EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

Europaudvalget 2017-18
EUU Alm.del Bilag 104
Offentligt

The economic consequences for the Danish fishery following the United Kingdom’s

decision to leave the European Union

Andersen, Peder; Andersen, Jesper Levring; Hoff, Ayoe; Ståhl, Lisa

Publication date:

2017

Document Version

Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record

Citation for published version (APA):

Andersen, P., Andersen, J. L., Hoff, A., & Ståhl, L. (2017). The economic consequences for the Danish fishery

following the United Kingdom’s decision to leave the European Union. Frederiksberg: Department of Food and

Resource Economics, University of Copenhagen. IFRO Report, No. 263

Download date: 08. nov.. 2017

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

The economic consequences for the

Danish fishery following

the United Kingdom’s decision to

leave the European Union

Peder Andersen

Jesper Levring Andersen

Ayoe Hoff

Lisa Ståhl

263

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

IFRO Report 263

The economic consequences for the Danish fishery following

the United Kingdom’s decision to

leave the European Union

Authors: Peder Andersen, Jesper Levring Andersen, Ayoe Hoff, Lisa Ståhl

Scientific quality control: Rasmus Nielsen

Published November 2017

ISBN: 978-87-92591-83-8

This report is the result of a special project commissioned by the Ministry of Environment and Food

of Denmark (MFVM).

The authors are responsible for the research findings contained in this report.

The IFRO Report series (former FOI Report) can be found here:

http://ifro.ku.dk/publikationer/ifro_serier/rapporter/

Find other IFRO Commissioned Work (mostly in Danish) here:

http://ifro.ku.dk/publikationer/ifro_serier/udredninger/

Department of Food and Resource Economics (IFRO)

University of Copenhagen

Rolighedsvej 25

DK 1958 Frederiksberg

www.ifro.ku.dk/english

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

Contents

Foreword, introduction and data ....................................................................................................... 2

Foreword ....................................................................................................................................................... 2

Introduction................................................................................................................................................... 2

Data, information and definitions ................................................................................................................. 3

II Description of the Danish and United Kingdom fishing sector and interactions between them ............ 4

Danish fishing vessels fishing in UK zone ...................................................................................................... 4

Fishing in the ICES statistical rectangles divided between the UK-EEZ and NEW-EU-EEZ .......................... 11

Danish quota exchanges with UK ................................................................................................................ 12

Imports of fish to Denmark ......................................................................................................................... 14

Exports of fish from Denmark ..................................................................................................................... 18

Landings in Denmark ................................................................................................................................... 21

Geographic distribution of UK landings in Denmark ................................................................................... 21

Landings by UK and EU vessels from UK-EEZ .............................................................................................. 22

The fish processing industry in Denmark .................................................................................................... 24

Onshore service industry............................................................................................................................. 26

III Analysis and results ........................................................................................................................ 28

Scenarios ..................................................................................................................................................... 28

Approach to analysis ................................................................................................................................... 29

Economic effects for the fishing fleets ........................................................................................................ 32

Economic effects for the processing sector ................................................................................................ 39

IV Summary and perspectives ............................................................................................................. 41

Importance of the UK-EEZ to Danish fisheries ............................................................................................ 41

Consequences of Brexit for Danish fisheries ............................................................................................... 42

Literature ......................................................................................................................................................... 45

ANNEXES .......................................................................................................................................................... 46

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 2 OF 53

Foreword, introduction and data

Foreword

The Department of Food and Resource Economics (IFRO), University of Copenhagen, agreed with a

funded contract (MFVM Id nr.: 2703310) to undertake an analysis regarding the consequences for

the Danish fishery following the United Kingdom s (UK) decision to leave the European Union (EU)

(in Danish: Analyse af konsekvenserne for fiskeriet ved Storbritanniens udtræden af EU).

The contract entered into force by the 1

January 2017 with finalisation in June 2017.

The following from IFRO has been a part of the work: Professor Peder Andersen, Associate Professor

Jesper Levring Andersen, Senior Researcher Ayoe Hoff and Scientific Assistant Lisa Ståhl. Associate

professor emeritus Hans Staby Frost has participated in discussions about the approach to

modelling.

At the beginning of the project period, a meeting was held

ith The Da ish Fishe e s Asso iatio ,

The Danish Pelagic Producers Organization, Marine Ingredients Denmark, and Danish Seafood

Association.

Introduction

The government of the UK officially announced the 29

March 2017 that UK would follow the

outcome of the referendum vote to leave the European Union. A process, also referred to as

B e it , has ee i itiated

implying that UK will not be a member of the European Union by April

2019.

Fisheries will be an important part of the Brexit EU negotiation process, not only because of its

macroeconomic importance, but because of its status as a sector, which supports livelihoods in

many regions and in regions with few alternative employment possibilities.

In order to get the best possible foundation for discussing how to divide fisheries in the future

between the EU and UK, an array of aspects is relevant to have knowledge about beforehand.

