Danish Fishers Producer Organisation
dkfisk
Promoting the interests of the Danish fishing industry both at national and international level
ID: 47326968864-27
Lobbying Activity
Meeting with Costas Kadis (Commissioner) and
27 May 2025 · Common Fisheries Policy
Meeting with Asger Christensen (Member of the European Parliament)
16 May 2025 · Fisheries
Meeting with Eva Maria Carballeira Fernandez (Head of Unit Maritime Affairs and Fisheries) and Sveriges Fiskares Producentorganisation ekonomisk förening
20 Feb 2025 · Exchange of views on fisheries cooperation between the EU and Norway on the management of shared fish stocks in the North Sea and Skagerrak
Meeting with Stine Bosse (Member of the European Parliament)
4 Nov 2024 · European Fisheries Policy
Meeting with Asger Christensen (Member of the European Parliament)
4 Nov 2024 · Fishing
Meeting with Stine Bosse (Member of the European Parliament)
18 Sept 2024 · European Fisheries Policy
Response to Ex-post evaluation of European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF) 2014-2020
6 Sept 2024
Danish Fishers PO and Danish Pelagic Producers Organisation welcome the consultations on fisheries and maritime activities funding programmes. Since 2014 The European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF 2014-2020) and European Martime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF 2021-2027) have been potentially important financial aid schemes for the fishing industry in EU. The allocated sum of EMFAF to Denmark amounts to 280 mills. . An amount which could significantly contribute to the further development of the sector and the modernization of the fishing fleet. Nevertheless, looking into how the funds are prioritized in Denmark, only 28 percent of the EMFAF funds are allocated to the fishing community. This is a EU record low share, when compared with other EU member states, where on average more than 50% of the funds are earmarked for fishing, aquaculture, marketing, and processing. In Denmark, the majority of EMFAF funds are spent on watercourse restoration and tasks conducted by public authorities. In line with the political agreement for the distribution of EMFAF funds for 2021-2023, DKK 60 million was allocated annually for inland watercourse restoration and DKK 153 million for public authority tasks / technical assistance, including electronic monitoring, drones, and data collection. It would be appropriate to set a limitation on how much of the funding can be allocated to national authorities to make sure that EMFAF is effective for the industry. EMFAF is the only support scheme for the fishing industry. Compared to the Single Payment Scheme in the Common agriculture policy where producers are guaranteed financial support, it has proven to be more difficult to make EMFAF funding available to the fishing industry. The funds must go to the fishing community, instead of public government institutions. Even though the EMFAF budgets indicate that there are funds available for fishing vessels, most funds are only available for directed investments in increased selectivity, green transition and safety in the fleet. We have most recently seen this with the scheme for green transition, where the funds of DKK 46.1 million annually were primarily allocated to the development and testing of environmentally improving solutions in the fishing industry and not on implementation of known effective solutions. The long list of limitations on how fundings can be used, should be shortened and opportunities be increased, so EMFAF in the future can be effective for the sector. One of the major challenges for the sector in the coming years is the green transition. It is vital for the vessels to receive financial support in this transition. The fishing sector has called upon the Danish authorities to allocate significantly more funds to the green transition at vessel level. EU seafood production only covers around 43% of the demand in EU, so the rest must be covered by imports. It is crucial that the EU fleet improves its competitiveness and ability to transform in accordance with new market driven and legislative demands. The European Green Deal points out that challenges related to greenhouse gas emissions and loss of biodiversity must be addressed with innovation and new technologies to be deployed and demonstrated in all sectors, creating new innovative value chains. The COVID-19 pandemic had a negative impact on the fisheries and aquaculture sector and led to a new focus on the importance of effective and resilient food systems that can ensure citizens having access to sufficient supplies of food at affordable prices. Something which is prioritized in the political guidelines of the European Commission for the next five years. Even though the Commission made it possible to use EMFAF funding to mitigate the consequences for the sector during the pandemic, the Danish programme did not allocate any support for the sector, because of the already approved political agreement.
