The Implementation of the Landing Obligation in Small-Scale Fisheries of Southern European Union Countries

Chapter 5 The Implementation of the Landing Obligation in Small-Scale Fisheries of Southern European Union Countries Sebastian Villasante, Manel Antelo, Maria Christou, Laurence Fauconnet, Katia Frangoudes, Francesc Maynou, Telmo Morato, Cristina Pita, Pablo Pita, Konstantinos I. Stergiou, Celia Teixeira, George Tserpes, and Vassiliki Vassilopoulou Abstract In the European Union, discards represent a major source of undocumented mortality, contributing to the overfishing of European fish stocks. However, little attention has been given by the scientific community to discards in the S. Villasante (*) Faculty of Political and Social Sciences, University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain e-mail: [email protected] M. Antelo · P. Pita Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain M. Christou · K. I. Stergiou Institute of Marine Biological Resources and Inland Waters, Hellenic Centre for Marine Research, Anavyssos, Greece Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece L. Fauconnet Departamento de Oceanografia e Pescas –Okeanos, Instituto do Mar (IMAR), Universidade dos Açores, Horta, Portugal K. Frangoudes University of Brest, Ifremer, CNRS, UMR 6308, AMURE, IUEM, Plouzané, France F. Maynou Institut de Ciències del Mar, CSIC, Barcelona, Spain T. Morato Marine and Environmental Sciences Centre (MARE), Institute of Marine Research (IMAR) and OKEANOS Research Unit, Universidade dos Açores, Horta, Portugal C. Pita Department of Environment and Planning & Centre for Environmental and Marine Studies (CESAM), University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal C. Teixeira MARE –Marine and Environmental Sciences Centre, Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal ©The Author(s) 2019 S. S. Uhlmann et al. (eds.), The European Landing Obligation, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03308-8_5 89 European Union’s small-scale fisheries (SSF). This is mainly due to the fact that discards are mostly generated by industrial fisheries, while SSFs were generally thought to have lower discard rates than industrial fisheries. A Landing Obligation (LO) is being introduced in European waters with the reform of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) (Article 15, EU regulation 1380/2013) to limit/reduce discarding. However, management recommendations are required to support its implementation. The reality and challenges to enforce the LO in SSF are analyzed in this chapter, gathering information from different small-scale fisheries and fishers from the Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea who were asked about their perceptions toward the LO. The objectives of this chapter are to (a) identify the reasons for discarding and (b) investigate the multiple ecological, economic, social, and institutional drivers which act as a barrier toward the implementation of the LO in SSF. Given the high importance of SSF in the southern countries of Europe, different case studies of SSF from France, Greece, Portugal, and Spain coasts are used to illustrate the reasons for discarding, the impacts of the LO on SSF, and the barriers for its implementation. Keywords Common Fisheries Policy · Discards · Impacts · Landing Obligation · Small-scale fisheries · Southern Europe 5.1 Introduction In the European Union (EU), discards represent a major source of undocumented (or poorly documented) mortality, contributing to the overfishing of European fish stocks. Discarding levels in EU fisheries vary between locations, gears, species, and fishing grounds (Uhlmann et al. 2013). However, data collection and estimates of discards for all commercial species in EU waters under the CFP are far from being complete and generally have low precision. This reflects the relatively low intensity of discard sampling and the high variability in amounts of fish discarded, even within a single fishery. The omission and/or poor discard data from stock assessments may also result in underestimation of exploitation rates and can lead to biased assessments and policy recommendations, hampering the achievement of resilient and sustainable fishery resources uses (Aarts and Poos 2009). The implementation of a Landing Obligation (LO) was one of the key elements of the recent reform of the EU Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) (Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013). A phased LO was formally implemented in January 2015, and by 2019 G. Tserpes Institute of Marine Biological Resources (IMBR), Hellenic Centre of Marine Research, Anavyssos, Greece V. Vassilopoulou Institute of Marine Biological Resources and Inland Waters, Hellenic Centre for Marine Research, Anavyssos, Greece 