The purpose of this report is to describe some of these aspects in form of the primary interactions

between the Danish fishing sector and UK with focus on the following:

The activity of Danish fishing vessels in the UK Economic Exclusive Zone (EEZ)

The activity of fishing vessels from the UK in EU waters

Quota interactions between the Danish and UK authorities

Export and import of fish products between Denmark and UK

Other aspects could also become a part of and influence these discussions, including for instance

market access, trade agreements and control and enforcement.

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 3 OF 53

The first part of the report gives a picture of the importance of the access to UK fishing waters for

the Danish fishing vessels and the importance of import and export of fish products for the Danish

processing industry. Based on the description, the second part of the report estimates the potential

economic consequences of Brexit for the Danish fisheries (including a regional focus), the processing

industry (downstream services), and the onshore services (upstream services). The analyses are

presented for different scenarios regarding Danish vessels future quotas and access to UK fishing

grounds.

Data, information and definitions

The present analysis is based on several data sources.

The Danish Agrifish Agency hosts several databases with detailed information about the activity

undertaken by Danish vessels. By combining the information from the logbook, sales notes, and

vessel registers, it is possible to provide a comprehensive description of which vessels conduct the

activity of interest, what they do and where the vessels land. The descriptions cover landings in live

weight as well as in value.

Furthermore, the cost structures of the relevant vessels are obtained from the Danish Account

Statistics for Fishery provided by Statistics Denmark. A range of other information is also used and

referred to in the text, when relevant.

When undertaking the description and analysis in the following, it is important to highlight the

distinction between zones. Thus, when referring to the economic exclusive zone of UK, it is referred

to as UK-EEZ. Following Brexit, the remaining member states in the European Union will have a

reduced fishing area under their jurisdiction. This area will be called NEW-EU-EEZ.

In order to separate landings from the UK-EEZ and other zones, primarily NEW-EU-EEZ and

Norwegian zone, the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) statistical rectangles

are used. A range of these rectangles will be overlapping between the UK-EEZ and other zones. In

these cases, landings are distributed evenly between the UK-EEZ and the relevant other zones.

Maps showing the ICES statistical rectangles, subdivisions, economic exclusive zones and countries

are included in Annex 1 and Annex 2.

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 4 OF 53

II Description of the Danish and United Kingdom fishing

sector and interactions between them

In order to provide a context and starting point for the analysis, the following section describes the

Da ish fishe se to s depe de

o Da ish fishi g essels a ess to UK fishi g g ou ds, uota

e ha ges, i po t/e po t of fishi g p odu ts, i ludi g UK essels la di gs i Da ish po ts a d the

importance for the Danish processing industry and the onshore service industry.

Danish fishing vessels fishing in UK zone

The Da ish fishe ies depe de e o the UK-EEZ

in recent years is described in the following section.

Of the total landings by Danish vessels, 27-34 % of the value and 31-45 % of live weight came from

the UK-EEZ for the period 2012-2016. It was primarily larger vessels which landed fish from the UK-

EEZ. Depending on the year, between 66 and 85 vessels were active in the UK-EEZ. For these vessels,

the average importance of the UK-EEZ ranged between 43-57 % of their total landings value and 43-

63 % of their total live weight landings. Analysing the activity in the UK-EEZ in more detail, 33-43

essels depe ded o this EE) fo o e tha

% of thei total la di gs alue. These

%- essels

landed 98 % of the total Danish value and live weight from the UK-EEZ. They caught mostly herring

and mackerel and landed their catches primarily in Skagen, Hirtshals, Thyborøn, and Hanstholm.

Minor shares were landed in UK harbours. The description in this report thus focuses on these 15%-

vessels since they could potentially be the most impacted by Brexit.

As a starting point for the analysis of the fishing activity in the UK-EEZ, the number of vessels actually

having activity in the zone is identified. Table II.1 below therefore shows on a yearly basis the

number of Danish fishing vessels having fished in the UK-EEZ from 2012 to 2016. Vessels are

included in the table no matter how much they land from the UK-EEZ. Thus in 2012, 85 vessels fished

in the UK-EEZ, while in 2016 this number was reduced to 66 vessels and it was primarily large vessels

above 24 meters.

Table II.1 Number of Danish fishing vessels fishing in UK-EEZ

2012

<12m

12-15m

15-18m

18-24m

24-40m

>40m

Licensed fisheries

Total

21%

31%

32%

100%

2013

10%

21%

32%

35%

100%

2014

19%

35%

37%

100%

2015

19%

36%

100%

2016

15%

38%

44%

100%

Source: The Danish Agrifish Agency Vessel Register, Logbook and Sales Notes Register 14

Feb. 2017.

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 5 OF 53

For the years 2012-2016, table II.2 shows total yearly landings by Danish vessels, the landings by

Danish vessels having fished in the UK-EE)

a d the latte essels depe de

o the UK-EEZ,

the

NEW-EU-EEZ, the Norwegian zone and other zones.

