The second workshop on lists of commercial fish and shellfish species for reporting of MSFD D3 (WKD3Lists2)

WKD3Lists2 created lists of regionally relevant commercial fish and shellfish species (and higher order taxa) for the use of Article 8 reporting by EU member states under Descriptor 3 of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD). The regional taxa lists were based on landings data from the Fisheries Dependent Information data base (FDI) provided by EU member states and compiled by the Joint Research Centre (JRC). The taxonomy of landings data was consolidated by regional experts and the consolidated data were combined to obtain absolute and proportional landing weights and values for each (sub)re-gion, which were used to apply dual (weight and vale) selection thresholds to compile (sub)re-gional D3-taxa-lists. Regional D3-taxa-lists were produced for two MSFD regions (Baltic Sea & Black Sea) and eight MSFD subregions: The Greater North Sea, Celtic Seas, the Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast, Mac-aronesia, Western Mediterranean, the Ionian Sea & Central Mediterranean, the Adriatic Sea and the Aegean-Levantine Sea. To exclude taxa with very low landing weights or value from the final lists, two types of thresh-olds (cumulative and minimum) with differing cut-off values were evaluated (90%, 95%, 98% and 99% for cumulative and 0.1% and 1% for minimum thresholds). Depending on the cut-off value, the number of taxa included varied substantially and in most (sub)regions the application of thresholds reduced the initial number of taxa by more than 50%. WKD3Lists2 did not recommend any threshold type or cut-off value to be applied generically in all (sub)regions, but identified trade-offs between inclusiveness and parsimony of relevant con-tent i.e. higher cut-off values will lead to longer lists including many taxa with relatively low landings weights/values. In some (sub)regions, thresholds with lower cut-off values (90% to 95%) were considered feasible by regional experts (Mediterranean subregions, Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast, Macaronesia), whereas in other MSFD (sub)regions cut-off values in the range of 98-99% were considered as appropriate (Baltic Sea, Greater North Sea, Celtic Seas). The regional D3-taxa lists by WKD3Lists2 were created without considering the availability of data or assessments i.e. many species are included, for which no assessment information is avail-able. WKD3Lists2 decided on this approach because a representative selection of commercially targeted taxa was considered to indicate knowledge and data gaps in current data collection and assessment schemes. Regional species lists shall be used by EU member states for the national reporting of D3. Stocks and species from the regional lists shall be considered by member states, and additional stocks/species can be added where appropriate (e.g. those stocks/species of national or local of importance that do not appear on the regional lists). x WKD3Lists2 discussed and compiled recommendations on how Member States can complement the regional lists of D3-taxa. A key recommendation is to maintain taxa reported in 2018 under D3, even if they are not part of the regional D3-taxa list for 2024. Wherever possible, Member States should report on stock level. WKD3Lists2 also discussed linkages between D1 and D3-reporting of commercial taxa.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Workshop to review and progress the reported lists of eu msfd descriptor 3 ( (WKD3LISTS)

info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Workshop to scope and preselect indicators for criterion D3C3 under MSFD decision (EU) 2017/848 (WKD3C3SCOPE)

