In 2017 and 2018, the bass stock crashed to scarily low levels. But since then, as a result of emergency restrictions, the stock has recovered somewhat but remains at an unsafe level, so more stock rebuilding is needed. But like any good scary movie, just when you think things are getting better, the shocks keep coming.
In recent weeks, we have realised that the scientists’ annual bass stock assessment1 doesn’t contain rebuilding advice. Instead, it presents “Headline Advice” that, if followed, would actually shrink the bass stock, not rebuild it!
The scientists’ assessment provides other, lower, catch scenarios that fishery managers could follow, but the problem is the fisheries managers’ normally aim to set fishing opportunities in line with the Headline Advice and say this is “sustainable”. Regarding bass specifically, so far we have only heard Defra talk about the “Headline Advice”, which makes us concerned they may not appreciate that the Headline Advice for bass is not aimed at rebuilding the bass stock and is therefore not “sustainable”.
When we raised this problem with Defra’s UK fishing opportunities negotiators, to their credit they seemed to take it on board that not having scientific rebuilding advice, when you are supposed to be rebuilding stocks, is a rather difficult place for fisheries managers to find themselves and have offered a meeting to discuss this problem in early 2025.
But what will UK and EU fisheries managers decide in the next few weeks for the bass fishery in 2025?
The EU Advisory Council for North Western Waters (which is dominated by commercial fishing interests) has recommended following the Headline Advice and shrinking the bass stock by 7% in 2025 (overturning the more conservative position of its bass focus group that recommended no change to the total bass tonnage killed). We have heard France is seeking to increase landings by bottom trawlers and seiners, whilst rolling-over catch limits for other gear types – so aiming to reduce the bass stock by 3%.
Bass Angling Conservation supports the position taken by the European Anglers Alliance and the International Forum for Sustainable Underwater Activities:
“the EAA and IFSUA recommend that fisheries managers should not follow the ICES headline advice and instead should consider alternatives to the ICES headline advice and aim for Total Removals that would either increase or, at the very least, maintain the SSB2 in 2025. Recognising the significant challenge of reducing fishing pressure enough to achieve stock growth within the year, we recommend that fisheries managers target a Total Removals level of 1,469 tonnes in 2025, a 26% reduction from the estimated 2024 removals of 1,990 tonnes.”
Where should these cuts fall, if the fisheries managers were to decide to do the right thing by the bass stock? Recreational fishers have had no increase to their bag limit since 2020, whilst commercial fishing limits were increased in each of 2021, 2022 and 2023, so we argue that fisheries managers should revoke some of those previous commercial fishing increases.
However, fisheries managers know that reducing commercial catch limits upsets commercial fishers, so it seems likely that, at best, fishery managers will settle for a roll-over of 2024 measures and keep their fingers crossed that the scientists are wrong and this won’t shrink the stock by 3%. Do UK fisheries managers and our Fisheries Minister have the nerve to stand up for the bass stock and the improved long-term socio-economic benefits that will flow from maintaining or growing the bass stock in 2025? We will soon know the answer.
[1] https://doi.org/10.17895/ices.advice.27222843
[2] Spawning Stock Biomass