The importance of the UK-EEZ at the overall level for Danish fishery is that on average 29% of the

landings value comes from fishing in this area, while it for live weight is 36%. In the period, 27-34%

of the landings value comes from fishing in this area, while it for live weight is 31-45% with a

reducing share.

Comparing the total landings by vessels having had landings from the UK-EE)

to these essels

landings from that zone, the importance is on average 49% in the period, being between 43-57% of

landings value. For landings in live weight, the importance of the UK-EEZ is 49% on average, being

between 41-63% with the smallest shares in the most recent years.

Table II.2 Landings by Danish vessels, their dependency on UK-EEZ and UK-EE)

a ti e essels

landings on areas

Landings value (1,000 DKK)

Zone

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

UK-EEZ by UK-EEZ

active vessels

901,059 31% 1,015,159 34% 773,462 27% 910,904 27% 1,017,511 28% 923,619 29%

NEW-EU-EEZ by UK-

EEZ active vessels

402,191 14% 431,512 14% 618,324 21% 772,433 23% 672,589 18% 579,410 18%

Norwegian by UK-

EEZ active vessels

360,188 12% 326,054 11% 232,541 8% 387,566 11% 420,105 11% 345,291 11%

Other by UK-EEZ

active vessels

5,766 0%

0% 75,682 3% 58,965 2% 24,338 1% 41,188 1%

Total by UK-EEZ

vessels

1,669,203 57% 1,772,725 59% 1,700,009 58% 2,129,868 63% 2,134,543 58% 1,881,270 59%

Total by all Danish

vessels

2,947,787 100% 3,026,654 100% 2,918,495 100% 3,404,765 100% 3,653,240 100% 3,190,188 100%

Landings live weight (tonnes)

Zone

UK-EEZ by UK-EEZ

active vessels

NEW-EU-EEZ by UK-

EEZ active vessels

Norwegian by UK-

EEZ active vessels

Other by UK-EEZ

active vessels

Total by UK-EEZ

vessels

Total by all Danish

vessels

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

Average 2012-

2016

Average 2012-

2016

199,693 40% 302,468 45% 237,337 32% 291,638 33% 208,625 31% 247,952 36%

102,828 20% 144,284 22% 263,813 35% 334,131 38% 248,964 37% 218,804 32%

34,942

875

34,593

16,090

21,057

37,872

11,635

40,901

6,539

32,880

10,027

338,337 67% 481,345 72% 538,297 72% 675,276 77% 505,029 75% 507,657 73%

502,702 100% 669,678 100% 745,139 100% 875,022 100% 674,283 100% 693,365 100%

Source: The Danish Agrifish Agency Vessel Register, Logbook and Sales Notes Register 14

Feb. 2017.

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 6 OF 53

Having described the number of vessels fishing in the UK-EEZ and the overall dependency of the UK-

EEZ for the Danish fishery, the next step is to focus on the vessels having high shares of landings

from the UK-EEZ, and which will thus potentially experience substantial economic impacts,

depending on the outcome of the Brexit negotiations.

In the following, the activity by vessels having more than 15% of their landings value from the UK-

EEZ will therefore be described in detail. The 15%-vessels cover 98% of the total landings value from

the UK-EEZ. The threshold of 15% is considered an appropriate level for concluding that if the

accessibility to the UK-EEZ changes, it will negatively impact the economic performance of these

vessels at a level which cannot directly be compensated via activity in other areas. Such

compensation possibilities are considered more likely for the vessels below the 15%-dependency.

Table II.3 shows how many vessels have more than 15% of their total landings value in the UK-EEZ.

Comparing to Table II.1, around 50% of the vessels fishing in the UK-EEZ fall under this threshold.

Table II.3 Number of Danish fishing vessels fishing in UK-EEZ with 15%-dependency

18-24m

24-40m

>40m

Licensed fisheries

Total

2012

11%

19%

68%

100%

2013

12%

23%

65%

100%

2014

24%

68%

100%

2015

24%

68%

100%

2016

27%

70%

100%

Source: The Danish Agrifish Agency Vessel Register, Logbook and Sales Notes Register 14 Feb. 2017.

Focusing only on these 15%-vessels of course implies that some landings from the UK-EEZ will not

be included in the forthcoming analysis. Table II.4 displays the magnitude of this concentrated focus.