The workshop to scope and preselect indicators for Descriptor 3 criterion 3 under MSFD Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848 (WKD3C3SCOPE) provided a platform for experts from the EU member states and relevant regional bodies to meet and support development and progress the assessment methodology, based on a request by the EC (DGENV). WKD3C3SCOPE is the first of a series of three workshops (WKD3C3THRESHOLDS and WKSIMULD3) to provide guidance in relation to operational indicators for MSFD D3C3. The workshop was organized as a series of presentations with intermittent group discussions. On the first day of the workshop the participants discussed what defines a ‘healthy population structure’ for species with different life history traits (ToR a). During the following days, the group discussed and identified relevant D3C3 indicators (ToR b) and developed criteria to select among the identified D3C3 indicators to allow further testing and setting of thresholds at WKD3C3THRESHOLDS (ToR c). The participants found that overall, healthy fish stocks are characterized by high productivity, wide age and size structuring in the population, and the ability to quickly recover from disturbances. The groups noted that environmental factors, along with stock biomass and fishing pressure, influence the productivity and health of a stock, with environment playing a particularly large role in the recruitment of short-lived stocks. It was suggested that the age structure of a stock might be more relevant for evaluating the health of long-lived stocks. However, it was acknowledged that not all stocks have sufficient data to evaluate all proposed indicators, and a single indicator is unlikely to suffice for all stocks. Data availability, species- specific factors and regional or sub-regional variation are thus also important considerations. In relation to ToR b, the participants presented their work on potential indicators including: recruitment time-series, proportion of fish larger than the mean size of first sexual maturation, F rec/Fbar, length distribution L 90, relative proportion of old fish above A 90, indicators of spawner quality, and SSB/R. A discussion on pros/cons, benefits to the population of high or low indicator values, benefits supported by empirical evidence, applicability to data-poor stocks and benefits supported by simulation/theoretical considerations followed the presentations. Finally, in relation to ToR c, the difficulty emerged in ranking the indicators alone without considering the data used to estimate them and a new set of evaluation criteria for use in WKD3C3THRESHOLDS were defined. Based on the outputs of the meeting a list of indicators to be further evaluated has been drafted, which also emphasizes the stocks for which studies have empirically demonstrated effects on productivity. In addition to the listed indicators, indicators of genetic diversity and proportion of fish with parasite infestation were mentioned but to the knowledge of the participants, widespread data for these are currently not publicly available.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Workshop on Assessing the Impact of Fishing on Oceanic Carbon (WKFISHCARBON; outputs from 2023 meeting)

Rapports Scientifiques du CIEM. Volume 6, nº 12The Workshop on Assessing the Impact of Fishing on Oceanic Carbon (WKFISHCARBON) was set up to provide ICES and stakeholders with a summary of knowledge on the role of fishing in the process of carbon budgets, sequestration and footprint in the ocean. The workshop addressed the potential impact of fishing on the biological carbon pump (BCP), the possible impacts of bottom trawling on carbon stores in the seabed, as well as considering emissions from fishing vessels. The overall aim was to generate proposals on how to develop an ICES approach to fishing and its role in the ocean carbon budget, and to develop a roadmap for a way forward. The main findings were that knowledge of the BCP in the open ocean was reasonably well developed, but that key gaps existed. In particular, information on the biomass of mesopelagic fish and other biota, and of some of the key processes e.g. fluxes and fish bioenergetics. Knowledge is much weaker for the BCP in shelf seas, where the bulk of fishing occurs. In particular, while biomass of fish was often well quantified, unlike the open ocean, the understanding of the important processes was lacking, particularly for the fate of faecal pellets and deadfall at the seabed. There is extensive scientific knowledge of the impact of fishing on the seabed, but what is un-clear is what it means for seabed carbon storage. There have been numbers of studies, which give a very divided view on this. There has also been open controversy about this in the literature. Physical disturbance to the seabed from fishing can affect sediment transport and has the potential to facilitate remineralization, but precise impacts will depend on habitat, fishing métier, and other environmental factors. From this, it is clear that more research is needed to resolve the controversy, and to quantify the impacts from different fishing gears and on different substrates or habitats in terms of carbon storage. There has been much more research on minimizing fuel use by fishing vessels, and hence emissions, but this has mainly focused on fuel efficiency, fuel use per unit of landed catch, and less on the total emissions. Baselines for fuel use are available at the global level, but are lacking at the national and vessel level. There is a need for standardization of methodologies and protocols, and for improving the uptake of fuel conservation measures by industry, as well as for improving the uptake of existing and potential fuel conservation and efficiency measures by industry. Finally, a roadmap was proposed to develop research and synthesis, on the understandings of the processes involved, the metrics and how to translate this into possible advice for policy-makers. To that end, a further workshop was proposed in 2024.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio