has a negligible impact on the habitat when the fishery isundertaken on rocky, sandy or muddy bottoms where the common octopus fishery normally occurs. Therefore,the impact on the substrate is assessed as "low concern".

Justification:

83

Factor 4.2 - Mitigation of Gear Impacts

Figure 20 Figure 18: Pot made of PVC (North of Portugal)


Low Concern

Trapping is a passive way to catch fish, shellfish, crustaceans and cephalopods. Traps are designed in suchmanner that the entrance itself becomes a non-return device, allowing the target species to enter the trap butmaking it impossible to leave. Different materials are used for building the trap: iron (frame),netting wire, etc.Traps are normally baited with pieces of low value fish such as sardines or mackerels. An artificial bait, knownas "membrillo", is also being used in the Galician (North of Spain) trap fishery

Traps in general have little adverse impact on bottom habitats, they do not create ghost fishing problems andthe energy efficiency and catch quality of trap fishing are high (Cochrane 2002).

Justification:


No Effective Mitigation

The Mauritanian legislation regulates fishing intensity and protects marine habitats through limitations in thenumber of licenses, by-catch limits, fishing area restrictions and the creation of marine protected areas, suchas the Banc d'Arguin National Park. However, information about vulnerable marine ecosystems (VME) presentin the area and management measures particularly defined to protect benthic habitats is very scarce.

84

Moreover, compliance with management measures is not correctly monitored, resulting in massive illegal,unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing in some protected areas (Belhabib et al. 2013).

New management measures to limit the spatial extent of fishing were developed in 2013 in the EU -Mauritania Fisheries Partnership Protocol (FPA) but no effective controls on fishing intensity are in place.Therefore, mitigation of gear impacts for the Mauritanian trawl fishery is assessed as "ineffective".



The Moroccan legislation regulates fishing intensity and protects marine habitats through limitations in thenumber of licenses, by-catch limits, time and area restrictions and the creation of marine protected areas.However, information about vulnerable marine ecosystems (VME) present on the Atlantic coast andmanagement measures particularly defined to protect benthic habitats is very scarce. Moreover, compliancewith these measures is not correctly monitored. So, some fishermen have argued that illegal octopus fishing istaking place in protected areas and during time closures. This poses questions about the real protection ofthese measures in the country (Lavieeco 2007), (Belhabib et al. 2013).

Few efforts exist to limit the spatial extent of fishing. Therefore, mitigation of gear impacts for the Moroccantrawl fishery is assessed as "ineffective".

PORTUGAL / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, POTS, PORTUGALPORTUGAL / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, TRAPS (UNSPECIFIED), PORTUGAL


The Portuguese fishing legislation regulates fishing intensity in the pot/trap fishery and protects marinehabitats through limitations in the number of pots/traps permitted by vessel, limitations in the number oflicenses, time and area restrictions and the declaration of marine protected areas. However, is well-knownthat some vessels normally exceed the maximum number of pots/traps permitted (Sonderblhom pers. comm.)and IUU is also reported in some restricted areas (CIIMAR 2011).

Some efforts exist to limit the spatial extent of fishing but controls on fishing intensity are not effective.Therefore, mitigation of gear impacts for the Portuguese pot/trap fishery is assessed as "no effectivemitigation".

Justification:

85

Figure 21 Figure 18: Pot made of PVC (North of Portugal)


Minimal Mitigation

Bottom trawl is the fishing gear that raises most concerns due to its negative impact on the habitat,overexploitation of commercial species and collateral effects on non-commercial species. The Algarve, off thesouthern coast of Portugal is one of the most important fishing areas of the country. Recent studies show thatof all species captured by this fishing gear, around 70% are discarded due to low or lack of commercialimportance, low gear selectivity and fishing legislation. Direct observations revealed a heavily trawled bottom,with strong parallel marks caused by the doors of the trawl nets (Borges & O’Dor 2010).

The Portuguese government has issued very recently (June 2014) a decree prohibiting all deep-sea fishing -with the exception of longlining - in an area spanning 2,280,000 km , to promote sustainable fisheries and theconservation of deep-sea ecosystems. This decree will also contribute to building up the information databaseon Vulnerable Marine Ecosystems (VMEs) by establishing a requirement to collect samples of accidentallycaptured corals and sponges (Oceana 2014). However, this protection doesn't include shallow areas, wherethe octopus fishery is normally undertaken.Trawling is allowed outside of 6 nm. and the prohibition of trawling within this limit was enhanced through theuse of artificial reefs in sensitive coastal areas. There are also time and area closures to bottom trawling andsome management measures have been introduced to reduce by-catch (Machado 2005).

Trawl fishing heavily impacts the seabed but some management measures are in place. Mitigation of gearimpact is therefore considered as "minimal".

2

86

SPAIN / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, POTS, SPAINSPAIN / NORTHEAST ATLANTIC, TRAPS (UNSPECIFIED), SPAIN


Spanish fishing legislation regulates fishing intensity in the pot/trap fishery and protects marine habitatsthrough limitations in the number of pots/traps permitted by vessel, limitations in the number of licenses, timeand area restrictions and the declaration of marine protected areas. Some sites of Community Importance(SCI) have been also declared in the Spanish coast (e.g: Donana waters and Seabeds in the Bay of Cadiz)(see figure 19) .

In Galician waters the use of pots is banned and in the Gulf of Cadiz, fishing using pots and traps is alsoprohibited at the mounth of the Guadalquivir river and between the Strait of Gibraltar and the longitude 006º12’ W. The number of traps used by vessel is controlled using an identification number and new measures asthe use of Rfid chips have been also proposed.

However, is well-known that some vessels normally exceed the maximum number of pots/traps permitted(Xunta de Galicia 2006) and IUU fishing is also regularly reported (Otero et al. 2005).

While measures exist to reduce the impact of pot/traps on the habitat, no effective controls on fishing intensityare in place and few efforts exist to limit the spatial extent of fishing. Therefore, mitigation of gear impacts forthe Spanish pot/trap fishery is assessed as "no effective mitigation".

Justification:

Figure 22 Figure 19: Protected areas Gulf of Cadiz (www.marineplan.es)

87


Minimal Mitigation

The Gulf of Cadiz (North-eastern Atlantic, Spain) is a notably stressed ecosystem, displaying characteristics ofa heavily exploited area. The exploitation of fisheries composed mainly of trawlers, purse seiners andartisanal boats is intensive in that area with all fleets exerting high impacts on most living groups of theecosystem (Torres et al. 2013). Trawling is allowed outside of 6 nm. and the prohibition of trawling within thislimit was enhanced through the use of artificial reefs in sensitive coastal areas. There are also area closuressuch as bottom trawl closed areas, military areas and marine protected areas (Gulf of Cadiz, Doñana NationalPark, etc) (figure 16) (Ramos et al. 1996).

However, these marine protected area cover a very small marine area. In particular, because the continentalshelf in this area is extensive and depths over 50 meters are reached far from the coast (at least 10 miles),Doñana’s marine ecosystem extends much further than the one currently included in the protected area.Oceana sampled from 2007 to 2010 the waters in the Gulf of Cadiz and showed that the area in front ofDoñana and the coastal region south of the Guadalquivir harbor a wide variety of species and vulnerablecommunities (coral beds, ostrea edulis beds, sea pens and communities of burrowing megafauna, etc). A newarea was proposed to be included within the protected area covering 80,000 hectares (compared to the lessthan 4,000 hectares currently protected), extending 8 kilometres into open waters (Oceana 2010).Fishing intensity is controlled, some vulnerable habitats are protected and new measures are beingdeveloped. Therefore, mitigation of gear impacts is considered "minimal".

Justification:

Figure 23 Figure 19: Protected areas Gulf of Cadiz (www.marineplan.es)

88

Factor 4.3 - Ecosystem-Based Fisheries Management


Moderate Concern

Mauritania is characterised by fast-growing fisheries that have developed over the past decades. Since 1982,scientific trawl surveys have been conducted regularly, allowing assessment of the impact of this increasingfishing pressure on exploited species as well as on demersal communities. Changes in thedemersal community structure were investigated, using Biomass Trophic Spectra representations (Gascuel etal. 2007). It was shown that the demersal biomass has been reduced by 75% on the Mauritanian continentalshelf over the past 25 years, corresponding to a biomass loss of around 20,000 MT per year. Top predatorabundance has been reduced by 8–10-fold and in some case up to 20-fold. The trophic structure has beensignificantly modified and the mean trophic level of the catchable biomass decreased from >3.7 to <3.5. Thisdecline was due to severe overexploitation that affected the various groups in succession (Gascuel et al.2007).

A five year program called "Uses of marine ecosystems" is being undertaken by the IMROP (InstitutMauritanien de Recherches Océanographiques et des Pêches) to improve the knowledge of the structure andfunctioning of ecosystems, including the uses they support (IMROP 2014).

There is not any evidence that the management strategies in place are improving EBFM. Therefore, as thefishery does not catch “exceptional species” and scientific assessment and management of ecosystem impactsare not yet underway, though they are in planning stages, EBFM scores as moderate concern.


Moderate Concern

Morocco became more concerned with the sustainability of its fishing sector when valuable fisheries, like thecephalopods fishery, began to experience resource depletion in the 1990s (Faraj 2009). Illegal fishingpractices (Boudinar 2007), foreign fishing pressure, lack of control and surveillance (Kaczynski, V.M. 1989),fish habitat loss (Menioui, M. 2007) and high rates of discards have led to the over-exploitation of demersalresources (Belhabib et al. 2013). Heavy trawling activity led to shifting stocks (Balguerias et al. 2000) anddeclining stock abundance (Faraj, A & Bez, N. 2007). With this growing concern about long term economicviability of fishing activities a range of legislative and regulating measures were implemented. Thesemeasures, based on "Target Resources-Oriented Management" (TROM) approach, were however essentiallyimplemented to cope with the fishing overcapacity, spatial fleets interaction and growth overexploitationissues, although elements of multispecies interactions and environmental forcing were somewhat taken intoaccount in the management (Faraj 2009).

