NEA(17)11. Report of the Thirty-Fourth Annual Meeting of the North-East Atlantic Commission of the North Atlantic Salmon Conservation Organization

Transcription

1 NEA(17)11 Report of the Thirty-Fourth Annual Meeting of the North-East Atlantic Commission of the North Atlantic Salmon Conservation Organization 1. Opening of the Meeting Varbergs Kusthotell, Varberg, Sweden 6-9 June The Chairman, Dr Ciaran Byrne (European Union), opened the Meeting and welcomed participants to the Thirty-Fourth Annual Meeting of the Commission. He noted that last year, in view of the very serious threat posed by the parasite Gyrodactylus salaris, the Commission decided to reconvene its Working Group. The Working Group had met in 2017 and had reviewed monitoring and eradication programmes for the parasite and developed recommendations for enhanced co-operation to prevent its spread. Given the risks to the wild stocks from this parasite, the Chairman indicated that he hoped the Commission would adopt the new Road Map in order to enhance information exchange and co-operation on monitoring, research and measures to prevent the spread of G. salaris and eradicate it if introduced. He noted that in 2015, the Commission had adopted a multi-annual decision relating to the salmon fishery at the Faroe Islands. He recognised this continuing commitment to salmon conservation by the Faroe Islands in refraining from fishing for salmon in accordance with the scientific advice. The continuation of that decision was conditional on the application of a Framework of Indicators and the results for 2017 confirmed that no re-assessment of the existing management advice for the Faroes fishery was required from ICES in The decision would, therefore, continue to apply in 2017/18 but there were other important items on the Agenda, not least consideration of the scientific advice and the report of the Working Group on Gyrodactylus salaris and progressing towards the development and adoption of a risk framework for the Faroese salmon fishery. 1.2 A written Opening Statement on behalf of the Non-Government Organisations (NGOs) attending the Annual Meeting was distributed (Annex 1). 1.3 A list of participants at the Thirty-Fourth Annual Meetings of the Council and Commissions of NASCO is included on page xx of this document. 2. Adoption of the Agenda 2.1 The Commission adopted its Agenda, NEA(17)8 (Annex 2). 3. Nomination of a Rapporteur 3.1 Mr Helge Lorentzen (Norway) was appointed as Rapporteur. 1

2 4. Review of the 2016 Fishery and ACOM Report from ICES on Salmon Stocks in the Commission Area 4.1 The representative of ICES, Mr Gérald Chaput, presented the report from ICES on the status of salmon stocks in the Commission area. His presentation is available as document NEA(17)10. The ICES Advisory Committee (ACOM) report that contains the scientific advice relevant to all Commissions, CNL(17)8, is included on page XX of this document. 5. Mixed-Stock Fisheries conducted by Members of the Commission 5.1 In autumn 2015, the Russian Federation and Norway signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the Ministry of Climate and Environment (Norway) and the Federal Agency for Fishery (the Russian Federation) on co-operation on management and monitoring of, and research on, wild Atlantic salmon in Finnmark County (Norway) and the Murmansk region (the Russian Federation). A joint Working Group has been established under the MoU consisting of managers and scientists from each country as appointed by the Parties. The Group will meet and report annually to the Ministry of Climate and Environment (Norway) and to the Federal Agency for Fishery (the Russian Federation). An organisational meeting was held in November, 2015 in Oslo and the Group held its first meeting in April 2016 in Trondheim, Norway. At that meeting the Group discussed a range of issues, including the scientific foundation for conservation limits and catch advice in Norway, status of relevant salmon populations in Finnmark, trends in fisheries, the management system, policies and processes in Norway with emphasis on Finnmark County, salmon fisheries management in Russia and development of fisheries and conservation limits for salmon populations in the Murmansk region. The Group agreed that the first report should focus on the mandate of the Group, the salmon stocks and the fisheries. Later reports will consider other topics such as fish farming. The Group has not yet produced a report and the next meeting is scheduled for the second half of The representative of the European Union indicated that the Teno/Tana River is the border river between Finland and Norway, is one of the largest salmon rivers in the world and is very important for the indigenous Sami people. The new fisheries agreement for the Teno/Tana was accepted by the Finnish and Norwegian parliaments earlier this year and it came into force on 1 May The new agreement is target- and science-based and flexible and socio-economic factors have been taken into consideration. This means that the use of traditional gears can continue with reduced effort and the tourist fishery continues with a new license sales system. Fishing pressure will be substantially reduced, particularly for the weakest stocks. 5.3 The representative of Norway indicated that under the new agreement there will be close co-operation between the authorities managing the fisheries in Norway and Finland. A joint science group will co-ordinate monitoring and research and local knowledge will also be involved in all aspects of the group s work. The new agreement will soon be translated into English and distributed to NASCO Parties. 5.4 Under the Council s Action Plan for taking forward the recommendations of the External Performance Review and the review of the Next Steps for NASCO, CNL(13)38, it was agreed that there should be agenda items in each of the Commissions 2