90 S. Villasante et al. it will be in force in all EU waters, covering all fisheries that capture commercial species covered by the CFP regulation, including SSF. Landings from EU SSF are worth around €2 thousand million euros annually, i.e., 25% of the revenue generated by EU fisheries, and SSF therefore have a high value in the seafood supply chain. Around 80% of EU fishing boats and more than 40% of EU fishers (90,000) are engaged in SSF (Macfadyen et al. 2011), emphasizing that SSF is a sector with great social, economic, and cultural importance for coastal communities, especially in southern Europe. The small-scale fleet has declined by 20% over the last 10 years, to just over 70,000 vessels. Small-scale vessels are on average between 5 and 7 m in length, weigh 3GT, and have engines with a power of 34 kW (Macfadyen et al. 2011). More than 90% primarily use passive gears (i.e., gears that are not towed or dragged through the water) such as drift and fixed nets, hook and lines, or pots and traps. Despite their importance, for decades, EU fishery policy (e.g., quotas, subsidies, management systems) has focused on large-scale fishing, and there is a lack of knowledge about biological, environmental, socioeconomic, management, and policy aspects of SSF. SSF faces diverse challenges and pressures, not least to establish appropriate governance systems. However, little research has been done on the impacts of the LO on SSF (Villasante et al. 2015a; Veiga et al. 2016). Therefore, the specific objectives of this chapter are to (i) identify the reasons for discarding among SSF, (ii) determine the factors (ecological, economic, institutional) that act as barriers for the successful implementation of the LO, and (iii) identify the institutional arrangements and/or rules that either inhibit or facilitate an adaptation of the LO. 5.2 The Status of Discards in Small-Scale Fisheries To examine research gaps regarding discards in SSF, we did a systematic literature search to identify relevant scientific papers published up to August 2018 in Scopus, by searching titles, abstracts, and keywords using the following terms: “fisher*”or “fishing”;“discard*”; and “artisan*”or “small-scale”or “traditional”or “subsistence”or “local”or “industrial”or “commercial”or “large.”The results obtained show that the topic of discards in SSFs attracted little attention among the scientific community. A total of 1219 papers have been published on the topic of discards from 1950 to August 2018, of which 952 are related to industrial fisheries (78%) with only 267 papers focused on SSF (21%) (Fig. 5.1). The review also showed that the little attention paid by the scientific community to discards in SSFs is due to the belief that discard problems were mainly concentrated in industrial fisheries, while SSFs generally have lower discard rates (Villasante et al. 2016a). Discarding occurs not only due to poor gear selectivity and the capture of unwanted “low value”fish but also due to the mismatch between catch composition and regulatory catch or size limits. Undersize fish may be discarded due to the MLS regulations; over-quota fish can be discarded in a multi-species fishery due to quota 5 The Implementation of the Landing Obligation in Small-Scale Fisheries... 91 exhaustion of one species, and less valuable size classes of target species may be discarded to make room for more valuable size classes (high grading). Even if high grading has been legally forbidden, it is still known to occur on a regular basis. All these issues are reported to be present in EU SSF (Villasante et al. 2016a,2016b, 2016c). These different reasons for discarding impact heavily on the willingness to comply with rules and regulations. 5.3 Impacts of the Landing Obligation in Small-Scale Fisheries The term SSF implies small vessel size and, sometimes, low levels of technology and capital investment per fisher. For the purposes of the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (Regulation (CE) No 508/2014, “small-scale coastal fishing”was formally defined as fishing done by vessels of an overall length < 12 m and not using towed gear. SSF are thus typically “artisanal”and coastal, using small boats, targeting multiple species using traditional gears. To investigate the impact of the LO in SSF, we will focus on the impact of this measure on selected SSF in the EU –in France, Greece, Portugal, and Spain. We will describe these fisheries, their discards, the reasons for discarding, impact of the LO, factors that act as barriers for the successful implementation of the LO, and the institutional arrangements and rules that inhibit or facilitate the adaptation to the LO. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 Publications (N) Year Industrial fisheries Artisanal fisheries Fig. 5.1 Number of scientific papers published in relation to discards from industrial and artisanal fisheries (1950–2018). (Source: Scopus) 92 S. Villasante et al. 5.3.1 France Small-Scale Fisheries in the British Channel, Celtic Sea, and Bay of Biscay In France, the small-scale fleet is not legally defined. The number of hours spent at sea is the main criterion to classify the vessels rather than length or use of passive gears. For the purpose of this chapter, only vessels < 12 m of the length operating within territorial waters (12 nm) in the British Channel, Celtic Sea, and Bay of Biscay are taken into account. See Table 5.1 for the characteristics of this fleet and the main species landed. The majority of the target species in the Atlantic Coast/ Ocean are subject to Total Allowable Catch (TAC) regulations. Interviews were done with small-scale fishers operating in the English Channel, Celtic Sea, and Bay of Biscay as part of the EU DiscardLess project (http://www. discardless.eu). All French fishers interviewed perceived the LO negatively not only because they felt that it will reduce their activity and increase expenditure on their boats but that it also shows that decisions were made at the top level without taking in account the good management practices implemented by the fisheries committees or POs over the last 15 years (van Hoof et al., this volume). That is, French smallscale fishers feel that European decision-makers satisfy claims and interests of lobbies (conservationists, aquaculture) rather those of fishers (De Vos et al. 2016). According to interviewed fishers, the main reasons for discarding are regulatory, such as quotas, forbidden species, etc. Low market prices and high grading are also given as reasons for discarding (Table 5.2). Damaged fish was also mentioned by netters or long-liners. It is probably that because SSF implemented a quota system later than the larger fleet, and the fact that they have smaller amounts of quota, these fishers discard more. New fishers, who do not own quotas, have to fish under an open national quota system, managed by the national fisheries administration, and because these quotas are rapidly filled, they are obliged to discard all fishes over quota. Young fisherwomen using nets as the main fishing gear say: “As soon as the national quota closes, all fish caught under the quotas system are discarded. We are not members of the local PO, and we cannot access more quotas.”In some regions, POs manage quotas collectively; thus, the quota can be swapped among fishers, with the result that it is easier for them to avoid high discard rates. Undersize fish, when mentioned, did not really represent a constraint to French small-scale fishers. They all say that the gears they use are more selective than those used by the industrial fleet. But they cannot avoid all undersize fish as “there is not a fishing gear which doesn’t catch undersize fishes.”For those using handline or traps, unwanted fish can easily be returned alive to the sea. The “lack of a good price”for some species, for example, European plaice (Pleuronectes platessa) in the Eastern Channel and European hake (Merluccius merluccius) or Atlantic horse mackerel (Trachurus trachurus) in the Bay of Biscay, is given as another reason for discarding. For fishers, discarding species without commercial value is not perceived as discards. It is the same when it comes to high grading practiced by fishers to 5 The Implementation of the Landing Obligation in Small-Scale Fisheries... 93 Table 5.1 Case studies characterization Case study Country Fishing fleet Gear used Main species landed Rules and regulations SSF in the British Channel, Celtic Sea, and Bay of Biscay France Vessels less than 12 m operating mainly within territorial waters (12 nm) using mainly passive gear Gillnets, trammel nets, longlines, handlines, nets, pots and traps, some SSF vessels using dredges or trawls Common sole, European sea bass, pollack, and monkfish; total landings 80,000 tons (in 2013) Most target species subject to TAC and MLS SSF in the Thermaikos Gulf Greece Polyvalent passive gears Nets, pots, longlines, traps Lands a wide array of species, the most important being hake, common cuttlefish, mullets, annular seabream, saddled seabream, common octopus, common pandora, and scorpionfish; accounted for 18,152 tons (in 2016) Most target species have minimum landing size (MLS). Plus spatial restrictions and temporal restrictions (e.g., vessels targeting hake and exceeding the limit of >20% of landings are not authorized to fish in February) SSF in Catalonia Spain Polyvalent passive gears operating within 6 nm Trammel nets, gillnets, boat seines, pots for octopus, and longline Lands over 200 species, the most important being demersal species (cuttlefish, hake, pandora, sole, golden seabream), sand-eel, octopus, and bonito. Average landings of 3000 ton/year Some species subject to MLS (e.g., hake, sole, Sparidae, octopus). Technical limitations to the size of fishing gear (e.g., maximum length of nets; maximum number of hooks; maximum number of traps) SSF in Galicia Spain Vessels less than 12 m operating mainly within Gillnet Hake, horse mackerel, mackerel, pouting, surmullet. Most target species subject to TAC, MLS, and fishing effort (continued) 94 S. Villasante et al. obtain better prices. Only the biggest individuals are landed; all the others, including those having legal size, are discarded. The impacts of the LO will be different for fishers using different gears. Netters think that in some seasons they will have high rates of discards (e.g., Atlantic horse mackerel), that they will have to come to the harbor to land before returning back to their fishing areas. Handling and sorting fish will take longer, and they do not know if crew members will do it. For them, the need to employ one more crew member to deal with longer handling times means less income for the crew. All fishers want to know who will pay the different taxes related to auctions, dealing with trash, etc. Netters and long-liners consider that the LO will have a negative economic impact on their activity. But for the more selective handliners, the LO was felt to have little economic impact. Table 5.1 (continued) Case study Country Fishing fleet Gear used Main species landed Rules and regulations 6 nm using passive gear Average daily catch of 3000 kg (in 2018) Deepwater hook-and- line fishery in the Azores Portugal Deepwater Bottom longlines, handlines Blackspot seabream, European conger, Forkbeard, silver scabbardfish, bluemouth rockfish, wreckfish. Total landings of 4070 t (in 2014), 15– 21 M€between 2010 and 2017 Target and secondary species subject to TAC (e.g., blackspot seabream, alfonsinos). Deepwater sharks subject to TAC zero. MLS for several species, minimum hook sizes, area and temporal closures, and bans on the use of specific gear Beach seine Portugal Purse seine Trawling net to the beach; small fishery consisting of solely 143 vessels in the entire country Small pelagic fish such as mackerel, Atlantic horse mackerel, and sardine Horse mackerel (Trachurus spp.) subject to TAC Note: SSF, small-scale fisheries; MLS, minimum landing size; nm, nautical miles; TAC, Total Allowable Catch 5 The Implementation of the Landing Obligation in Small-Scale Fisheries... 95 Table 5.2 Reasons for discarding and barriers to implementing the Landings Obligation (LO) Case study Country Main reasons for discarding Barriers to the implementation of the LO Ecological Economic Institutional SSF in the British Channel, Celtic Sea, and Bay of Biscay France Mainly regulations (quotas, MLS, and forbidden species). Also, low market value, lack of commercial value/market, high grading, and damaged catch Mix fisheries, in some season’s abundance of some species are not easy to avoid. Few vessels located in estuary areas deal with undersize fish The LO will increase operation costs for netters and long-liners (more trips to land all catch, increase in crew to deal with extra work). Worries about who will pay for taxes related to the auction, trash, etc. Most target species subject to quota and many smallscale fishers operate under the national open quota system, which ends fast SSF in the Thermaikos Gulf Greece Low market value of the landings, damaged catch, mishandling on board, undersize fish, small catch Many factors, mostly caused by the nature of the Greek SSF (multifleet and multispecies). Recent data show that discards have risen and are dominated by alien species Economic incentives seem to contribute to discarding practices; high local market demand for fish contributes to the regular selling of undersized fish in the black market Loose enforcement; lack of spatial monitoring system for vessels < 12 m (the majority of SSF fleet). Unknown number of recreational vessels hardens the role of fisheries managers Fishers do not perceive an increase in operation costs due to the LO because they have little discards Fishers oppose the LO because it will decrease their catch. There is the need to decrease the MLS for some species to avoid discards SSF in Catalonia Spain Damaged catch; low market value Largely mixed fisheries with relatively small quantities of discards of regulated species; very Increased cost of sorting; inexistence of economic outlet for unwanted catches brought to land Loose monitoring, control, and enforcement capacity by the fisheries administration; lack of (continued) 96 S. Villasante et al. Table 5.2 (continued) Case study Country Main reasons for discarding Barriers to the implementation of the LO Ecological