In 2009 the Halieutis Plan was launched by the Moroccan government. The main objective of this strategy is topreserve fish stocks and marine ecosystems to achieve healthy marine waters in 2020 and to strengthenMorocco's position as the worldwide supplier of quality marine products. The plan is based in three mainaxes: ecological, social and economic sustainability. The plan consists of 16 strategic projects which coverseveral issues: scientific improvement and knowledge transfer, set up TACs to manage fisheries, aquaculturedevelopment, improvement fisheries infrastructures, etc (see figure 20).


89

Justification:

Figure 24 Figure 20: Halieutis plan: axes and objectives (Moroccan government).


Moderate Concern

The trophic role of cephalopod species in the food-web is not well-known although they are part of the dietof various predator species, e.g. cetaceans, seabirds and large epipelagic fish (ICES 2013).

The pots used in the Iberian peninsula (Spain and Portugal) octopus fishery are made of clay, plastic or PVC.They are lightweight and their impact on the habitat seems to be low. However, pots losses and breakages areestimated to be quite high at up to 9000 pots per month (Sobrino et al. 2011) and some concern exists overthe impact of these lost plastic pots in the ecosystem. In Spain, plastic and PVC pots were banned veryrecently (Orden AAA/627/2013) and some concern still exists about the impact of these pots in the ecosystem.

Although the need for an ecosystem based fisheries management (EBFM) has been identified in the reform ofthe CFP (European Commission 2011), no measures have been taken to address the role of cephalopodspecies in the ecosystem and to reduce the amount of plastics in the marine environment.


Justification:

90

The 2009 Green Paper on the Reform of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP; EC 2009) and subsequentcommunications on the upcoming reform of the CFP (European Commission 2011) identified the need forecosystem based fisheries management (EBFM); stated an intention to move towards a longer-term approachto fisheries management; and made commitments to greater stakeholder involvement and management tosupport the three pillars of sustainability: ecological, social and economic (Bloomfield et al. 2011).

On this basis, the Commission defined two key objectives for CFP management decisions: to ensure thatdecisions are based on the best available knowledge about the interactions between fishing and ecosystems,and that both direct and indirect impacts on the marine environment are minimized, in particular by reducingoverall fishing pressure; and to ensure that fisheries measures are used fully to support the cross sectorialapproach defined by the EU’s Marine Strategy and by the Habitats and Birds Directives.

The Making the European Fisheries Ecosystem Plan Operational (MEFEPO) project was designed to furtherdevelop a framework and the supporting evidence base (natural and social science), required to integratethe EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) objectives within a reformed CFP (Bloomfield et al.2011).

ICES is already developing multi-species and mixed fisheries advices for some European waters (North Sea,Baltic Sea, etc).


Moderate Concern

The trophic role of cephalopod species in the food-web is not well-known although they are part of the diet ofvarious predator species, e.g. cetaceans, seabirds and large epipelagic fish (ICES 2013).

Methodologies for quantifying the role of cephalopods as predators and prey are needed as they arepotentially significant components of the ecosystem and their importance tends to be underestimated ifemphasis is given to biomass rather than to energy flows, due to their high P/B (Production per biomass)ratio.

Moreover, the high sensitivity of cephalopods to environmental changes means they can be useful indicatorsand some countries have shown interest in including cephalopods in the trophic descriptor (4th descriptor ofthe GES(Good Environmental Status) criteria) under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (ICES 2013).Although the need for ecosystem based fisheries management (EBFM) has been identified in the reform of theCommon Fisheries Policy (CFP) (European Commission 2011), cephalopods have usually not been specificallyinvestigated. Therefore, there is not any evidence that the management strategies in place for this fishery areimproving EBFM.

As this fishery does not catch “exceptional species” and scientific assessment and management of ecosystemimpacts are not well developed, EBFM scores as moderate concern.


Moderate Concern

The trophic role of cephalopod species in the food-web is not well-known although they are part of the diet ofvarious predator species, e.g. cetaceans, seabirds and large epipelagic fish (ICES 2013).

91

The 2009 Green Paper on the Reform of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) (European Commission 2009) andsubsequent communications on the upcoming reform of the CFP (European Commission 2008)(EuropeanCommission 2011b) identified the need for ecosystem based fisheries management (EBFM); stated anintention to move towards a longer-term approach to fisheries management; and made commitments togreater stakeholder involvement and management to support the three pillars of sustainability: ecological,social and economic.

Within the EU (European Union), the cross-sectoral approach is being pursued under the Integrated MaritimePolicy (IMP) which has been implemented to take account of the multiple pressures from the different sectorsand address interactions between European policies and maritime activities (EC 2007). The Marine StrategyFramework Directive (MSFD) forms the environmental pillar of the Integrated Maritime Policy and is thethematic strategy for the protection and conservation of the marine environment “with the overall aim ofpromoting sustainable use of the seas and conserving marine ecosystems” (European Commission 2008).Economic and social sustainability are acknowledged as being dependent on productive fish stocks and healthymarine ecosystems, and commitments have been made to manage European fisheries within the constraintsof the MSFD to achieve good environmental status (GES) (European Commission 2008)(European Commission2011b).In this context, the MEFEPO (Making the European Fisheries Ecosystem Plan Operational) project wasdesigned to further development of a framework, and the supporting evidence base, required to integrate theMSFD objectives within a reformed CFP (Bloomfield et al. 2011).

Although the need for ecosystem based fisheries management has been identified, scientific assessment andmanagement of ecosystem impacts are not yet underway, though they are in planning stages. So, EBFMscores as moderate concern.

92

AcknowledgementsScientific review does not constitute an endorsement of the Seafood Watch program, or its seafoodrecommendations, on the part of the reviewing scientists. Seafood Watch is solely responsible for theconclusions reached in this report.

Seafood Watch would like to thank the consulting researcher and author of this report, Jose Peiro Crespo, aswell as Dr. Ignacio Sobrino Yraola (Researcher, Spanish Institute of Oceanography), Dr. Luis Ambrosio (FisheriesConsultant, Probitec s.l.) and Alberto Garazo Fabregat (Marketing and quality manager, Bueu fishermen'sassociation - Galicia (Spain)) for reviewing this report for scientific accuracy.

®

®

93

ReferencesAgnew, D.J., Walmsley, S.F., Leotte, F., Barnes, C., White, C. & Good, S. 2010. Estimation of the cost of illegalfishing in West Africa. MRAG. 97 p.

Aguilar, A. & Lowry, L. (IUCN SSC Pinniped Specialist Group). 2013. Monachus monachus. In: IUCN 2013. IUCNRed List of Threatened Species. Version 2013.2. <www.iucnredlist.org>. Downloaded on 01 May 2014.

Anderson, E.D. 1990. Fishery models as applied to elasmobranch fisheries. In H.L. Pratt, Jr., S.H. Gruber & T.Taniuchi (eds). Elasmobranchs as living resources: advances in the biology, ecology, systematics, and the statusof fisheries, pp. 473–484. U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA Technical Report NMFS 90.

Baddyr, M. & Guénette, S. 2001. The fisheries off the Atlantic coast of Morocco 1950-1997. p. 15 In Zeller, D.,Watson, R. & Pauly, D (eds.), Fisheries Impacts on North Atlantic Ecosystems: Catch, Effort andNational/Regional Data Sets. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 9 (3).

Balguerias, E. 1997. Discards in fisheries from Eastern Central Atlantic (CECAF region). pp. 183-214 In Technicalconsultation on reduction of wastage in fisheries. Tokyo, Japan. FAO fisheries report (547). FAO, Rome.

Balguerias, E. Quintero, M.E. & Hernandez-Gonzalez, C.L. 2000. The origin of the Saharan Bank cephalopodfishery. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 57, 15–23. 398

Balguerías, E., Hernández-González, C., Perales-Raya, C. 2002. On the identity of Octopus vulgaris Cuvier, stocksin the Saharan Bank (Northwest Africa) and their spatio-temporal variations in abundance in relation to someenvironmental factors. Bull. Mar. Sci. 71 (1), 147–163.

Barreira, A., Fabra, A., Martínez, A.R. & Tudela, T. 1998. From concept to design: Creating an internationalenvironmental ombudsperson. Local communities and fishing disputes in Saharan and Moroccan waters:opportunities for new dispute resolution mechanisms. The Nautilus Institute for Security and SustainableDevelopment, San José. 47 p.

Belcari, P. Cuccu, D. Gonzalez, M. Srairi, A. & Vidoris, P. 2002. Distribution and abundance of Octopus vulgarisCuvier, 1979 (Cephalopoda: Octopoda) in the Mediterranean Sea. SCI. MAR., 66 (Suppl.2): 157-166

Belhabib, D., Harper, S., Zeller, D. and Pauly, D. 2013. Reconstruction of marine fisheries catches from Morocco(north, central and south), 1950-2010. pp 23-40. In: Belhabib, D., Zeller, D., Harper, S., and Pauly, D. (eds.),Marine fisheries catches in West Africa, 1950-2010, part I. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 20 (3). FisheriesCentre, University of British Columbia, Canada [ISSN 1198-6727].