3 to allow for a focus on mixed-stock fisheries (MSFs). 5.5 The European Union, NEA(17)7 (Annex 3), Norway, NEA(17)5 (Annex 4), and the Russian Federation, NEA(17)6 (Annex 5), tabled papers providing updates on the information on MSFs contained in the Implementation Plans, including a description of any MSFs still operating, the most recent catch data, and any changes or developments in the management of MSFs to implement NASCO s agreements. 5.6 The representative of Denmark (in respect of the Faroe Islands and Greenland) thanked the European Union for its comprehensive review and noted that there had been substantial progress in some areas. He reminded the Commission that the salmon fishery at the Faroe Islands was on mixed stocks and the fishery had been closed. He indicated that all MSFs should be sustainable and he encouraged the European Union to take further action. 5.7 The representative of the European Union thanked Norway for its report and asked for additional details because it was mentioned that new regulations would be introduced now the Teno/Tana River agreement is in place. He asked in which areas the new regulations would apply; would it only be the Tanafjord or the northern coastal region referred to in Norway s 2016 report on MSFs. He asked for details of the sort of restrictions that would be introduced and when they would come into force. 5.8 The representative of Norway indicated that a decision had been taken in the 2016 regulations for further restrictions on MSFs in Finnmark in the Tanafjord and coastal region, including the Varangerfjord, in order to offer additional protection to Tana River stocks. At that time, it was intended that these additional restrictions would come into force when a new agreement for the Tana River was reached. However, decisions on the new agreement were taken later than anticipated. The status of stocks suggests that these regulations had been beneficial, but given the delay in reaching agreement, the decision was made not to bring the regulations into force in 2017 but to do so in 2018 unless unforeseen circumstances occur or the scientific advice changes. 5.9 The representative of the NGOs commended Denmark (in respect of the Faroe Islands and Greenland) for continuing the moratorium on the salmon fishery since He recognised that this had been a difficult political decision for a country that relies heavily on marine resources. He noted that there are considerable MSFs in the North-East Atlantic Commission area and urged other Parties to take further action and could see no reason why this should not be possible if the Faroe Islands could close its salmon fishery. There was a need for fairness and balance. 6. Development of a Risk Framework for the Faroese Fishery 6.1 The Chairman noted that since 2010, the Commission has discussed the possible development and adoption of a Risk Framework for the Faroese fishery. The elements that would need to be developed and adopted to allow establishing a formal mechanism for the provision of the scientific advice as in other NASCO Commissions could, inter alia, include: agreement on appropriate management units (MU); the management objectives for these units; 3