Table II.4 Landings distributed on UK-EEZ 15%-vessels and non-15%-vessels

Landings value (1,000 DKK)

2012

2013

Total UK-EEZ

879,011

98%

999,671

98%

15%-vessels

Total UK-EEZ

22,048

15,487

non-15%-vessels

Total

901,059 100% 1,015,158 100%

Landings live weight (tonnes)

2012

Total UK-EEZ

195,645

98%

15%-vessels

Total UK-EEZ

4,048

non-15%-vessels

Total

199,693 100%

2013

301,201

1,267

302,468

100%

2014

751,409

22,053

773,462

2014

231,264

6,073

237,337

2015

97% 887,162

23,742

97%

2016

982,276

35,235

97%

100% 910,904

2015

97% 287,543

100% 1,017,511 100%

2016

99%

100%

200,759

7,865

96%

4,095

100% 291,638

208,624 100%

Source: The Danish Agrifish Agency Vessel Register, Logbook and Sales Notes Register 14 Feb. 2017.

Thus, the 15%-vessels accounts for more than 96% of the value and live weight from UK-EEZ landings

over the period.

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 7 OF 53

Table II.5 shows the dependency of the UK-EEZ for the 15%-vessels. 53-71% of the landings value is

from the UK-EEZ with smaller shares in the latest years, while 68-47% of the live weight landings is

from the UK-EEZ also with smaller shares in years that are more recent. The 15 %-

essels spe ifi

catches by species are shown in Table II.6 below.

Table II.5 Landings by the 15%-vessels distributed on zones

Landings value (1,000 DKK)

Zone

2012

UK-EEZ

879,011

NEW-EU-EEZ

205,662

Norwegian zone

175,598

Other zones

5,766

Total UK-EEZ 15%-

1,266,037

vessels

2013

999,671

271,247

144,085

2014

751,409

352,331

68,130

75,682

2015

887,162

581,338

157,220

54,530

2016

982,276

394,190

236,517

24,240

69%

16%

14%

71%

19%

10%

60%

28%

53%

35%

60%

24%

14%

100% 1,415,004 100% 1,247,552 100% 1,680,249 100% 1,637,223 100%

Landings live weight (tonnes)

Zone

2012

UK-EEZ

195,645 66%

NEW-EU-EEZ

75,371 25%

Norwegian zone

24,191

Other zones

875

Total UK-EEZ 15%-

296,082 100%

vessels

2013

301,201

119,767

22,600

68%

27%

2014

231,264

173,470

5,656

21,057

54%

40%

2015

287,543

294,285

23,846

11,384

47%

48%

2016

200,759

162,674

30,156

3,320

51%

41%

443,568 100%

431,446 100%

617,058 100%

396,909 100%

Source: The Danish Agrifish Agency Vessel Register, Logbook and Sales Notes Register 14

Feb. 2017.

The composition of species caught in the UK-EEZ by the 15%-vessels is shown in Table II.6 together

ith thei sha e of the essels la di gs f o the UK-EEZ

as shown in Table II.5. In this period, herring

and mackerel are the most important species landed from the UK-EEZ. Sandeel is also important,

but fluctuates between the years. The importance of demersal species such as cod and hake in the

UK-EEZ, although important species in the Danish fishery in general, is low and varies over the years.

Table II.6 Landings of top 10 species in 2016 from the UK-EEZ by the 15%-vessels, measured by value,

and share of total landings from the UK-EEZ by the 15%-vessels in table II.5

Landings value (1,000 DKK)

Species

2012

Herring

431,808

Mackerel

261,860

Blue whiting

Norway pout

60,328

Sandeel

63,158

Cod

4,837

Hake

1,544

Horse mackerel

7,773

Monkfish

3,145

Saithe

2,670

Total

879,011

2013

374,979

253,041

2,754

43,039

281,594

5,156

3,266

14,042

2,091

3,232

999,671

2014

327,891

250,238

27,192

41,550

58,814

6,754

1,694

9,000

3,788

4,357

751,409

2015

326,280

216,613

13,780

20,191

222,302

9,550

12,744

20,291

4,576

4,709

887,162

2016

494,697 50%

257,266 26%

49,162

44,940

26,459

25,224

24,837

16,100

14,642

8,876

982,276 98%

49%

30%

95%

38%

25%

28%

98%

44%

33%

97%

37%

24%

25%

96%

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 8 OF 53

Table II.6, continued

Landing live weight (tonnes)

Species

2012

Herring

86,062

Mackerel

35,672

Blue whiting

Norway pout

25,145

Sandeel

32,414

Cod

235

Hake

121

Horse mackerel

1,240

Monkfish

111

Saithe

244

Total

195,645

2013

103,184

30,972

923

30,036

128,350

256

231

2,327

326

301,201

2014

102,155

34,826

16,567

27,296

41,394

333

138

1,434

112

417

231,264

2015

81,785

35,314

7,917

10,850

131,684

429

849

3,155

128

397

287,543

2016

96,652

34,484

20,876

23,743

13,284

1,114

1,560

2,674

473

772

200,759

44%

18%

13%

17%

93%

34%

10%

43%

98%

44%

15%

12%

18%

97%

28%

12%

46%

95%

48%

17%

10%

12%

97%

Source: The Danish Agrifish Agency Vessel Register, Logbook and Sales Notes Register 14

Feb. 2017.

Given that the UK-EEZ covers a vast fishing area with different distances for the Danish vessels, Table

II.7 shows which ICES subdivisions are the most important for the 15%-vessels. It is mainly North

Sea fishing areas, which are important to these vessels.

Table II.7 Landings distributed on ICES subdivisions by the 15%-vessels

Landings value (1,000 DKK)

Sub-division

2012

542,014 62%

313,894 36%

593

5,779

2,656

5,585

8,490

Total

879,011 100%

2013

1,371

588,594 59%

378,519 38%

2,532

14,708

2014

10,679

418,120

<173,077

144

139,485

2015

2016

1,662

488,106 55% 686,773 70%

335,706 38% 121,367 12%

15,948

1,429

145

2,306

35,500

4% 154,590 16%

4,400

0% 12,858

2,105

2,749

286

841

2,431

56%

23%

19%

5,336

2,817

4,057

1,738

999,672 100%

2,420

2,339

671

3,172

1,299

751,408

238

100% 887,163 100% 982,278 100%

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 9 OF 53

Table II.7, continued

Landings live weight (tonnes)

Sub-division

2012

101,131 52%

85,596 44%

207

933

416

2,888

4,473

Total

195,644 100%

2013

144

137,204 46%

156,632 52%

1,388

2,795

929

496

845

769

301,202 100%

2014

1,753

119,200

76,118

29,455

2015

2016

238

103,964 36% 123,172 61%

161,069 56% 35,984 18%

9,068

726

973

8,396

3% 32,923 16%

2,500

5,550

1,243

587

140

395

1,181

111

287,543 100% 200,760 100%

505

878

200

2,152

920

231,263

52%

33%

13%

100%

Source: The Danish Agrifish Agency Vessel Register, Logbook and Sales Notes Register 14

Feb. 2017.

Note: See Annex 2 for geographical location of the ICES-subdivisions.

Four Danish harbours receive landings of fish from the UK-EEZ by the 15%-vessels as shown in Table

II.8. Skagen receives the most of these landings, more than three times the amount landed in

Hanstholm. Herring is the primary species landed in Skagen together with some species for

reduction used for the production of fishmeal and oil (sandeel and blue whiting). Herring and

mackerel are the most important species in Hirtshals, species for reduction, a bit of herring and

minor amounts of demersal species are landed in Thyborøn, while landings of demersal species

primarily occur in Hanstholm.

Table II.8 Landings from the UK-EEZ to Danish harbours by the 15%-vessels

Landings value (1,000 DKK)

Harbour

2012

Skagen

168,669

Hirtshals

189,427

Thyborøn

100,628

Hanstholm

28,520

Esbjerg

Hvide Sande

1,639

Total

488,883

Landings live weight (tonnes)

Harbour

2012

Skagen

42,409

Hirtshals

28,098

Thyborøn

43,649

Hanstholm

9,021

Esbjerg

Hvide Sande

Total

123,216

2013

235,594

119,419

172,453

76,621

201

2014

141,814

80,599

67,048

46,926

2015

210,150

90,640

170,615

78,768

483

550,662

2015

72,918

21,014

93,520

31,528

315

219,298

2016

244,565

161,114

96,521

72,174

35%

39%

21%

100%

39%

20%

29%

13%

1,411

604,288 100% 337,798

2013

80,451

25,347

88,653

29,175

42%

24%

20%

14%

100%

38%

16%

31%

14%

100% 574,374

43%

28%

17%

13%

100%

34%

23%

35%

100%

36%

11%

40%

13%

996

223,714 100% 144,124

2014

58,719

20,550

43,381

20,478

41%

14%

30%

14%

100%

33%

10%

43%

14%

100%

2016

58,677

44%

27,776

21%

38,719

29%

8,784

133,956 100%

Source: The Danish Agrifish Agency Vessel Register, Logbook and Sales Notes Register 14

Feb. 2017.

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 10 OF 53

The 15%-vessels also land some of their landings in UK harbours, cf. Table II.9. A minor amount of

landings caught in other zones than the UK-EEZ is landed in UK harbours. Overall, the share of

landings in UK harbours is low and between 2-9 % of value and 0-6 % of live weight.

Table II.9 Landings to UK harbours by the 15%-vessels and percentage of total landings by the 15%-

vessels

Landings value (1,000 DKK)

2012

Landings in UK harbours

from non UK-EEZ

1,250

Landings in UK harbours

from UK-EEZ

107,536

Total landings in UK

108,785

harbours

Total landings by 15%-

vessels

1,265,700 100%

Landings live weight (tonnes)

2012

Landings in UK harbours

from non UK-EEZ

Landings in UK harbours

from UK-EEZ

Total landings in UK

harbours

Total landings by 15%-

vessels

157

18,323

18,480

2013

779

14,658

15,438

2014

2,787

12,382

15,168

2015

1,418

3,033

4,451

2016

1,591

10,115

11,707

2013

6,611

94,293

100,904

2014

23,124

72,379

95,503

2015

10,301

15,504

25,806

2016

10,831

60,607

71,438

1,415,004 100%

1,247,552 100%

1,680,249 100%

1,637,223 100%

295,908 100%

443,568 100%

431,446 100%

617,058 100%

396,909 100%

Source: The Danish Agrifish Agency Vessel Register, Logbook and Sales Notes Register 14 Feb. 2017.