Biton, S. 2009. Biología de las tortugas marinas e incidencia de la pesca de arrastre en su conservación en elMediterráneo y Golfo de Cádiz. Monografías de la Asociación Chelonia, vol. 1. 117 p.

Bitón, S. Merchán M. & Tomás, J. 2009. Assessing the Use of Turtle Excluder Devices (TEDs) in Bottom Trawlersin the Western Mediterranean Sea: A Preliminary Study

Bloomfield, H.J., Le Quesne, W.L.F., Piet, G.J., Raakjær, J., Aanesen, M., Armstrong, C., Nolan, C., Borges, M.F.,Rui Pinho, M., Porteiro, C., Rockmann, C., Miller, D., Velasco, F., Van Hal, R., Van Hoof, L., Hegland, T.,Christensen, A., Abreu, H., Ounanian, K., Mendes, H., Hily, C., Duchêne, J., Pastoors, M.A., Christie, S., Ramirez,P., Zetterholm, S., Paramor, O.A.L., Rogers, S.I., Connolly, P. and Frid, C.L.J. 2011. Making the EuropeanFisheries Ecosystem Plan Operational (MEFEPO): Synthesis and review of progress towards an ecosystemapproach to fisheries management. Making the European Fisheries Ecosystem Plan Operation (MEFEPO): Work

94

Package 8 Report.

Borges, T. & O’Dor, R. 2010. Biodiversity and fisheries: a study case in the South coast of Portugal (Algarve).

Borges, T.C., Erzini, K., Bentes, L., Costa, M.E., Goncalves, J.M.S., Lino, P.G., Pais, P & Ribeiro, J. 2001. By-catchand discarding practices in ®ve Algarve (southern Portugal) metiers. J. Appl. Ichthyol. 17 (2001), 104±114

Boudinar, B. 2007. Diagnostic du secteur de la pêche maritime au Maroc. Ministerio de Medio Ambiente y MedioRural y Marino de España. 229 p.

Brito, C., Vieira, N., Sá, E. & Carvalho, I. 2009. Cetaceans’ occurrence off the west central Portugal coast: acompilation of data from whaling, observations of opportunity and boat-based surveys.

Campos, A., Fonseca, P., Fonseca, T., Parente, J. 2007. Definition of fleet components in the Portuguese bottomtrawl fishery. Fish. Res. 83, 185–191.

Casale, P. Mazaris, A.D. & Freggi, D. 2011. Estimation of age at maturity of loggerhead sea turtles Carettacaretta in the Mediterranean using length-frequency data. Endangered species research. Vol. 13: 123–129,2011 doi: 10.3354/esr00319

Casale, P., Cattarino, L. Freggi, D. Rocco, M. & Argano, R. 2007. Incidental catch of marine turtles by Italiantrawlers and longliners in the central Mediterranean. Aquatic Conservation-Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems17: 686–701.

Case, R. 1999. "Octopus vulgaris" (On-line), Animal Diversity Web. Accessed April 11, 2014 athttp://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/accounts/Octopus_vulgaris/

CCR.S Southern Western Regional Advisory Council. Retrieved June, 27, 2014 from: http://www.ccr-s.eu/EN/

Chassot, E., Balguerías, E., Guitton, J., Jouffre, D., Tfeil, B., Gascuel, D., 2010. Diagnostic de l’état du stock depoulpe (Octopus vulgaris) mauritanien. Synthèse et nouvelles évaluations par approche globale. In: Labrosse, P.,Brahim, K., Ould Taleb, O.S. (Eds.), Evaluation des ressources et aménagement des pêcheries de la ZEEmauritanienne, Rapport du 6e groupe de travail de l’IMROP. Nouadhibou, Mauritanie, pp. 95–116.

CIIMAR. 2011. Estudo de caracterizacao da actividade piscatoria costeira e dos seus impactos nos recursos enas comunidades marinhas do Litoral Norte de Portugal. Polis litoral project. Unpublished.

ClientEarth. 2014. Retrieved May, 16, 2014 from: http://www.clientearth.org/

Cochrane, K.L. (ed.). A fishery managerís guidebook. Management measures and their application. FAOFisheries Technical Paper. No. 424. Rome, FAO. 2002. 231p.

Coelho, R. & Erzini, K. 2008. Effects of fishing methods on deep water shark species caught as by-catch offsouthern Portugal. Hydrobiology Volume 202, 2008, pp 187-193

Coelho, R., Bertozzi, M.,Ungaro. N. & Ellis, J. 2009. Raja undulata. In: IUCN 2013. IUCN Red List of ThreatenedSpecies. Version 2013.2. <www.iucnredlist.org>. Downloaded on 28 April 2014.

Correia, A.T., Isidro E.J., Antunes, C. & Coimbra, J. 2002. Age, growth, distribution and ecological aspects ofConger conger leptocephali collected in the Azores, based on otolith analysis of premetamorphic specimens.Marine Biology (2002) 141: 1141–1151 DOI 10.1007/s00227-002-0908-4

95

Cortes, E. 2000. Life History Patterns and Correlations in Sharks. Rev. Fish. Sci., 8(4):299–344.

Bycatch of crustacean and fish bottom trawl fisheries from southern Portugal (Algarve). Scientia Marina 72(4)December 2008, 801-814. ISSN: 0214-8358 doi: 10.3989/scimar.2008.72n4801

CSC. 2013. Rapport de la sixième réunion du Comité Scientifique Conjoint RIM-UE - Rennes, 2-5 avril 2013 -

Culik, B.M. 2004. Review of Small Cetaceans. Distribution, Behaviour, Migration and Threats. 2004. Compiled forCMS by Boris M. Culik. Illustrations by Maurizio Wurtz, Artescienza. UNEP / CMS Secretariat, Bonn, Germany.343 pages.

DOG. 2013. Galician official gazette number 160. Page 33959: "RESOLUTION of 14 May 2013 approving themanagement plan for the octopus (O. vulgaris) trap fishery for the 2013-2014 campaign".

EcoFishMan project. 2014. Results-based management to contribute to the reform of the Common FisheriesPolicy. Retrieved June, 27, 2014 from: http://www.ecofishman.com/

EDMED. 2014. European Directory of Marine Environmental Data (EDMED). Pan - European infrastructure forocean & marine data management. Accessed 18 June 2014 inhttps://www.bodc.ac.uk/data/information_and_inventories/edmed/org/691/

El Ouadghiri, A. 2013. Agripeche. L'actualites economique au Maroc. Abondance des stocks de poulpe pour lasaison été 2013.

El Pais. 2013. In press: "The Galician department of the sea open the door to introduce some changes in theOctopus management plan after fishermen's protests".

Ellis, J. 2005. Raja clavata. In: IUCN 2013. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2013.2.<www.iucnredlist.org>. Downloaded on 28 April 2014.

Encyclopedia of life. 2014. Sepia officinalis. Retrieved May, 13 2013 from: //http:www.eol.org

European Commission. 2008. Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament:The role of the CFP in implementing an ecosystem approach to marine management. COM(2008) 187 final.Commission of the European Communities, Brussels.

European Commission. 2009. Green Paper on the Reform of the Common Fisheries Policy. COM(2009)163 final.Commission of the European Communities, Brussels.

European Commission 2011. Studies in the Field of the Common Fisheries Policy and Maritime Affairs. Lot 4:Impact Assessment Studies related to the CFP. Impact Assessment of Discard Reducing Policies. EU DiscardAnnex

European Commission. 2011. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, theEuropean Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Reform of the Common FisheriesPolicy. COM(2011) 417 final. European Commission, Brussels.

European Commission. 2013. Proposal for a council decision on the conclusion of the Protocol between theEuropean Union and the Kingdom of Morocco for the FPA. COM92013) 648 final.

European Commission. 2013b. Proposal for a council decision on the conclusion of the protocol between the

96

European Union and the Kingdom of Morocco setting out the fishing opportunities and financial contributionprovided for in the Fisheries Partnership Agreement in force between the two Parties. Com (2013) 648 final.2013/0315 (NLE)

European Commission 2014. The Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). Management of Eu fisheries. Retrieved May,15, 2013. from: http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/cfp/index_en.htm

European Parliament. 2013. Draft European Parliament Resolution: On the proposal for a Council decision onthe conclusion of the Protocol setting out fishing opportunities and the financial contribution provided for in theFisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Islamic Republic of Mauritania for aperiod of two years. 15777/2012– C7-0419/2012 – 2012/0258(NLE)

FAO. 2006. FAO working group on the assessment of small pelagic fish off Northwest Africa. FAO FisheriesReport No. 811

FAO. 2011. Fisheries management. 4. Marine protected areas and fisheries. FAO Technical Guidelines forResponsible Fisheries No. 4, Suppl. 4. Rome. 198 pp.

FAO/CECAF. 2012. Report of the FAO/CECAF Working Group on the Assessment of Demersal Resources –Subgroup North Banjul, the Gambia, 6–14 November 2007. CECAF/ECAF SERIES 10/71.

FAO/COPACE. 2005. Évaluation des stocks et amenagement des pecheries de la EZZ Mauritanienne. Rapport ducinquième Groupe de travail IMROP Nouadhibou, Mauritanie, 9-17 décembre 2002. COPACE/PACE SÉRIES 05/66

Faraj, A & Bez, N. 2007. Spatial considerations for the Dakhla stock of Octopus vulgaris: indicators, patterns,and fisheries interactions. ICES J. Mar. Sci. (2007) 64 (9): 1820-1828. doi: 10.1093/icesjms/fsm160.