Economic Institutional difficult to optimize operations to completely avoid unwanted catches incentives for compliance SSF in Galicia Spain Lack of quotas for harvested commercial species Largely mixed fisheries with relatively small quantities of discards of regulated species; very difficult to optimize operations to completely avoid unwanted catch The hold space on board is currently optimized, and it would not be possible to expand the hold space without affecting the navigability of the fishing vessels. Small-scale fishing vessels hold their catches on board in boxes classified by species and size, and the potential increase on their number would increase insecurity of the vessels Fishers strongly oppose the LO and the mandatory measure to annotate all catches in the electronic logbook, because it will be very difficult and impractical during the fishing activities Deepwater hook-and- line fishery in the Azores Portugal Undersize fish (< MLS), quota in the case of “alfonsinos,” low market value, damaged catch Difficult to avoid unwanted catch due to mixed resources, especially juveniles of blackspot seabream; fishers perceived high abundance of deepwater sharks Fishers strongly oppose that unwanted undersize catch cannot be sold for direct human consumption; Representatives of fish auctions concerned about the economic costs of collecting and dealing with the unwanted catch Fishers strongly oppose that catch will count against quota; limiting quota for “alfonsinos” and TAC zero for deepwater sharks could prematurely choke the fishery (continued) 5 The Implementation of the Landing Obligation in Small-Scale Fisheries... 97 Compared to other segments of the fleet, SSF is highly selective, and the amount of discards is relatively low. The fractions of the catch that are discarded are usually noncommercial species, such as epibenthic invertebrates, or damaged fish. Commercial species that could be otherwise sold are discarded when they are damaged due to scavengers preying on the catch. This problem is particularly acute for set net fishing gear (trammel nets and longlines). Undersize fish are usually not discarded but sold on the black market. Field studies carried out in the MINOUW project show that the amount of catches below legal size is generally low, but for certain species and certain gear deployments, the proportion of catches that will fall under the remit of the Landing Obligation can be high. Trammel nets employing inner panels of 40–60 mm mesh can produce a relatively high proportion of undersize European seabass (Dicentrarchus labrax), Sand steenbras (Lithognathus mormyrus), blackspot seabream (Pagellus bogaraveo), or common sole (Solea solea). In the case of the blackspot seabream, its large legal size (33 cm TL) results in all catches from all fishing gears studied being undersize. Several barriers for the implementation of the LO have been identified such as low quantities of discards, the lack of capacity to monitor SSF by the regional administration, and increase costs of sorting, among others (Table 5.2). 5.3.4.2 The Gillnet Fishery in Galicia Fishing is a major contributor to gross domestic product in Galicia (an autonomous community in northwestern Spain), the main fishing region in Spain (Villasante 2012). The artisanal/SSF fleet is comprised mainly of small vessels (on average 6 m long), fishing with a great variety of passive gears, the so-called artes menores (traps, hooks and lines, gill and trammel nets, and small seines), and exploiting a diverse range of species, most of which are subjected to TACs. The fleet using gillnets comprises 1000 fishing vessels, operating in a multispecific SSF, mainly harvesting European hake, pouting (Trisopterus luscus), horse mackerels, and surmullet at depths of 30–140 m and up to 8–10 miles from the coast. Based on results from interviews started in 2015 and updated until 2018, the reasons for discarding are the precautionary closure and the full closure of the fishery due to the full harvest of the TAC (Villasante et al. 2016a,b). Recently, Villasante et al. (2015b) estimated the total removals of fisheries catches (including IUU catches, subsistence catches, and discards for commercial and recreational fisheries) for the 1950–2010 period. The authors demonstrated that the discard rate for SSFs ranges between 5–18% depending on the type of commercial species harvested. However, the authors also found that the discard rate for some sedentary resources (e.g., goose barnacle (Pollicipes pollicipes) 74% and razor clams Ensis spp. 49%) can be significantly higher than for other SSFs. However, the species under TAC and quota regulations present high discard rates which ranged between 0 and 50% (European hake, mackerels) and/or 50200% 104 S. Villasante et al. (horse mackerels). Catches of horse mackerels and mackerels are highly variable due to migratory movements from Portuguese to Galician waters and can sometimes lead to high discard rates. Harvesting of immature individuals was reported to be very low or nonexistent for all species caught by this fishery (Villasante et al. 2015b, 2016c). Regarding the compliance to the LO, the expert’s opinion and the participatory consultation made with the small-scale fisheries sector show that changing the fisheries management system based on the TAC regulation would be the most important reason to comply with the LO (Villasante et al. 2016a,b) (Table 5.2). 