4 a sharing agreement; the season to which any TAC should apply (January to December or October to May). 6.2 Last year, Denmark (in respect of the Faroe Islands and Greenland) had indicated that it was not in a position to consider the development and adoption of a risk framework but agreed that there be more substantive discussion at the 2017 Annual Meeting. The representative of Denmark (in respect of the Faroe Islands and Greenland) advised the Commission that the Faroe Islands had been considering how to handle this matter for many years. There had been some further consultations in the Faroe Islands over the past year and he indicated that Denmark (in respect of the Faroe Islands and Greenland) intended to prepare a discussion document examining both scientific (e.g. the data to be used and appropriate Management Units) and management (components to be included in the framework) aspects. He referred to a Working Group on allocation criteria that had been set up by the North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission (NEAFC). Issues considered included zonal attachment, historical fisheries, biomass conversion and socioeconomic factors. These might be factors for inclusion in a risk framework for the Faroes salmon fishery. He suggested that the discussion document could be considered by correspondence and the Parties could then decide if a meeting was required. 6.3 The representative of the European Union thanked Denmark (in respect of the Faroe Islands and Greenland) for considering this issue and agreed that it would be useful to move forward on this over the coming year. 6.4 The representative of Norway indicated that he welcomed the commitment to move forward with the risk framework, but indicated that Norway would need to see what was being proposed before proceeding. 6.5 The representative of Denmark (in respect of Faroes Islands and Greenland) advised the Commission that, as he had been elected President of NASCO, the head of the Faroese delegation would in future be Ms Margretha Nónklett. 7. Regulatory Measures 7.1 At its Thirty-Second (2015) Annual Meeting, the Commission adopted a Decision regarding the salmon fishery in Faroese waters in 2015/16, 2016/17 and 2017/18 (NEA(15)10). Under this Decision, the Commission decided not to set a quota for the salmon fishery in the Faroese Fisheries Zone for 2015/16, acknowledging that Faroese management decisions will be made with due consideration to the ICES advice concerning the biological situation and the status of the stocks contributing to the fishery. The decision would also apply in 2016/17 and 2017/18 unless the application of the Framework of Indicators (FWI) showed that a re-assessment was warranted. The Commission had agreed that the procedure for applying the FWI that was used previously should continue under the new Decision. 7.2 The report of FWI Working Group, NEA(17)3, was presented by its Co-ordinator, Mr Ian Russell (European Union). The Working Group had concluded that the results of the NEAC FWI assessment in 2017 (based on indicator values for 2016) do not suggest that the PFA forecast for 2016 has been under-estimated. Therefore, the FWI Working Group 4

5 concluded that no re-assessment of the existing management advice for the Faroes fishery was required from ICES in The Decision adopted in 2015 will, therefore, continue to apply to the fishery in 2017/ Report of the Working Group on Gyrodactylus salaris 8.1 In 2004, the Commission had agreed a Road Map for taking forward recommendations relating to the parasite G. salaris. In accordance with this Road Map, Working Group meetings had been held in 2006 and There had been no meetings of the Working Group since 2007, but an item had been included on the North-East Atlantic Commission s Agenda since then to allow for progress reports from the Parties and, in addition, information is sought in the Implementation Plan template on measures taken to prevent the introduction or further spread of the parasite. In 2016, in view of the serious threat posed by the parasite, the Commission agreed to reconvene its Working Group, under the Chairmanship of Mr Stian Johnsen (Norway), to undertake the following tasks: provide a forum for exchange of information among the Parties/jurisdictions on research on, and monitoring and control programmes for, the parasite G. salaris; review progress in relation to the Commission s Road Map and advise of any changes required; develop recommendations for enhanced co-operation on measures to prevent the further spread of the parasite and for its eradication in areas where it has been introduced; and develop recommendations for future research. 8.2 The Commission Chairman introduced the Report of the Meeting of the Working Group on Gyrodactylus salaris in the North-East Atlantic Commission Area (NEA(17)4) (Annex 6). The Working Group had met in London during March The Working Group stressed the importance of ensuring that adequate measures are in place to prevent the introduction of the parasite and it was recommended that publicity material highlighting the risks posed by the parasite be disseminated by the competent authorities and made available on the NASCO website. The Working Group noted that legislation should recognise different strains and their pathogenicity. In the event that G. salaris and G. thymalli were synonymised, there could be serious consequences for the protection afforded by Additional Guarantees. The Group noted that emerging risk factors for the spread of G. salaris include a changing climate, which could result in reduced salinities, and changes in migration patterns with smolts entering the sea but then migrating into other rivers. In this regard, the Working Group had noted with concern the continuing spread of G. salaris along the west coast of Sweden and it was suggested that salinity levels in the Skagerrak may not always be at levels that would prevent the further spread of the parasite. 8.3 The Working Group further recommended that the North-East Atlantic Commission retain an item on its agenda to allow for an exchange of information on G. salaris. To facilitate this, there should be a further meeting of the Working Group in 2018 but, thereafter, only every three years. The importance of developing and testing contingency plans was highlighted and it was noted that these are at different stages of development in different countries. The Working Group recommended that the North-East Atlantic Commission request that contingency plans be made available through the Secretariat in 5