Faraj, A. 2009. Techniques geostatistiques au service de l'amenagement de la pecherie cephalopodiereMarocaine. These pour obtenir le grade de Docteur de l’Ecole des Mines de Paris Spécialité “Géostatistique”présentée et soutenue publiquement par Abdelmalek FARAJ. ED n°398 – Géosciences et Ressources Naturelles,Paris

Finance news. 2014. Localisation des pêcheries et suivi des navires par satellite : Prémices d'un nouvelaccrochage Akhannouch/armateurs. Retrieved June 21 2014. From: http://www.financenews.press.ma/La-Une/localisation-des-pecheries-et-suivi-des-navires-par-satellite-premices-dun-nouvel-accrochage-akhannoucharmateurs.html

Fishbase. 2014. http://www.fishbase.de/

Fonseca, T., Campos, A., Afonso-Dias, M., Fonseca, P. & Pereira, J. 2008. Trawling for cephalopods off thePortuguese coast—Fleet dynamics and landings composition. Fisheries Research 92 (2008) 180–188

Fontaubert, C. & Zara, P. 2012. Reducing poverty for artisanal fishermen in Morocco K&IN: The journal of MCC& MCA technical staff, local food security, global markets. Volume 2, Issue 1 | Winter/Spring 2012-13

Freire, J. & Gonzalez-Gurriaran, E. 1995. Ecology of the velvet swimming crab Necora puber in mussel raftareas of the Ria de Arousa (Galicia, NW Spain). lMARINE ECOLOGY PROGRESS SERIES Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. Vol.119: 139-154,1995.

Gascuel, D., Labrosse, P., Meissa, B., Ould Taleb Sidi, M.M. & Guénette, S. 2007. Decline of demersal resourcesin North-West Africa : an analysis of Mauritanian trawl-survey data over the past 25 years. African Journal of

97

Marine Science, vol. 29, 331-345.

Gepeto project. 2014. Specific-target octopus fleets in the Iberian Northwest. GEPETO Sharing knowledge forsustainable fisheries. European Union.

Gonzalez-Gurriaran, E. 1985. Crecirniento de la necora Macropipuspuber (L.) (Decapoda, Brachyura) en la Riade Arousa (Galicia. NW Espana), y primeros datos sobre la dinamica de la poblacion. Boln Inst. Esp. Oceanogr.2: 33-51

Graham, J.P., Robin, J.P. & Portela, J.M. 1996. Data Collection For Assessment Of Fished Cephalopod Stocks.Project No 96/081: Data Collection For Assessment Of Fished Cephalopod Stocks.

Guénette, S. Balguerías, E. & Santamaría, M.T.G. 2001. Spanish fishing activities along the Saharan andMoroccan coast. pp. 206-213 In Zeller D, Watson R and Pauly D (eds.), Fisheries Impacts on North AtlanticEcosystems: Catch, Effort and National/Regional Data Sets. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 9(3).

Guerra, A. & Rocha, F. 1994. The life history of Loligo vulgaris and Loligo forbesi (Cephalopoda: Loliginidae) inGalician waters (NW Spain). CSIC

Guerra, A., Allcock, L. & Pereira, J. 1994. Cephalopod life history, ecology and fisheries: An introduction.Manuscript

Haddad, N. 1994. Evaluation de l’expérience de l’observateur scientifique marocain, Institut agronomique etvétérinaire de Hassan II, Rabat, Maroc. 140 p.

Hiscock, K., Marshall, C., Sewell, J. & Hawkins, S.J. 2006. The structure and functioning of marine ecosystems:an environmental protection and management perspective. English Nature Research Reports, No 699.

Holthuis, L.B. 1987. Necora, a new genus of European swimming crabs (Crustacea Decapoda, Portunidae) andits type species, Cancer puber L., 1767. Zoologische Mededelingen 61 (1): 1–14.

IBERMIX project. 2004. Identification and segmentation of mixed-species fisheries operating in the AtlanticIberian peninsula waters (IBERMIX project). European Commission Directorate-General for Fisheries andmaritime Affairs (Contract Ref.: FISH/2004/03-33).

ICES. 2005. Report of the Planning Group on Commercial Catch, Discards and Biological Sampling (PGCCDBS),1-4 March 2005, Oostende, Belgium. ICES CM 2005/ACFM: 15.

ICES 2008. EC request on evaluation of long-term management of the NEA mackerel stock and fishery. InReport of the ICES Advisory Committee, 2008. ICES Advice 2008. Book 9. Section 9.3.2.1.

ICES 2012. Report of the Working Group on Cephalopod Fisheries and Life History (WGCEPH), 27–30 March2012, Cadiz, Spain. ICES CM 2012/SSGEF:04. 241 pp.

ICES Advice 2013, Book 9. Mackerel in the Northeast Atlantic (combined Southern, Western, and North Seaspawning components).

ICES Advice 2013 Book 9. Widely distributed and migratory stocks. Blue whiting in Subareas I–IX, XII, and XIV

ICES Advice 2013, Book 7. Bay of Biscay and Atlantic Iberian waters. Horse mackerel (Trachurus trachurus) inDivision IXa (Southern stock)

98

ICES 2013. Report of the Workshop on the Necessity for Crangon and Cephalopod Management (WKCCM), 8–9October 2013, Copenhagen, Denmark. ICES CM 2013/ACOM:82. 80 pp.

ICES. 2013e. Report of the Working Group on Elasmobranch Fishes (WGEF). 17–21 June 2013 Lisbon, Portugal

ICES. 2014. Bycatch of small cetaceans and other marine animals – Review of national reports under CouncilRegulation (EC) No. 812/2004 and other published documents. ICES Advice 2014, Book 1

ICES. 2014b. Mackerel in the Northeast Atlantic (combined Southern, Western, and North Sea spawningcomponents). Widely distributed and migratory stocks. ICES Advice 2014, Book 9

ICES. 2013d. European hake in in Divisions VIIIc and IXa (Southern stock). Bay of Biscay and Atlantic Iberianwaters. ICES Advice 2013, Book 7

Ictioterm 2013. Retrieved June, 29, 2014 from: www.ictioterm.es

IMROP. 2013. ATLAS MARITIME des zones vulnérables en Mauritanie Un appui à la gestion écosystémique etéquitable.

IMROP. n.d. Institut Mauritanien de Recherches Océanographiques et des Pêches. Retrieved June, 16, 2014 fromhttp://www.imrop.mr/#

Infosamak 2005. Morocco: Resumption of Octopus Fishing. Source: www.infosamak.org/english/actualite.cfm?id=379

Infosamak 2011. Value Chain Report - Morocco

IUCN 2014. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2014.1. <www.iucnredlist.org>. Downloaded on 01July 2014.

Jiménez, M.P., Sobrino, I., Ramos, F. 2004. Objective methods for defining mixed-species trawl fisheries inSpanish waters of the Gulf of Cadiz. Fisheries Research 67, 195–206.

Junta de Andalucia 2001. Especies de interés pesquero en el litoral de Andalucía Junta de Andalucía. Consejeríade Agricultura y Pesca. Sevilla. ISBN: 84-8474-014-5

Kaczynski, V.M. 1989. Foreign fishing fleets in the subSaharan West African EEZ. The coastal state perspective.Marine Policy 13 (1): 2-15.

Kelleher, K. 2005. Discards in the world’s marine fisheries. An update. Fish. Tech. Pap. (470), FAO, Rome. 131 p.

Kitching, J. A., Sloane, J. F., Ebling, F. J. 1959. The ecology of Lough Ine. VIII. Mussels and their predators. J.Anim. Eco~2. 8: 331-341

Lavieeco. 2007. Retrieved June, 29, 2014 from: http://www.lavieeco.com/news/economie/10-du-poulpe-destine-a-l-export-est-d-origine-frauduleuse-2566.html

LAZRAQ, S. 2009. HALIEUTIS, Stratégie de développement et de compétitivité du secteur halieutique marocainà l’horizon 2020. Directrice des Industries de la Pêche. Ministère de l’Agriculture et de la Pêche MaritimeDépartement de la Pêche Maritime.

99

Leatherwood, S. 1975. Some Observations of Feeding Behavior of Bottle-Nosed Dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) inthe Northern Gulf of Mexico and (Tursiops cf T. gilli) off Southern California, Baja California, and Nayarit, Mexico.Marine Fisheries Review 37(9):10-16.

Leitao, F., Baptista, V., Erzini, K., Iritani, D & Zeller, D. 2014. Reconstruction of mainland Portugal Fisheriescatches 1950-2010. The University of British Columbia Working Paper Series Paper #2014 - 08. Sea around usproject.

Lopez, A. Pierce, G.J. Santos, M.B. Gracia, J. & Guerra, A. 2003. Fishery by-catches of marine mammals inGalician waters: results from on-board observations and an interview survey of ?shermen

Loughlin, T. R., L. Consiglieri, R. L. Delong, & A. T. Actor. 1983. Incidental Catch of Marine Mammals by ForeignFishing Vessels, 1978-81. Marine Fisheries Review 45(7-8-9):44-49.

Coll, M., Carreras, M,. Cornax, M.J., Massutí, E., Morote, E., Pastor, X., Quetglas, A., Sáeza, R, Silva, L., Sobrino,I., Torres, M.A., Tudela, S., Harper, S., Zeller, D. & Pauly, D. 2014. Closer to reality: Reconstructing totalremovals in mixed fisheries from Southern Europe. Fisheries Research 154 (2014) 179–194

Machado, A. 2005. Medidas tecnicas de conservacao dos recurso da pesca - continente. Manual pratico.Direccao geral das pescas e aquicultura.

Mangold, K. 1983. Octopus vulgaris. In: P.R. Boyle (Ed.) Cephalopod life cycles Vol. 1, pp 335-364. Academicpress. London.