Read full responseResponse to Evaluation of the Common Fisheries Policy
6 Sept 2024
Danish fishers PO and Danish Pelagic Producers Organisation welcome the evaluation of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) initiated by the Commission. After more than 10 years the 2013 CFP is in need of an update and an upgrade thus the Danish Fishing industry hopes that the evaluation will result in a genuine reform of the common policy. By introducing the landing obligation the 2013 CFP reform made drastic changes to how fisheries are operated and conducted, there has been only very limited opportunities to expand, adapt and adjust critical elements of this regulation in accordance with experiences gathered at sea and in national administrations and the developments in the EU membership, food security threats and in the marine environment. The time is now if we are to facilitate the sustainable and green development of the EU fishing sector. Brexit, Covid-19 and the war in Ukraine have shown that EU must react to conserve and protect European food production. It is therefore an obvious possibility to adjust the policy, principles, and provisions to secure a viable fishing industry and food production in the future. The Danish fishing industry welcomes the speech from the president of the Commission at the plenary of the European Parliament in July 2024, when she was approved reelected as president of the European Commission. It is worth mentioning some of the key points in that speech and the political guideline for the upcoming five years 2024-2029: 1. Make business easier and deepen our single market. 2. Sustaining our quality of life: Food security, water, and nature 3. A European Ocean Pact Looking into these statements and taking stock on the discussions from the last mandate, it is about time to evaluate and reform the Common Fisheries Policy.
Read full responseMeeting with Asger Christensen (Member of the European Parliament)
4 Sept 2024 · Upcoming priorities in PECH
Response to EU-Greenland fisheries agreement and protocol – way forward
8 Feb 2024
Danske fiskere har fisket rejer i grønlandsk farvand i siden 1978. Siden den første fiskeriaftale blev indgået mellem EU og Grønland tilbage i 1985, har danske fiskere benyttet sig af muligheden for at fiske især rejer i grønlandsk farvand. Men også fiskeriet efter bl.a. lodde har i nogle år være ganske betydeligt. Partnerskabsaftalen er en vigtig aftale for EU. Ikke blot fordi, den giver mulighed for EU at tilkøbe fiskerimuligheder i grønlandsk farvand efter en række vigtige arter. Men også fordi aftalen med Grønland er med til at sikre balance i hele Nordatlanten. Et forhold, der er blevet endnu vigtigere siden Storbritannien forlod EU. Aftalen mellem EU og Grønland har historisk set været et vigtigt element i transfereringerne mellem EU og Norge i den såkaldte balance. Det er vigtigt, at denne mekaniske sikres i fremtiden. Ikke mindst fordi aftalen mellem EU og Norge er en hjørnesten i fiskerisamarbejdet i Nordatlanten. Desværre har partnerskabsaftalen mellem EU og Grønland udviklet sig i en uheldig retning, som gør det fortsat sværere at drive et rentabelt fiskeri efter rejer i grønlandsk farvand. Siden 2010 er den mængde rejer, der tilbydes EU i NAFO-område 1 faldet ganske betragteligt. Fra 4.000 tons til nu 2.500 tons. Det gør det vanskeligt for fiskerne at drive et både økonomisk og miljømæssigt bæredygtigt fiskeri. Derudover er nettomængden i den østlige del af grønlandsk farvand blevet reduceret til 3.300 tons, som resultat af, at EU overfører flere rejer til Norge end tidligere. Det er derfor vigtigt, at en fremtidig partnerskabsaftale med Grønland bliver styrket og ikke forringet. En svækkelse af aftalen med Grønland vil medføre store økonomiske konsekvenser for fiskerierhvervet i EU, hvilket for alt i verden bør undgås. I en situation, hvor fiskerimulighederne i EUs aftale med Norge bliver gradvist reduceret som følge af bl.a. Brexit, er det vigtigere end nogensinde, at man fra EUs side bestræber sig på, at adgang til øgede mængder af de vigtigste arter i aftalen, heriblandt rejer. Gennem flere år, har Danmarks Fiskeriforening anbefalet, at man fra EU-Kommissionens side arbejder for at øge mængden af rejer. Udover de mængder, der eksplicit fremgår af fiskeriprotokollen til partnerskabsaftalen, er det vigtigt, at der skabes forståelse for vigtigheden af muligheden for at tilkøbe overskudsmængder, som ikke bliver udnyttet af de grønlandske rejefiskere. Gennem efterhånden mange år, har det desværre ikke været en mulighed. De grønlandske myndigheder har oftest svaret, at der ikke er mulighed for at overføre overskudsmængder til EU, fordi TACen udnyttes fuldt ud af grønlandske fiskere. Det betyder, at EU stort set altid må affinde sig med kun at få mulighed for at fiske på de indikative mængder, der fremgår af fiskeriprotokollen. Det er derfor vigtigt i de fremtidige forhandlinger at rette opmærksomheden på to forhold: For det første, at den grønlandske regulering giver mulighed for 100% år-til-år fleksibilitet For grønlandske, der fisker efter rejer og hellefisk. For det andet, har det vist sig, at grønlandske fiskere efterlader store mængder rejer i havet, velvidende, at de kan fiskes som en del af det efterfølgende års kvote. Disse to forhold bør EU-Kommissionen rejse i de fremtidige forhandlinger. Begge forhold er med til at begrænse EUs muligheder for at drive et bæredygtigt fiskeri i grønlandske farvande. Det er vigtigere end nogensinde før, at EU forsøger at få balance tilbage i partnerskabsaftalen med Grønland og genrejse fiskerimulighederne til de niveauer, der var gældende frem til ca. 2010. Det forlyder, at man fra Grønlandsk side i en fremtidig aftale med EU, vil arbejde for en reduktion af EUs fiskerimuligheder, samtidig med, at vil kræve afgiften hævet. Det er hverken ret eller rimeligt. Det kan ikke være vejen frem i et respektfuldt og gensidigt samarbejde til gavn for begge parter.