Below, Table II.10 displays which UK harbours receive the landings, while Table II.11 shows which

species are landed. The largest shares are landed in Lerwick and Peterhead, while the most landed

species are mackerel and herring. As seen in Table II.11, the share of mackerel and herring landings

by 15%-vessels in UK harbours is small compared to the total landings by these vessels.

Table II.10 Landings to specified UK harbours by the 15%-vessels and percentage of the landings to

UK harbours

Landings value (1,000 DKK)

Harbour

2012

Lerwick

23,798 22%

Peterhead

79,208 73%

Fraserbourgh

1,982

Grimsby

3,798

Total

108,786 100%

Landings live weight (tonnes)

Harbour

2012

Lerwick

3,879 21%

Peterhead

13,921 75%

Fraserbourgh

395

Grimsby

285

Total

18,480 100%

2013

68,048

67%

27,738

27%

1,360

3,758

100,904 100%

2013

9,260

60%

5,646

37%

190

342

15,438 100%

2014

73,846 77%

18,166 19%

449

3,042

95,503 100%

2014

9,379 62%

5,205 34%

280

305

15,169 100%

2015

22,060

2016

40,312 56%

27,905 39%

2,924

297

71,438 100%

2016

6,206 53%

4,865 42%

610

11,706 100%

85%

3,746 15%

25,806 100%

2015

4,111

92%

339

4,450 100%

Source: The Danish Agrifish Agency Vessel Register, Logbook and Sales Notes Register 14

Feb. 2017.

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 11 OF 53

Table II.11 Landings to UK harbours specified by species by the 15%-vessels, top 5 species in 2016

measured by value, and percentage of total landings by 15%-vessels

Landings value (1,000 DKK)

Species

2012

Mackerel

28,927

Herring

74,025

Horse mackerel

Norway pout

131

Plaice

3,777

Landings live weight (tonnes)

Species

2012

Mackerel

4,366

Herring

13,705

Horse mackerel

Norway pout

Plaice

284

2013

86,683

8,801

1,662

3,719

2013

10,838

3,044

1,214

339

2014

77,836

12,225

963

3,033

2014

9,903

4,210

657

305

2015

15,260

6,340

453

3,734

2015

2,250

1,610

250

339

2016

37,481

31,795

1,262

588

297

2016

5,043

6,116

203

311

Source: The Danish Agrifish Agency Vessel Register, Logbook and Sales Notes Register 14

Feb. 2017.

Fishing in the ICES statistical rectangles divided between the UK-EEZ and NEW-EU-EEZ

The International Council for the Exploration of the Seas (ICES) has for statistical analysis

standardized the division of sea areas into statistical rectangles measuring 30 times 30 nautical miles

each. These rectangles have been used to divide the fishery activity between the UK-EEZ and NEW-

EU-EEZ. However, in some circumstances a statistical rectangle cannot solely be allocated to the UK-

EEZ or NEW-EU-EEZ. In this analysis, the fishing activity in these statistical rectangles has been

divided to the UK-EEZ and NEW-EU-EEZ based on how much of the area is in each of these EEZs.

It can be argued that the fishery in these boarder rectangles takes place with some coincidence. It

is thus relevant to consider how much fishing actually takes place within the divided rectangles.

Table II.12 shows the distribution of landings value between the UK-EZZ and NEW-EU-EEZ for the

divided rectangles, including the species caught.

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 12 OF 53

Table II.12 Landings value divided between UK-EEZ and NEW-EU-EEZ within divided rectangles by

the 15%-vessels (1,000 DKK)

2012

23,108

10,050

46,050

1,653

6,509

13,739

775

1,854

1,642

4,815

2013

84,322

2,175

19,141

15,585

9,870

2,198

1,175

3,338

1,428

2,451

3,082

UK-EEZ

2014

52,423

2,033

17,794

5,716

2,545

3,881

577

5,315

2,242

2,794

10,409

2015

40,394

12,952

16,314

6,017

3,865

6,704

5,445

3,999

2,705

10,523

2016

55,848

5,405

9,731

328

238

8,589

4,924

7,352

2,591

15,135

2012

7,786

15,646

418

419

4,700

8,785

177

1,024

1,249

NEW-EU-EEZ

2013

2014

2015

12,027

9,036 11,058

9,505 17,237 53,466

2,936

1,366

656

11,151

1,548

6,762

12,441

2,047

4,121

2,417

1,990

1,497

399

257

242

330

602

1,578

782

170

1,058

3,257

2016

15,105

23,373

2,658

208

203

1,899

252

764

312

3,585

Herring

Sprat

Mackerel

Sandeel

Horse mackerel

Boarfish

European hake

Norway pout

Cod

Plaice

Other species

Total divided

rectangles

Total from EEZ

110,195 144,766 105,729 108,918 110,140 40,252 51,722 36,192 82,173 48,358

879,011 999,671 751,409 887,162 982,276 205,662 271,247 352,331 581,338 394,190

Source: The Danish Agrifish Agency Vessel Register, Logbook and Sales Notes Register 14

Feb. 2017.