Mangolk, K. 1998. The Octopodinae from the Eastern Atlantic Ocean and the Mediterranean Sea. In:Systematics and biogeography of cephalopods. II (N.A. Voss, M. Vecchione & R.B. Toll, eds), 521 –547.Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology, Washington, DC.

Marine Scotland. 2011. Marine and fisheries. Velvet crab. Available at:http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/marine/marine-environment/species/fish/shellfish/VelvetCrab

Marine Turtle Specialist Group 1996. Caretta caretta. In: IUCN 2014. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.Version 2014.1. <www.iucnredlist.org>. Downloaded on 26 June 2014.

Menioui, M. 2007. Projet SMAP III. Sensibilisation et création d’un cadre politique favorisant l’intégration del’environnement et du développement avec l’accent sur la gestion intégrée des zones côtières. Ministère del’aménagement du territoire, de l’eau et de l’environnement, Rabat. 22 p.

Millan, M. 1992. Descripción de la pesquería de cerco en la Región SuratlánticaEspa˜nola y Atlántico-NorteMarroquí. Informes Técnicos, vol. 136. InstitutoEspa˜nol de Oceanografía, pp. 70.

Mora, C. Myers, R.A. Coll, M. Libralato, S. & Pitcher, T.J. 2009. Management Effectiveness of the World’s MarineFisheries. PLoS Biol 7(6): e1000131. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1000131

Morey, G., Serena, F., Mancusi, C., Fowler, S.L., Dipper, F. & Ellis, J. 2006. Squatina squatina. In: IUCN 2014.IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2014.1. <www.iucnredlist.org>. Downloaded on 26 June 2014.

Morgan, L. & Chuenpagdee, R. 2003. Shifting Gears addressing the collateral impacts of fishing methods in U.S.waters. Island Press, Washington, D.C

MRAG. 2005. Review of Impacts of Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing on Developing Countries.

100

Muntz, L.. Ebling, F. J., Kitching, J. A. 1965. The ecology of Lough Ine. XIV. Predatory activity of large crabs. J.Anim.Ecol. 34: 315-329

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 2014. Fisheries statistics division: commercial fisheries and foreigntrade information. National Marine Fisheries Service. Accessed March 31, 2014. Available at:http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/commercial-fisheries/index

Oceana 2008. European trawlers are destroying the oceans. Accessed at:http://oceana.org/sites/default/files/reports/european_trawlers_destroying_oceans.pdf

Ocena 2010. DOÑANA AND THE GULF OF CADIZ. Marine protected area expansion proposal

Oceana 2014. Oceana website. Media & Reports. Retrieved June, 29, 2014 from:http://oceana.org/en/eu/media-reports/press-releases/portugal-protects-over-2-million-km2-from-trawling

Ono, K., Punt A.E., Rivot, E. 2012. Model performance analysis for Bayesian biomass dynamics models usingbias, precision and reliability metrics. Fisheries Research 125-126: 173-183.

ONP 2013. Office national des peches. Statistiques des produits de la mer

Otero, J. Alvarez-Salgado, X.A. González, A. Miranda, A. Groom, S.B. Cabanas, J.M. Casas, G. Wheatley, B. &Guerra, A. 2008. Bottom-up control of common octopus, Octopus vulgaris, in the Galician upwelling system,northeast Atlantic Ocean. Marine Ecology Progress Series 362: 181–192

Otero, J., Rocha, F., Gonzalez, A.F., Gracia, J. and Guerra, A. 2005. Modelling artisanal coastal fisheries of Galicia(NW Spain) based on data obtained from fishers: the case of Octopus vulgaris, Sci. Mar., 69(4): pp. 577–585.

Pala, C. 2013. Detective work uncovers under-reported overfishing. Nature 496:18

Pechecops and Coalition for Fair Fisheries Arrangement (CFFA). August 2006. Mauritania EU FisheriesPartnership Agreement: What impacts on fisheries sustainable development in Mauritania.

Pereira 1999.Control of the Portuguese artisanal octopus fishery. Proceedings of the international conference inintegrated fisheries monitoring. FAO.

Pierce, G. J., Allcock, L., Bruno, I., Bustamante, P., González, Á., Guerra, Á., Jereb, P. 2010. Cephalopod biologyand fisheries in Europe. ICES Cooperative Research Report No. 303. 175 pp.

Pierce, G.J., Robin, J-P & Portela, J.M. 1996. Project Nº 96/081: Data collection for assessment of fishedcephalopod stocks

Pompa, S., Ehrlich, P.R. & Ceballos, G. 2011. Global distribution and conservation of marine mammals. vol. 108no. 33, 13600–13605, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1101525108

Pramod, G., Pitcher, T.J., Pearce, J. and Agnew, D. editors 2008. Source of information supporting estimates ofunreported fishery catches (IUU) for 59 countries and the high seas. Fisheries Centre Research Reports 16 (4).242 p.

Quetglas, A., Alemany, F., Carbonell, A., Merella, P., Sanchez, P. 1998. “Biology and fishery of Octopus vulgarisCuvier, 1797, caught by trawlers in Mallorca (Baltic Sea, Western Mediterranean).” Fisheries Research. 36: 237-249.

101

Ramos, F., Sobrino, I. & Jimenez M.P. 1996. Cartografia tematica de caladeros de la flota de arrastre en el Golfode Cadiz. Informaciones tecnicas 45/96. Junta de Andalucia.

Rojo-Diaz, P & Pitcher, T.J. 2005. An estimation of compliance of the fisheries of Morocco with article 7(Fisheries Management) of the UN Code of Conduct for Responsible Fishing. 23 p

Scharm, W. & Schack, U. 2006. Fighting illegal unreported unregulated fishing (IUU) in Mauritania. GermanSociety for Technical Cooperation, Bonn, Germany. 4 p.

2004. Chelonia mydas. In: IUCN 2013. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2013.2.<www.iucnredlist.org>. Downloaded on 01 May 2014.

Sequeira, M., & Ferreira, C. 1994. Coastal fisheries and cetacean mortality in Portugal. Report of theInternational Whaling Commission, Special Issue 15. p. 165-181.

Serena, F., Mancusi, C., Clò, S., Ellis, J. & Valenti, S.V. 2009. Mustelus mustelus. In: IUCN 2014. IUCN Red List ofThreatened Species. Version 2014.1. <www.iucnredlist.org>. Downloaded on 26 June 2014.

Silva, L. Acosta, J.J. & Soriano, M.M. 2012. An update of cephalopod landings data of the Spanish fishing fleetoperating in ICES area for the 2000-2012 period. Working Document presented to the ICES WGCEPH WorkingGroup on Cephalopod Fisheries and Life History. Cádiz, SPAIN, 27-30 March 2012

Silva, L., Sobrino, I., Ramos, F. 2002. Reproductive biology of common octopus (Octopus vulgaris Cephalopoda:Octopodidae) in the Gulf of Cádiz (SW Spain). Bull. of Mar. Sci., 71(2): 837-850.

Silva, L., Sobrino, I., Ramos, F. 2004. Reproductive biology of Eledone moschata (Cephalopoda: Octopodidae) inthe Gulf of Cadiz (south-western Spain, ICES Division IXa). J. Mar. Biol. Ass. UK., 84, 1221-1226.

Sobrino, I. & García, T. 2007. Reproductive aspects of the rose shrimp Parapenaeus longirostris (Lucas, 1846) inthe Gulf of Cadiz (southwestern Iberian Peninsula). Bol. Inst. Esp. Oceanogr, 2007

Sobrino, I., Jiménez, M.P., Ramos, F., Baro, J. 1994. Descripción de las pesqueríasdemersales de la RegiónSuratlántica Espanola, vol. 151. Boletín Instituto Espanol de Oceanografía, 76 pp.

Sobrino, I., Juarez, A., Rey, J., Romero, Z. & Baro, J. 2011. Description of the clay pot fishery in the Gulf of Cadiz(SW Spain) for Octopus vulgaris: Selectivity and exploitation pattern. Fisheries Research 108 (2011) 283–290.

Sobrino, I., Silva, L., Bellido, J.M. & Ramos, F. 2002. Relationship between common octopus and cuttlefishlandings and environmental parameters in the Gulf of Cádiz (SW Spain). Bulletin of Marine Science,71(2):851-865.

Sonderblohm, C. P., Pereira, J., and Erzini, K. 2014. Environmental and fishery-driven dynamics of the commonoctopus (Octopus vulgaris) based on time-series analyses from leeward Algarve, southern Portugal. – ICESJournal of Marine Science, doi:10.1093/icesjms/fst189.

STECF 2008. Scientific, technical and economic committee for fisheries. Evaluation of the STECF/SGMOS 07-04working group on discards. April 2008.

STECF 2013. Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF) – Review of scientific advicefor 2014 – Consolidated Advice on Fish Stocks of Interest to the European Union (STECF-13-27). 2013.Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, EUR 26328 EN, JRC 86158, 575 pp.

102

Stevens, J.D., Bonfil, R., Dulvy, N. & Walker, P. 2000. The effects of fishing on sharks, rays, and chimaeras(chondrichthyans), and the implications for marine ecosystems. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 57: 476–494.

Suda, Y., Regregui, A., Sadakane, H. & Machii, T. 1996. Bottom fishes collected by T/S Koyo-Maru off Agadir,Morocco, with notes on some fishery aspects. Journal of National Fisheries University. 44(2) 55-70 (1996)

Taylor, B.L., Baird, R., Barlow, J., Dawson, S.M., Ford, J., Mead, J.G., Notarbartolo di Sciara, G., Wade, P. &Pitman, R.L. 2011. Globicephala macrorhynchus. In: IUCN 2014. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version2014.1. <www.iucnredlist.org>. Downloaded on 27 June 2014.

Torres, M.A. Coll, M. Heymans, J.J. Christensenc, V. & Sobrino, I. 2013. Food-web structure of and fishingimpacts on the Gulf of Cadiz ecosystem (South-western Spain). Ecological Modelling 265 (2013) 26– 44.

Tsangridis, A., Sanchez, P., Ioannidou, D. 2002. Exploitation patterns of Octopus vulgaris in two Mediterraneanareas. Scientia Marina. 66 (1): 59-68.

Walker, T.I., Cavanagh, R.D., Stevens, J.D., Carlisle, A.B., Chiaramonte, G.E., Domingo, A., Ebert, D.A., Mancusi,C.M., Massa, A., McCord, M., Morey, G., Paul, L.J., Serena, F. & Vooren, C.M. 2006. Galeorhinus galeus. In: IUCN2014. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2014.1. <www.iucnredlist.org>. Downloaded on 26 June2014.

Wallace, B. P., C. Y. Kot, A. D. DiMatteo, T. Lee, L. B. Crowder, and R. L. Lewison. 2013. Impacts of fisheriesbycatch on marine turtle populations worldwide: toward conservation and research priorities. Ecosphere4(3):40. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1890/ES12-00388.1

Walton, A. Gomei, M. & Di Carlo, G. 2013. STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT. Participatory Approaches for thePlanning and Development of Marine Protected Areas. World Wide Fund for Nature and NOAA—National MarineSanctuary Program. 36 pages.

Wood J.B. 2014. Retrieved on April, 20, 2014 from: http://www.thecephalopodpage.org/Octopusvulgaris.php

World Ocean Review 2014. Mauritania, Senegal and the difficult path towards good fisheries management

Xunta de Galicia 2006. Los recursos marinos de Galicia. Serie tecnica Nº 6. La pesca de pulpo comun (Octopusvulgaris) con nasas en la costa gallega (1999-2004).

Zeeberg, J., Corten, A. & De Graaf, E. 2006. Bycatch and release of pelagic megafauna in industrial trawlerfisheries off northwest Africa. Fisheries research, 78, 186-195.

Zollet 2005. A Review of Cetacean Bycatch in Trawl Fisheries. Literature Review Prepared for the NortheastFisheries Science Center

103

Appendix A: Extra By Catch SpeciesATLANTIC MACKEREL




Medium

Atlantic mackerel is assessed on the Fishbase website as having medium resilience (minimum populationdoubling time 1.4 - 4.4 years (rm=0.33-0.56; K=0.23-0.27; tm=2-3; tmax=17; Fec=200,000)) and moderatevulnerability (44 of 100) (Fishbase 2014). Where rm is the intrinsic rate of population growth (1/year); k is aparameter of the von Bertalanffy growth function (also known as growth coefficient), expressing the rate(1/year) at which the asymptotic length is approached; tm is the age at first maturity; tmax is the maximumage that the species can reach; and fec refers to fecundity, the average number of eggs that a female canproduce in each lay.


Low Concern

SSB (stock Spawning biomass) has increased considerably since 2002 and remains high, aboveB (precautionary reference point for spawning stock biomass (SSB)) and MSY B (biomass referencepoint that triggers a cautious response within the new ICES MSY framework, and is currently a proxy basedon, and equal to, B ). The 2002 and 2006 year classes are the strongest year classes in the time-series. Theincoming 2011 year class appears to be above average (ICES 2014b).

There is a reliable quantitative stock assessment, and biomass is estimated to be well above the targetreference point. However, because the MSY B reference point is a proxy based on B , a lessconservative reference point than B , abundance is considered as "low concern" (ICES 2014b).

pa trigger

pa

trigger pa

MSY

Justification:

Figure 25 Figure 6: ICES advice. Mackerel in the Northeast Atlantic. Summary of stock assessment (SpawningStock Biomass) (ICES 2013a)

104




Very Low Concern

Traditionally, the fishing areas with higher catches of mackerel have been in the northern North Sea, aroundthe Shetland Islands, and off the west coast of Scotland and Ireland. The southern fishery off Spain’s northerncoast has also accounted for significant catches. Mackerel in the southern component are taken in a mixture ofpurse-seine, demersal trawl, line, and gillnet fisheries. The highest catches (87%) from the Southerncomponent are taken in the first half of the year, mainly from Division VIIIc, and consist of adult fish. In thesecond half of the year, the catches are mainly taken in Division IXa and contain a high proportion of juveniles(ICES 2014b).

While fishing mortality was above F (limit reference point for fishing mortality) during the early 2000s (seefigure), current fishing mortality (2012) is estimated to be below F (fishing mortality consistent withachieving Maximum Sustainable Yield) and F (precautionary reference point for fishing mortality) at0.19. Fishing mortality is therefore ranked as "very low concern".

lim

MSY

pa

Justification:

Figure 26 Figure 7: ICES advice. Mackerel in the Northeast Atlantic. Summary of stock assessment. Fishingmortality (ICES 2013a)


40-60%


105





20-40%




Justification:

106

AXILLARY SEABREAM





Medium

Axillary seabream is assessed on the Fishbase website as having medium resilience (minimum populationdoubling time 1.4 - 4.4 years (K=0.17-0.23; tm=2-3; tmax=7; Fec=85,000)) and moderate vulnerability (43 of100) (Fishbase 2014)


High Concern

The FAO/CECAF working group concluded in the last assessment published (the assessment is from 2007 andincluded data through 2006) that the axillary seabream stock was overfished as the current biomass was lessthan the target biomass, B and the limit biomass, B . (B /B = 19%, B /B =20%) (FAO/CECAF2012). The stock is listed by the FAO/CECAF working group as overfished. Therefore, abundance is consideredas "high concern".

0.1 MSY curr 0.1 curr MSY

107



BLUE WHITING




High Concern

Axillary seabream is mainly caught by ocean-going trawler fleets, coastal fishery vessels (longline and trawl)and artisanal fishery boats. Freezer cephalopod trawl catch of axillary seabream has decreased since 2001,stabilizing over the last three years at around 600 MT. In the coastal fishery, axillary seabream catches fellbetween 1999 and 2002, then stabilized at approximately 1,200 MT, nearly twice the catch of the oceangoingfishery. Fishing effort is above the F effort (F /F =281%).

Overfishing is occurring but management that is reasonably expected to curtail overfishing is in place(reductions in effort). Fishing mortality is therefore ranked as "high concern".

0.1 curr MSY


40-60%



Low

Blue whiting is classified on the Fishbase website as having medium resilience (minimum population doublingtime 1.4 - 4.4 years (K=0.18-0.22; tm=1-5; tmax=20; Fec=6000) and low to moderate vulnerability (33 of100) (Fishbase 2014).


Low Concern

Blue whiting is widely distributed in the eastern part of the North Atlantic from Norway to the south ofPortugal, with the highest concentrations along the edge of the continental shelf between 300 and 600 m. Amanagement plan was agreed on by Norway, the EU (European Union), the Faroe Islands, and Iceland in2008. Spawning stock Biomass (SSB) has almost doubled from 2010 (2.9 million tonnes) to 2013 (5.5 million

108



MT) and is well above B (2.25 million MT) and MSY B (2.25 million MT, a proxy based on B as ICESshifts to an MSY based stock assessment system). ICES evaluated the reference points in 2013 and concludedthat B and B should remain unchanged (see figure 8) (ICES 2013b).

There is a reliable quantitative stock assessment, and biomass is estimated to be well above the targetreference point. However, because the MSY B reference point is a proxy based on Bpa, a lessconservative reference point than BMSY, abundance is considered as "low concern".

pa trigger pa

lim pa

trigger

Justification:

Figure 28 Figure 8: ICES advice 2013. Blue whiting in Subareas I–IX, XII, and XIV. Summary of stockassessment


Very Low Concern

Blue whiting is a widely distributed species. In 2012, the main blue whiting fisheries occurred west ofScotland, around the Porcupine Bank, and south of the Faroe Islands. Norway, the EU, the Faroe Islands, andIceland agreed on a management plan in 2008. In 2013 ICES evaluated the extra harvest control rule optionsfor the long-term management plan and concluded that F = 0.30, replacing the September 2012 F proxyfor F (0.18). The current management plan is considered precautionary. A number of alternative F targetsin the range of 0.1–0.35 were evaluated for the current harvest control rule (HCR) and were deemedprecautionary up to an F target of 0.32 (corresponding to F ), with only a minimal increase in mean TAC forF targets above 0.3 (see figure 8) (ICES 2013b).

Fishing mortality is below reference points, likely allowing the population to maintain its current level.Therefore, fishing mortality is considered as "very low concern".

MSY 0.1

MSY

pa

109


40-60%






20-40%




Justification:

110

BLUESPOTTED SEABREAM





Medium

Bluespotted seabream is assessed on the Fishbase website as having medium resilience (minimum populationdoubling time 1.4 - 4.4 years (K=0.28; tmax=10; tm=2) and moderate to high vulnerability (46 of 100)((Fishbase 2014).


High Concern

In the latest published assessment (from 2007, including data up to 2006), the FAO/CECAF working groupconcluded that the bluespotted seabream stock is overfished because the current biomass is less than thetarget biomass, B (B /B =65%) and the limit biomass, B (B /B =71%) (FAO/CECAF 2012). Thestock is listed by the FAO/CECAF working group as overfished. Therefore, abundance is considered as "highconcern".