Read full responseResponse to Sustainable fishing in the EU: state of play and orientations for 2024
31 Aug 2023
Having studied the Commission Communication on sustainable fishing in the EU: state of play and orientations for 2024, Danish Fishers Producer Organisation (DFPO) would like that the following observation are taken into consideration: Landing obligation. For the industry it is absurd that plaice on virtually all other areas than the Baltic Sea have been demonstrated to have a high survival rate and are exempted from the landing obligation. From the industry viewpoint, there is not any good argument which documents that plaice in the Baltic does not have a lower survival and STECFs advice not to have a derogation for Baltic plaice appears to be in contrast to what they have advised for other areas. Scientific advice. DFPO is of course very much in favour of basing the management of the fishery on the best available science. However, this is not the same as being obliged to always set the TACs in line with scientific advice. In several cases ICES estimate that a stock is increasing, but advise a reduced TAC in order to comply with the obligation to fish in line with MSY. This does not correspond well with a landing obligation and is likely to lead to a lowest common denominator approach, which again compromises the principle of maximum sustainable yield. This is in particular the case for some of the stocks which are not evaluated through an analytical assessment, and advice is given in line with ICES new rfb rule. This is exemplified in the advice for whiting in the Skagerrak/Kattegat, where ICES observe that the stock has grown by 45%, but the rfb rule leads to a recommendation of a 27% reduction in the quota. How this fits with a regulation that prohibits discarding is not obvious, but it is not an regulation that takes into account the best scientific knowledge of the development in the stock. Similarly for ling, there is an assessment of a rather stable stock increase over 20 years, but an advice to reduce the TAC by 12%. For ling, the technical background is slightly different, but also for this species, it is a matter of biological advice, which appears to be in contrast to the observed stock development. Whiting and ling are stocks where the mismatch between stock situation and advice is very obvious, but also for other important stocks with a high risk of becoming choke species, there are examples of increasing stocks and proposals to reduce quotas. This applies to red sole and monkfish. Further to this, there are also cases, such as haddock, where the scientific advice is in line with the observed stock development, but the TAC is set far below that. Fishing for one species potentially influence the development of several other species. However, management should avoid underutilizing important resources in the attempt to provide better conditions for a single species, which is really just solving one problem by creating another. Bycatch It is also important not to adopt rules that seem effective on paper, but which have no effect whatsoever on the stocks. Thus, DFPO does not see any positive effect from making rules that certain species may only be caught as bycatch in fishing for other species. In a fishing context, what matters for the development of a stock is how much is caught - not whether it is caught in a larger or smaller proportion of other catches. On the other hand, by-catch rules cause major problems for the fisherman and contribute to unnecessarily complicating compliance with the duty to land all catch. DFPO is pleased that progress has been made for a number of important species, but will also point out, in continuation of the above argumentation, that on a number of points there are conflicts between the obligation to land all catch and the concern about the catch in mixed fisheries . Underutilization of stocks. It is a fine ambition to want to "put something in the bank" by not fully exploiting the growth in some stocks, but if this gives rise to problems with compliance with the landing obligat
Read full responseMeeting with Søren Gade (Member of the European Parliament) and Danish Pelagic Producers Organisation
26 Apr 2022 · Fisheries
Meeting with Helena Braun (Cabinet of Executive Vice-President Frans Timmermans) and Association of National Organisations of Fishing Enterprises in the European Union and
8 Apr 2022 · Bottom trawling and preparation of the Action plan to conserve fisheries resources and protect marine ecosystems
Meeting with Virginijus Sinkevičius (Commissioner) and
1 Apr 2022 · The follow up meeting with the sector to discuss the Commission response to the crisis in the fisheries sector, to present the measures adopted and planned