In comparison to the total landings value, the landings value originating from the divided rectangles

in the UK-EEZ and NEW-EU-EEZ respectively accounts for approximately 13% of the total landings

value on average. Given the magnitude of the fishing activity in the divided rectangles, and the

possible coincidence of this fishery, makes it relevant to consider in the analysis to come, what the

impacts are if the landings from the UK-EEZ divided rectangles can be caught in the NEW-EU-EEZ

instead.

Danish quota exchanges with UK

Every year, Denmark undertakes a range of quota exchanges with other countries, including the UK.

There are several reasons for undertaking these exchanges. Generally, the countries involved must

be expected to obtain a benefit from making an exchange. However, the actual background for the

exchange can be driven by a range of reasons.

One reason for an exchange could be that the quotas are based on historical catch patterns.

Therefore, the quotas are not adjusted to account for the actual situation for the individual

countries. Thus, it happens regularly that a country ends up in a situation, in which some quotas are

constraining and others are not. Therefore, in order to continue fishing, exchanges are made with

countries, where this constraint is not a problem.

Another reason for exchanges could be better use of the various countries fleet technology and

activity distribution. Thus, instead of moving vessels around, it might be better to concentrate the

activity in certain areas. This reduces expenses in relation to transportation time, but also the costs

of shifting gear, if necessary.

In Table II.13, the total numbers of Danish quota exchanges in the period from 2012 to 2016 are

shown, including the number specifically with UK. During the period, around 25% of all the Danish

quota exchanges are made with UK, peaking in 2016.

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 13 OF 53

Table II.13 Danish quota exchanges

Total number of quota exchanges with UK

Total number of quota exchanges overall

Share of UK exchanges (%)

2012

120

2013

135

2014

131

2015

127

2016

148

Source: The Danish Agrifish Agency and the Fishery Data Exchange System (FIDES)-database.

The total Danish quotas by the end of the year for the period 2012-2016 were on average a bit below

900,000 tonnes. Measured in live weight, Table II.14 shows how much Denmark has transferred to

other countries in total and to the UK specifically. On average, 9% of the transfers from Denmark

have been to the UK, while the transfers from the UK to Denmark on average amount to 15%.

Table II.14 Danish quota exchanges in live weight (1,000 tonnes)

Transfers from DK to UK

Total transfers from DK

Share of UK transfers (%)

Transfers from UK to DK

Total transfers to DK

Share of UK transfers (%)

2012

3,827

76,849

3,056

65,228

2013

9,186

147,007

9,412

98,763

2014

12,956

105,704

15,294

103,872

2015

7,551

102,755

13,650

84,249

2016

14,257

77,946

22,911

84,549

Total

47,777

510,260

64,322

436,661

Source: The Danish Agrifish Agency and the Fishery Data Exchange System (FIDES)-database.

Table II.15 and Table II.16 provide a more detailed view of the 10 most transferred quotas between

Denmark and UK and vice versa. Measured in live weight, mackerel quota is the most transferred

species, followed by sprat, where Denmark receives a larger amount than handed over to the UK.

However, most of the transfers are in packages including several quotas, which are not necessarily

the same. For instance, sprat is not necessarily exchanged with sprat, but with other quotas.

Table II.15 Danish quota transfers to the UK, 10 most important species in live weight (1,000 tonnes)

Species

Mackerel

Sprat

Horse mackerel

European hake

Blue whiting

Haddock

Herring

Norway Pout

Sandeel

Monk

2012

344

1,318

1,000

279

390

364

2013

872

1,018

1,952

667

1,730

896

2014

6,280

1,900

1,037

1,349

1,490

597

2015

3,700

750

675

1,084

125

514

2016

7,350

750

175

1,413

Total

18,546

5,736

4,839

4,792

3,610

1,907

1,698

1,636

1,472

1,324

1,573

1,632

811

1,472

Source: The Danish Agrifish Agency and the Fishery Data Exchange System (FIDES)-database.

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 14 OF 53

Table II.16 UK quota transfers to Denmark, 10 most important species live weight (1,000 tonnes)

Species

Mackerel

Sprat

Sandeel

Saithe

Blue whiting

Herring

Horse mackerel

Monk

Cod

Haddock

2012

1,000

171

340

775

300

138

170

2013

2,500

3,066

983

1,490

775

2014

4,550

4,700

2,481

1,628

1,490

2015

7,610

2,828

622

763

250

725

358

2016

11,388

7,751

460

875

638

328

350

586

262

Total

23,548

18,779

6,800

4,252

3,958

2,128

1,375

950

679

393

141

170

Source: The Danish Agrifish Agency and the Fishery Data Exchange System (FIDES)-database.