5.4 Conclusion Despite the increased recognition of SSFs, there is a still need to ensure that policymakers receive robust scientific data about such fisheries on which to base decisions and thus ensure coherent policy. Our results show that only 21% of 1219 papers that have been published until 2018 focused on the discard problem in SSF. Key SSFs from around Europe selected to investigate the reasons for discarding, impact, and barriers to implementing the LO illustrate that discard rates vary greatly from fishery to fishery and species to species. However, the main reasons fishers discard are relatively similar from fishery to fishery and are mostly due to regulations (mainly TACs, quotas, and MLS), low market value of some catch components, capture of noncommercial species, high grading, and damaged catch. Small-scale fishers perceive that it will be difficult to comply with the LO and could identify ecological, economic, and institutional barriers to the implementation of the LO. From an ecological perspective, most fishers are of the opinion that resources are largely mixed, and unwanted catch is very difficult to avoid. For example, the fact that the beach seine fishery in Portugal is carried out in areas of great ecological sensitivity, such as nursery areas, results in the capture of large numbers of juveniles. From an institutional perspective, the lack of monitoring, control, and enforcement capacity by fisheries jurisdictions, combined with lack of incentives for compliance, are critical barriers perceived by fishers for the implementation of the LO in all case studies. Plus, some fishers identified that the implementation of the LO requires the adoption of more selective gear technology (Galicia and Azores). Azores fishers think they are already using one of the most selective gear in European fisheries and as such that the LO should not apply to them. From an economic perspective, fishers state that the LO will increase the operational costs of fishing activities. They strongly oppose the fact that unwanted undersize catch cannot be sold for human consumption and that this catch will count against their quota. In general, the potential socioeconomic impacts of the LO could be high for SSF. For example, it is estimated that the future yield (catches) under the LO in Galicia (Spain) would be only 50% of catches expected in the absence of the LO, regardless of the total volume of quotas allocated to the fleet. 5 The Implementation of the Landing Obligation in Small-Scale Fisheries... 105 Acknowledgment The authors acknowledge the financial support from the European COST Action “Ocean Governance for Sustainability –challenges, options and the role of science”and by the ICES Science Fund Project “Social Transformations of Marine Social-Ecological Systems”, and MINOUW (Grant Agreement 634495). C. Pita acknowledges FCT/MEC national funds and FEDER co-funding, within the PT2020 partnership Agreement and Compete 2020, for the financial support to CESAM (Grant no UID/AMB/50017/2013). C.M. Teixeira had the support of the Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT) (Pest-OE/MAR/UI0199/2011); and C.M. Teixeira and C. Pita were supported by the Research Project “LESSisMORE –LESS discards and LESS fishing effort for BETTER efficiency on the small-scale fisheries”(Ref. “LISBOA-01- 0145-FEDER-028179”), support by the FEDER Funds through the COMPETE 2020, by the PIDDAC through FCT/MCTES. TM thanks the support from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation project DiscardLess (Grant Agreement No 633680), the Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia (FCT) strategic project UID/MAR/04292/2013 granted to MARE. He is also supported by the Program Investigador FCT (IF/01194/2013/CP1199/CT0002). References Aarts, G., & Poos, J. (2009). Comprehensive discard reconstruction and abundance estimation using flexible selectivity functions. ICES Journal of Marine Science,4, 763–771. Brodersen, M.M., Haralabous, J., Chalari, Dictyopoulos, C., Dogrammatzi, K., Vassilopoulou, V. (2016). Preliminary comparative study of trammel net fisheries in the Saronikos Gulf a decade apart 16th