0.1 curr 0.1 MSY curr MSY

111



EUROPEAN HORSE MACKEREL




High Concern

The Mauritanian industrial fleet's CPUE series for the bluespotted seabream fluctuated greatly over the periodunder analysis (1990–2003). During subsequent years (2004–2006) a general increasing trend was observedwith the exception of the Mauritanian pelagic industrial fisheries (pelagic RIM) which reached zero in 2006. Inthe last assessment the working group on demersal resources concluded that the stock was overexploited.Fishing effort was far higher than that which would produce a sustainable yield at the current biomass level(F /F =165%) (FAO/CECAF 2012).

Overfishing is occurring but management that is reasonably expected to curtail overfishing is in place(reductions in effort). Fishing mortality is therefore ranked as "high concern".

curr MSY


40-60%




Medium

European horse mackerel is assessed as having moderate vulnerability (53 of 100) and medium resilience(minimum population doubling time 1.4 - 4.4 years, K=0.12-0.16; tm=2-4; tmax=11; Fec=70,000) on theFishbase website (Fishbase 2014).


Moderate Concern

No precautionary reference points have been defined for this stock. ICES advises on the basis of the MSYapproach that catches should be no more than 35,000 MT in 2014. The SSB has decreased gradually since2007 and is at present around 30% below the long-term average. Recruitment is estimated to be aboveaverage in 2011. Confidence intervals for the assessment estimates are very wide, indicating a highuncertainty in F, SSB, and recruitment in the most recent years (see figure 12) (ICES 2013c).

112



Horse mackerel's stock status scores as "moderate concern" because the species has a medium inherentvulnerability to fishing mortality and there are no stock reference points.


Low Concern

No precautionary reference points have been defined for this stock. F (0.11) is proposed as a proxy forF . Historical fishing mortalities have on average (0.09) been at or below the candidate F (though actualestimates are very uncertain, with fishing mortality consistently overestimated). Following the ICES MSYapproach implies that fishing mortality can increase to F , resulting in catches of no more than 35,000MT in 2014. Following the MSY approach implies an increase in fishing mortality. Managers may want toconsider keeping F at the 2013 level to ensure a greater increase in biomass than by fishing at F (ICES2013c).

Although there are uncertainties in the estimation of fishing mortality in the most recent stock assessment,current fishing mortality is well below F and is likely overestimated (ICES 2013c). We note that althoughbottom trawls have historically been the most important gear type used to target horse mackerel, theircontribution to total landings has been decreasing since 2010 (ICES 2013c).

35%SPR

MSY MSY

MSY

MSY

MSY


40-60%






20-40%

113

EUROPEAN SQUID





Justification:



114


Low

The European squid, Loligo vulgaris is one of the most common loliginid species in the northeastern Atlanticand the Mediterranean Sea. It is a neritic and semi-pelagic species distributed between the North Sea and theBritish Isles (55 °N) and the north African coast (20 °N), including the Mediterranean Sea (Guerra, A. &Rocha, F. 1994).

The inherent vulnerability was calculated using the Seafood watch guidelines for invertebrates. In this case,the life history attributes selected from the table for European squid are: average age at maturity <5 years,average maximum age < 10 years, reproductive strategy "demersal egg layer" and density dependence "nodepensatory or compensatory dynamics demostrated". Therefore, inherent vulnerability results as "low".

Justification:

The life span of L. vulgaris is estimated at about 1 year. L. vulgaris spawn throughout the year, but the periodof more intensive spawning extends from December to April. The estimated number of oocytes in maturefemale L. vulgaris varied from 782 to 21,885 and showed a slight positive correlation with the length of themantle (Guerra, A. & Rocha, F. 1994).

Figure 31 Results from the Seafood Watch inherent vulnerability rubric for invertebrate species (referred to asa Productivity-Susceptibility Analysis (PSA) in the text) for Loligo vulgaris (SFW criteria document, pg. 4).Attribute scores can range from 1 to 3 with higher scores signifying more resilient life history attributes.Invertebrate species with average attribute scores between 2.46 and 3 are deemed to have a ‘lowvulnerability'."

115



MAMMALS



Moderate Concern

Before 2001, average squid yields by the Moroccan freezer trawlers reached more than 100 kg/day. From2002 they saw a heavy decline to around 40 kg/fishing day. The coastal and artisanal vessel yields are verylow in comparison. Year 2005 is the year in which squid yields are marked by an improvement in all threesectors (FAO/CECAF 2012).

The highest abundance indices from the trawl surveys carried out in Dakhla were registered in February 2000and March 2001 with 11 kg/30 minutes and 10 kg/30 minutes respectively. From September 2001, the yieldshave decreased varying between 1 kg/30 minutes and 3 kg/30 minutes, except for November 2005 when theyreached 6 kg/30 minutes (FAO/CECAF 2012).

Although no reference points were set for this stock and a reliable stock assessment was not undertaken dueto the inconsistency of the data, based on the CPUEs of the freezer trawlers and the abundance indices fromthe surveys which are decreasing, the Working Group estimated that the stock was overexploited (but did notstate whether it was likely to be overfished) (FAO/CECAF 2012). Due to the unknown stock status of Europeansquid in Morocco in combination with this species low inherent vulnerability, this section is assessed as"moderate concern".


High Concern

In Morocco, squid catches landed by the ocean-going sector have seen large fluctuations from one year to thenext. The maximum catch was recorded in 2000 with 13,730 MT. The lowest level was reached in 2004 with122 MT. Catches by coastal vessels (trawlers and longliners) are also characterized by considerable variationsfrom one year to the next. Of these vessels, it is the coastal trawlers that land large quantities of squid(FAO/CECAF 2012). The last report of the FAO/CECAF Working Group concluded that the stock wasoverexploited, and a recommendation to lower fishing effort was suggested. Overfishing is occurring,management that is reasonably expected to curtail overfishing is in place. Therefore, fishing mortality isconsidered as "high concern".


40-60%


116




High

Incidental capture in fishing activities threatens whales, dolphins, and porpoises worldwide. Marine mammalsprovide some of the best known cases of population and species extinction through overexploitation. Incidentalcapture of small cetaceans, in particular, presents the greatest threat worldwide to the conservation ofcetacean species (Zollett 2005). Several of these species such as Mediterranean monk seal, common dolphin,harbour porpoise or bottlenose dolphin, occur in Northwest African waters and Southern Europe (Pompa et al.2011).

Based on the unknown bycath matrix, inherent vulnerability for marine mammals is considered as "high".


High Concern

(Pompa et al. 2011) identified global key conservation sites for marine and and freshwater mammal speciesbased on their geographic ranges. Regions especially rich in marine species were found along the coasts ofNorth and South America, Africa, Asia, and Australia. In Northwestern Africa 25 species were identified, 7 ofthem endemic or with a small range. The size of the marine mammal populations in the area and theoptimum sustainable population (OSP) have not been calculated so it is not possible to determine whethercurrent populations are at a sustainable level. However, vulnerable and endemic species are found in the areaand the conservation status of the Northwestern Africa ecoregion was estimated by (Pompa et al. 2011) ascritically endangered. Using the SFW guidance for unknown species, abundance for these species is assessedas "high concern".


Moderate Concern

The Iberian (Spain and Portugal) mainland coast is rich in cetacean species with 13 cetacean species: 8odontocetes and 5 mysticetes. The principal species reported in the area are: common dolphins, harbourporpoises, bottlenose dolphins and striped dolphins. Some sources indicate that common dolphins werecaptured in large amount off mainland Portugal during late 19th and 20th centuries. Other species are alsocommonly reported as a bycatch such as harbour porpoises, bottlenose dolphins and striped dolphins (Brito etal. 2009). The size of these populations in the area and the optimum sustainable population (OSP) have notbeen calculated so it is not possible to determine whether the current population is at a sustainable level.Common dolphins, bottlenose dolphins, harbour porpoises and striped dolphins are not considered to beendangered or threatened species, all these species are assessed as least concern by the IUCN (IUCN 2014).Using the SFW guidance for unknown species, abundance for these species is assessed as "moderateconcern".

117


Moderate Concern

Historical whaling data suggest that in the eighteenth to the early twentieth century Northwest African watersconstituted a very important area for humpback whales and sperm whales. Recent data from scientific surveysconfirm that the area still plays an important role for these species, blue whales and several species ofdolphins and pilot whales (IMROP 2013).

Trawling activities can attract healthy animals since they represent an easy-to-access, concentrated foodsource. In some areas in the world, associations between cetacean species and trawlers have beendocumented. (Leatherwood 1975) observed three feeding patterns of bottlenose dolphins associated withshrimp trawlers including animals foraging behind working boats, eating organisms stirred-up from trawlers,fish that bypass the net, or fish stuck in the mesh; animals feeding on discarded fish or those that escaped thenet; and animals preying on fish attracted to non-working trawlers (Zollett 2005).Cephalopods occur regularly in the diets of various species such as cetaceans (ICES 2013). Some speciessuch as pilot whales are thought to be primarily adapted to feeding on squid and they are found in tropical tocool temperate waters and deep waters, typically in highest densities over the outer continental shelf orcontinental slope (Taylor et al. 2011).

Small-scale incidental catches of small cetaceans in gillnets occur elsewhere in its range. Some species aretaken in trawl and purse seine fisheries, particularly in the Black Sea and waters off Northwest Africa, SouthAmerica and New Zealand (Culik 2004).

Although there is not specific information about marine mammal mortality in the octopus trawl fishery due tothe lack of observer coverage, it is probable that it may occur in Mauritanian and Moroccan waters. Based onthe unknown bycatch matrix, fishing mortality is assessed as "moderate concern".