6 advance of the Working Group meeting in 2018 and that those countries without plans be encouraged to develop them as a matter of urgency. 8.4 The Working Group recommended that, given the potentially devastating impacts of the parasite, the Commission adopt a revised Road Map as contained in Annex 12 of its report. This revised Road Map had been considerably simplified to remove duplication and reflect changes in EC fish health legislation and it had been re-formatted without reference to the original source of the recommendations, responsibilities and timeframe for action which should be clear from the text. 8.5 The representative of the European Union thanked the members of the Working Group for a very informative report which provides a good overview of monitoring programmes, distribution of the parasite, measures to prevent spread of the parasite and to eradicate it where introduced and research undertaken. While the European Union could support the Working Group continuing its work, it had difficulty in adopting the recommendations in Annex 12 (the revised Road Map ) because there had been inadequate time to consult and it was not clear if some recommendations were consistent with EU Animal Health regulations. He also indicated that the recommendations concerning research should have been reviewed by the International Atlantic Salmon Research Board s Scientific Advisory Group (SAG). He also considered it strange that there would be a recommendation that required the EU to follow its own legislation. While he indicated that the new Road Map is an improvement of the current version, he was not able to adopt the recommendations at this time. 8.6 The representative of Denmark (in respect of the Faroe Islands and Greenland) thanked the Working Group for its report and recommendations on this important issue. 8.7 The representative of Norway indicated that G. salaris was an important issue for Norway, as it should be for all Parties, given the damage the parasite can cause. Norway considers that the recommendations make sense and while understanding that the European Union needs more time to consider these, sometimes one should be open to changing a regulation based on a recommendation. 8.8 The representative of the European Union indicated that it was necessary to verify that the recommendations were consistent with EU legislation since EU Animal Health law was developed through a science-based, complex and participatory process and currently provides a comprehensive framework. 8.9 The Commission agreed that it would retain this item on the agenda for its Annual Meetings, and the Working Group should meet every three years starting in 2018 with the following Terms of Reference: provide a forum for exchange of information among the Parties/jurisdictions on research on, and monitoring, control and eradication programmes for, the parasite G. salaris; consider the need for revisions to the recommendations in Annex 12 of NEA(17)4 to ensure consistency with NASCO Parties Animal Health Legislation; develop recommendations for enhanced co-operation on measures to prevent the further spread of the parasite and for its eradication in areas where it has been 6

7 introduced The representative of the European Union proposed to provide comments to the Working Group in relation to Annex 12 of NEA(17)4 ahead of the next meeting of the Working Group The representative of Norway advised the Commission that efforts to eradicate G. salaris in Norway have given good results in recent years. By 1 January 2017, G. salaris had been successfully eradicated from 22 rivers and a further 21 rivers have been treated and are being monitored. After eradicating the parasite, the local salmon stocks are re-built from the gene bank. He reported that in 2017 work will continue in accordance with the National Action Plan. It is expected that two new regions will be declared free of the parasite later this year. The treatment in Skibotn region in 2015 and 2016 seems to have been successful and efforts to re-build the stocks will commence this year. It will be a further five years before the result of the chemical treatment will be confirmed. There will then be two regions infected with the parasite. In the Driva region, a fish barrier is now operative and prevents salmon from migrating upstream, thereby reducing the infected area in preparation for chemical treatment. The expert group assessing options for treating the Drammen River will deliver its final report in Announcement of the Tag Return Incentive Scheme Prize 9.1 The Chairman announced that the winner of the Commission s 1,000 prize in the NASCO Tag Return Incentive Scheme was Mr Eugeny Danilov, Murmansk, Russian Federation. The winning tag had been applied to an autumn-run salmon on 10 September 2015 at the Falls Creek beat of the Ponoi River about 60km from the river outlet. It was recaptured on 23 September 2016 at the Gold Beach beat about 13km upstream from the place of tagging. The Commission offered its congratulations to the winner. 10. Recommendations to the Council on the Request to ICES for Scientific Advice 10.1 The request for scientific advice from ICES prepared by the Standing Scientific Committee in relation to the North-East Atlantic Commission area was agreed by the Council, CNL(17)10 (Annex 7). 11. Other Business 11.1 There was no other business. 12. Date and Place of the Next Meeting 12.1 The Commission agreed to hold its next Annual Meeting at the same time and place as the Thirty-Fifth Annual Meeting of NASCO. 13. Report of the Meeting 13.1 The Commission agreed a report of the meeting. 7

8 14. Close of the Meeting 14.1 The Chairman thanked the Parties and observers for their contributions and closed the Thirty-Fourth Annual Meeting of the North-East Atlantic Commission. Note: The annexes mentioned above begin on page XX, following the French translation of the report of the Meeting. A list of North-East Atlantic Commission papers is included in Annex 8. 8