Panhellenic Conference of Ichthyologists, Kavala, pp. 129–132. Cabral, H., Duque, J., Costa, M.J. (2003). Discards of the beach seine fishery in the central coast of Portugal. Fisheries Research,63(1),63–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-7836(03)00004-3. Canha, A. (2013). Caracterização das rejeições na pescaria de demersais nos Açores. Master thesis dissertation, University of the Azores, pp 76. Carvalho, N., Edwards-Jones, G., Isidro E. (2011). Defining scale in fisheries: small versus largescale fishing operations in the Azores. Fisheries Research,109, 360–369. Christou, M., Haralabous, J., Stergiou, K.I., Damalas, D., Maravelias, C.D. (2017). An evaluation of socioeconomic factors that influence fishers’discard behaviour in the Greek bottom trawl fishery. Fisheries Research,195, 105–115. Damalas, D., & Vassilopoulou, V. (2013). Slack regulation compliance in the Mediterranean fisheries: a paradigm from the Greek Aegean Sea demersal fishery, modelling discard ogives. Fisheries Management and Ecology, 20,21–33. De Vos, B.I., Döring, R., Aranda, M., Buisman, F.C., Frangoudes K., Goti L., et al. (2016). New modes of fisheries governance: Implementation of the landing obligation in four European countries. Marine Policy, 64,1–8. Depestele, J., Feekings, J., Reid, D., Cook, R., Gascuel, D., Girardin, R., et al. (this volume). The impact of fisheries discards on scavengers in the sea. In S.S. Uhlmann, C. Ulrich, S.J. Kennelly (Eds.), The European Landing Obligation –Reducing discards in complex, multi-species and multi-jurisdictional fisheries. Cham: Springer. EU [European Commission]. (2018). Fleet register on the NET 2018. Data provided by MS at 01/06/2018. Build of 13/06/2018 http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/fleet/index.cfm?method¼Search. SearchAdvanced&country. Accessed 13 June 2018. Fagundes, L., Tomás, A., Casarini, L., Bueno, E., Lopes, G., Machado, D., et al. (2007) A pesca de arrasto-de-praianailha de São Vincente, São Paulo, Brasil. Série Relatórios Técnicos N29. Faltas, S.N. (1997). Analysis of beach seine catch from Abu Qir Bay (Egypt). Bulletin of the National Institute of Oceanography and Fisheries, 23,69–82. Fauconnet, L., Pham, C., Canha, A., Afonso, P., Vandeperre, F., Machete, M., et al. (2016). Estimating total fisheries discards in an oceanic archipelago of the NE Atlantic. 7th World Fisheries Congress, Busan, South Korea, 23–27th May 2016. 106 S. Villasante et al. Fauconnet, L., Pham, C., Canha, A., Afonso, P., Diogo, H., Machete, M., Silva, M.A., Vandeperre, F., Morato, T. (in press) An overview of fisheries discards in the Azores. Fisheries Research Fitzpatrick, M., Quetglas, T., Frangoudes, K., Triantaphyllidis, G., Nielsen, K. (2017). DiscardLess policy brief No 2: year 2 of the landing obligation: key issues in Mediterranean fisheries.https:// doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.573666. Accessed 25 July 2018. Franca, M., & Costa, F. (1979) Nota sobre as xávegas da Costa da Caparica e Fonte da Telha. Boletín Instituto Nacional de Investigación das Pescas, 1,37–69. Gaspar, M., & Pereira, F. (2014). Pequena pesca na costa continental portuguesa: caracterização sócio-económica, descrição da actividade e identificação de problemas. Instituto Português do Mar e da Atmosfera. pp 268. Gonçalves, J., Stergiou, K., Hernando, J., Puente, E., Moutopoulos, D., Arregi, L., et al. (2007). Discards from experimental trammel nets in southern European small-scale fisheries. Fisheries Research, 88,5–14. Jorge, I, Siborro, S., Sobral, M. (2002). Contribuição para o conhecimento da pescaria da xávega da zona centro. Relatórios Científicos e Técnicos Instituto de Investigação das Pescas e do Mar, 85,1–22. Lamberth, S., Sauer, W., Mann, B., Brouwer, S., Clark, B., Erasmus, C. (1997). The status of the South African beach-seine and gill-net fisheries. South African Journal of Marine Science,18, 195–202. Macfadyen, G., Salz, P., Cappell, R. (2011). Characteristics of small-scale coastal fisheries in Europe. Policy Department: Structural and Cohesion Policies, European Parliament, Fisheries pp 162 . Martins, R., Carneiro, M., Rebordão, F., Sobral, M. (2000). A pesca com arte de xávega. Relatorios Científicos e Técnicos Instituto de Investigacão das Pescas Mar, 48, pp 32. Maynou, F., del Gil, M.Mar, Vitale, S., Giusto, G., Foutsi, A., Range, M., et al. (2017). Fishers’ perceptions of the European Union discards ban : perspective from south European fisheries. Marine Policy,89, 147–153. Morato, T., Machete, M., Kitchingman, A., Tempera, F., Lai, S., Menezes G., et al. (2008). Abundance and distribution of seamounts in the Azores. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 357,17–21. Palialexis, A., & Vassilopoulou, V. (2012a). Metier identification in trammel net fisheries in Greece. Oral paper presented at the 10th Panhellenic Symposium of Oceanography and Fisheries, Athens. Palialexis, A., & Vassilopoulou V. (2012b). The local character of trammel net fisheries in Greece and the need of regional spatial approach for management effectiveness. Oral paper presented at the 6th World Fisheries Congress, Edinburgh 711th May 2012. Pham, C., Canha, A., Diogo, H., Pereira, J., Prieto, R., Morato, T. 2013. Total marine fishery catches for the Azores (1950–2010). ICES Journal of Marine Sciences, 70, 564–577. Pita, C., Dickey, H., Pierce, G., Mente, E., Theodossiou, I. (2010). Willingness for mobility amongst European fishermen. Journal of Rural Studies, 26, 308–319. Silva, H., & Pinho, M. (2007). Exploitation, management and conservation: small-scale fishing on seamounts. In T. J. Pitcher, T. Morato, P. J. B. Hart, M.R. Clark, N. Haggan, R. S. Santos (Eds.), Seamounts: ecology, fisheries & conservation (pp. 333–399). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. STECF [Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries]. (2016). The 2016 annual economic report on the EU fishing fleet. (STECF-16-11). 2016. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, pp 470. Stergiou, K., Moutopoulos, D., Erzini, K. (2002). Gill net and longlines fisheries in Cyclades waters (Aegean Sea): species composition and gear competition. Fisheries Research, 57,25–37. Stergiou, K., Moutopoulos, D., Casal, H., Erzini K. (2007). Trophic signatures of small-scale fishing gears: implications for conservation and management. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 333, 117–128. Tsagarakis, K., Palialexis, A., Vassilopoulou, V. (2014). Mediterranean fishery discards: review of the existing knowledge. ICES Journal of Marine Sciences, 71, 1219–1234. 5 The Implementation of the Landing Obligation in Small-Scale Fisheries... 107 Tzanatos, E., Somarakis, S., Tserpes, G., Koutsikopoulos C. (2007). Discarding practices in a Mediterranean small-scale fishing fleet (Patraikos Gulf, Greece). Fisheries Management Ecology,14, 277–285. Uhlmann, S.S., van Helmond, A.T., Stefánsdóttir, K., Sigurðardóttir, S., Haralabous, J., Bellido, J. M., et al. (2013). Discarded fish in European waters: general patterns and contrasts. ICES Journal of Marine Sciences,71, 1235–1245. van Hoof, L., Kraan, M., Visser, N.M., Avoyan, E., Batsleer, J., Trapman, B. (this volume). Muddying the waters of the Landing Obligation: How multi-level governance structures can obscure policy implementation. In S.S. Uhlmann, C. Ulrich, S.J. Kennelly (Eds.), The European Landing Obligation –Reducing discards in complex, multi-species and multi-jurisdictional fisheries. Cham: Springer. Vassilopoulou, V., Anastasopoulou, K., Haralambous, C., Christides, G., Glykokokkalos, S., et al. (2007). Preliminary results of monitoring discards by coastal fishery vessels in Greek waters. Oral paper presented at the 13th Panhellenic Symposium of Ichthyologists, Mytilene, Greece, Proceedings: 109116. Veiga, P., Pita, C., Rangel, M., Gonçalves, J.M., Campos, A., Fernandes, P., et al. (2016). The EU landing obligation and European small-scale fisheries: what are the odds for success? Marine Policy,64,64–71. Villasante, S. (2012). The management of the blue whiting fishery as complex socialecologic system: the Galician case. Marine Policy, 36(3), 1301–1308. Villasante, S., Pazos Guimeráns, C., Garcia Rodrigues, J., Antelo, M., Rivero Rodríguez, S., Da Rocha, J.M., et al. (2015a). Small-scale fisheries and the zero-discard target(p. 73). Brussels: European Parliament, Directorate-General for Internal Policies Policy Department B: Structural and Cohesion Policies. Villasante, S., Macho, G., Isusi De Rivero, J., Divovich, E., Zylich, K., Zeller, D., et al. (2015b). Estimates of total fisheries removals from the Northwest of Spain (1950–2010). Working Paper Series #51, University of British Columbia, Canada, pp 18. Villasante, S., Pita, C., Pazos Guimeráns, C., Rodrigues, J., Antelo, M., Rivero Rodríguez, et al. (2016a). To land or not to land: How stakeholders perceive the zero-discard policy in European small-scale fisheries? Marine Policy, 71, 166–174. Villasante, S., Pierce, G., Pita, C., Pazos Guimeráns, C., Rodrigues, J., Antelo, M., et al. (2016b). Fishers’perceptions about the EU discards policy and its economic impact on small-scale fishers in Galicia (North West Spain). Ecological Economics, 130, 130–138. Villasante, S., Macho, G., Isusi de Rivero, J., Divovich, E., Zylich, K., Zeller, D., et al. (2016c). Spain (North West). In D. Pauly, & D. Zeller (Eds.), Global Atlas of marine fisheries: a critical appraisal of catches and ecosystem impacts (p. 397), Washington, DC: Island Press. Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. 108 S. Villasante et al.