Moderate Concern

Fishers often fail to report all incidences of bycatch (Loughlin et al. 1983), and observer coverage differsbetween fisheries and countries throughout the world. For example, in Portugal, reports of bycatch by fishersdecreased when bycatch became illegal even though no action was taken to reduce bycatch (Sequeira &Ferreira 1994) (Zollett 2005).

The ICES advice on marine mammals in 2013 reports three species caught in the mixed demersal fishery(gillnets/trammelnets) in Portugal: common dolphin, bottlenose dolphin and harbor porpoise. These threespecies are classified as least concern by the IUCN. No information was reported from the trawlfishery. However, (Lopez et al. 2003) reported a large number of marine mammals caught in the trawl fisheryin Galician waters (North of Portugal). Analysis of interview data suggested that around 200 cetaceans mightbe caught annually in inshore waters and around 1500 in offshore waters. The highest by-catch rates wereestimated for gillnets and offshore trawling. The majority of by-catches were small dolphins, probably mainlyDelphinus delphis. Smaller numbers of Tursiops truncatus and Globicephala melas are also reported. In thisstudy it was suggested that by-catches of D. delphis and T. truncatus may be unsustainably high (see figure13) (Lopez et al. 2003).

There is no current data about the impact of the trawl fishery on marine mammals. However, studies have

118


suggested high catch rates of marine mammals in Iberian waters. Based on the unknown bycatch matrix,fishing mortality is considered as "moderate concern".

Justification:

Figure 32 Figure 13: Proportion of interviews reporting non-zero by-catches for fishing activities in (a) inshorewaters, (b) offshore waters (Lopez et al. 2003).


40-60%




40-60%



40-60%


119





20-40%




Justification:

120

SENEGALESE HAKE





Medium

Senegalese hake is assessed on the Fishbase website as having low resilience (minimum population doublingtime 4.5 - 14 years (K=0.07-0.17) and moderate to high vulnerability (54 of 100) (Fishbase 2014).


Very Low Concern

Due to the fact that both species (M. polli and M. senegalensis) are fished and sold commercially by the samename (black hake), they are assessed as a one single stock (Merluccius spp.). Due to depth preferences, M.senegalensis is the species caught in the octopus trawl fishery. Reference points defined for small pelagics inthe FAO Working Group held in Banjul (Gambia) in 2006 (FAO/CECAF 2012) were also adopted for the blackhake stock. For biomass, these are B (Limit Reference Point) and B (Target Reference Point)(FAO/CECAF 2012). For the Mauritanian stock, the limit reference point adopted was B = 11,123MT andthe target reference point B = 12,236MT. For Mauritanian and Senegalese stocks (based on 2010 advice),

MSY 0.1

MSY

0.1

121



VELVET SWIMCRAB


current black hake biomass exceeded biomass required to produce maximum sustainable yield and exceededthe target biomass (STECF 2013).

There is a reliable quantitative stock assessment, and biomass is estimated to be above an appropriate targetreference point (B ). This section is considered as "very low concern".0.1


Very Low Concern

The main management advisory body is the FAO Committee for the Eastern Central Atlantic Fisheries(CECAF). Merluccius senegalensis and Merluccius polli are regularly assessed by the Working Group ondemersal resources in the northern zone. The last Working Group met in Agadir (Morocco) from 8 to 18February 2010. The results from the assessments have not yet been formally published and therefore theinformation provided may be considered as preliminary.

For the Mauritanian stock, the limit reference point for fishing mortality is F = 1.97 and the targetreference point F = 1.77. Current fishing effort was lower than that corresponding to the target effort and tothe MSY. These results showed that the stock was not fully exploited (STECF 2013). It is highly likely thatfishing mortality is below a sustainable level (F ) that will allow population to maintain current level. Fishingmortality is considered as very low concern.

MSY

0.1

0.1


40-60%




Low

The velvet crab has a wide distribution in north-west Europe. It is a fast moving and aggressive species, mostcommonly found on rocky substrates down to depths of about 25 m. Females grow slower and to a smallermaximum size than males, differences which are likely to be due to reduced growth during the females eggbearing phase. Growth is highly seasonal and males and females moult at different times of the year; themain moult for males is between April and July whereas females moult between May and August. Velvet crabstypically live for four to six years and recruit to the fishery at around age 3 (65 mm carapace width(CW)). They reach maturity at a carapace width of approximately 40 mm (approximately 1.5

122




years), although size at maturity varies according to location. This variation may be due to differencesin water temperature or other factors such as population density, genetic makeup and fishingpressure. Mating occurs after females have moulted, when the shell is still soft. Studies carried out in Orkneyand Shetland provide fecundity estimates of between 5,000 and 278,000 eggs per female. In contrast tobrown crabs, there is no evidence that velvet crabs undertake extensive migrations. Their movements arethought to be restricted to a few hundred metres (Marine Scotland website 2014).

Inherent vulnerability was calculated using the Seafood watch guidelines for invertebrates. Due to its highfecundity, low age at maturity, a relatively short lifespan, and rapid growth rate velvet swim crab isconsidered as a naturally resilient organism and inherent vulnerability results as "low".


Moderate Concern

The velvet swimcrab lives from southern Norway to Western Sahara in the North Sea and north Atlantic aswell as western parts of the Mediterranean Sea, on rocky bottoms from the shoreline to a depth of about 65metres (Holthuis, L.B. 1987). It is an abundant species in the subtidal rocky zones of the northeast Atlantic(Gonzalez-Gurriaran, E. 1985), where it may be one of the dominant epibenthic predators regulating theabundance and distribution of the prey populations (Kitching et al. 1959), (Muntz et al. 1965), (Freire, J. &Gonzalez-Gurriaran, E. 1995). In some European areas, as Scotland, velvet swimcrabs were once considereda 'pest' species, but the Scottish fishery for this species has rapidly expanded (Marine Scotland 2011).

There is not quantitative stock assessment for this species. There is no evidence to suggest that stock is eitherabove or below reference points; Unknown and Stock inherent vulnerability is low.


Low Concern

Velvet swimcrab is caught in the area using a special trap specifically designed for this species, which differsfrom the typical octopus trap. The velvet crab fishery is principally undertaken in summer, when octopuscatches decrease, and it is performed in shallow waters than the octopus fishery (<25m) (Xunta de Galicia2006). Velvet swimcrabs represent less than 5% of the total catch (in weight) in the octopus trap fishery (seefigure 17 in section 3.2.0-04) (Xunta de Galicia 2006).

Fishery does not adversely affect species, but contribution to mortality may not be negligible. Therefore fishingmortality is assessed as "low concern".


< 20%

123

Discarding in artisanal fisheries is not particularly well documented, though gear types such as traps, pots andother small-scale gear are generally thought to have low discards rates (<15%). Traps are highly selectivetargeting common octopus, spiny lobster and some bony fishes. Undersize or non-commercial catches canusually be released alive so catches such as berried lobsters can be returned to the sea (EuropeanCommission 2011).

Normally traps are baited with small pieces of oily fish such as sardines or mackerels (Xunta de Galicia 2006).

The trap fishery is thought to have low discards rates. The amount of bait used, although unknown, issignificant. However, artificial baits are being introduced. Therefore, discard rate in this fishery is assessed aslower than 20%.

Justification:

A comprehensive survey to describe the octopus trap fishery in the Northwest of Spain was undertaken in2006. The results show that the target species, common octopus (Octopus vulgaris) is the most abundantspecies, representing 86.7% of weight of the total catch, while the remaining 13.3% is distributed among 85different species. Crustaceans represent 5.8% by weight, being the velvet crab (Necora puber) the mostabundant species. Fish species accounted for 16.3% by number and 6.3% by weight. Wrasses, blennids andgadoids are the most represented species (Xunta de Galicia 2006). In this survey the bait used in the fisherywas also recorded. Five species are normally used as bait: mackerel (38%), sardine (23%), horse mackerel(14%), bogue (4%), blue whiting (1%), other cupleids (4%) and other mixed species (13%) (Xunta de Galicia2006).

A new artificial bait is being introduced in the Galician trap fishery (North of Spain). This bait, known locally as"membrillo", is more expensive than the natural bait used in the area. However, advantages lie in itsstorability, durability and light weight, making it a good substitute for natural bait.

124

Appendix B: Review ScheduleSome changes have ocurred in the last months/years in the area of the assessment which will affect theoctopus fishery.

In Northwest Africa, new fisheries agreements have been signed between Morocco and Mauritania and theEuropean Union. In 2012 the European octopus fishery fleet left Mauritania, one of the most important octopusfishing grounds for them. A new agreement was signed at the end of 2013 but it didn't include the octopusfishery. This agreement will be revised in one year time.

In Europe, the new common fisheries policy (CFP) took effect on 1 of January 2014. The current policystipulates that between 2015 and 2020 catch limits should be set that are sustainable and maintain fishstocks in the long term. The new CFP does also away with the wasteful practice of discarding through theintroduction of a landing obligation. To allow fishermen to adapt to the change, the landing obligation will beintroduced gradually, between 2015 and 2019 for all commercial fisheries (species under TACs, or underminimum sizes) in European waters.

In recent meeting the ICES working group on cephalopods (WGCEPH) concluded that cephalopods managementis necessary in European waters due to the importance of these fisheries in some countries and the importantrole of these species in the trophic weebs of marine ecosystems, both as prey and as predators. New meetingsare scheduled for the next few months.

Therefore, it is thought that an update for this assessment will be necessary in a period of two/three years.

125

mauritania/eastern central atlantic, morocco/eastern ... · seabream, pandora, european hake, etc)...

Documents