Throughout the years, Denmark and the UK have exchanged quotas frequently. On many occasions,

their fishing fleets operate in the same waters (primarily the North Sea), and this gives a range of

reasons for exchanging quotas. At the overall level, Denmark receives more quota from the UK than

vice versa, measured in live weight. However, despite mackerel being the most exchanged quota,

many of the exchanges are for quotas of low value species primarily for reduction (sprat, horse

mackerel, sandeel). Not being able to undertake such quota exchanges in the future can have an

economic impact for the 15%-vessels especially, because these most exchanged species are also the

most important species for their fishery.

Quota exchanges with the UK are to this extent important, given that on average, 9% of the Danish

transfers goes to the UK, while 15% of the transfers to Denmark come from UK. However, the

primary part of the exchanges is undertaken for species which are also primarily caught in the UK-

EEZ. Thus, the future importance of exchanges for these species will to a high degree depend on the

possibility for Danish vessels to fish in the UK-EEZ at all.

Having described the fishing activities taking place in relation to Danish and UK vessels, fishing area,

and harbour interactions, the following sections describe the imports and exports of fish and fish

products to and from Denmark in relation to the UK. Although this information does not feed into

the economic analysis in the following chapter, it provides further contexts of the amounts and

values of fish and fish products moving between the two countries.

Imports of fish to Denmark

In 2011-2015, Denmark on average imported 1,185 thousand tonnes of fish at a value of DKK 15.5

billion. By quantity, the most imported fish products were reduction species, fishmeal/oil, and

whole saltwater fish. By value, the most important products were prepared/conserved products and

whole saltwater fish. Of the fish imports to Denmark, 3 % of both quantity and value was imported

from the UK, corresponding to 37 thousand tonnes with a value of 457 million DKK.

The total value of Danish fish imports was on average 15.5 billion DKK in the period 2011-2015. Of

this, prepared or conserved fish made up 20% on average, followed by whole saltwater fish which

made up 19% of the total import value, see Table II.17 (The Danish Agrifish Agency, 2017a).

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 15 OF 53

Considering import quantities in Table II.17 below, total Danish imports were on average 1,185

tonnes in the years 2011-2015. Reduction fish made up the largest part (37%), followed by fishmeal,

oil, etc. (19%), and whole saltwater fish (19%) (The Danish Agrifish Agency, 2017a).

Table II.17 Denmark's import of fish by category, 2011-2015, and as % of total Danish fish imports

Import value (1,000 DKK)

Type

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

Fresh water

fish

1,859,207 13% 1,769,361 12% 2,223,547 14% 2,545,264 16% 2,499,619 14% 2,179,400 14%

Filet

1,948,590 14% 1,824,555 13% 2,128,838 14% 2,341,343 14% 2,235,740 13% 2,095,813 14%

Fishmeal, oil,

etc,

2,048,550 15% 2,845,145 20% 2,035,841 13% 1,928,050 12% 1,955,881 11% 2,162,693 14%

Whole

saltwater fish 2,423,858 18% 2,495,340 17% 2,926,984 19% 3,095,244 19% 3,598,405 21% 2,907,966 19%

Reduction fish

640,018

5% 478,919

3% 777,262

5% 869,014

5% 850,762

5% 723,195

Crustaceans

and molluscs

1,504,848 11% 1,553,813 11% 1,707,997 11% 1,881,574 11% 1,818,191 10% 1,693,284 11%

Salted, dried,

smoked

487,757

4% 531,825

4% 657,233

4% 600,618

4% 899,583

5% 635,403

Prepared or

conserved

2,860,740 21% 2,963,046 20% 3,004,004 19% 3,127,471 19% 3,601,441 21% 3,111,340 20%

Total

13,773,568 100% 14,462,004 100% 15,461,705 100% 16,388,577 100% 17,459,621 100% 15,509,095 100%

Import quantity (1,000 tonnes)

Type

Fresh water

fish

Filet

Fishmeal, oil,

etc,

Whole

saltwater fish

Reduction fish

Crustaceans

and molluscs

Salted, dried,

smoked

Prepared or

conserved

Total

2011

242

201

505

20%

16%

41%

2012

321

181

308

29%

17%

28%

2013

207

242

368

19%

22%

33%

2014

211

230

517

17%

18%

41%

2015

180

252

525

15%

20%

42%

Average

2011-2015

232

221

444

20%

19%

37%

Average

2011-2015

1,233 100%

1,089 100%

1,109 100%

1,255 100%

1,240 100%

1,185 100%

Source: The Danish AgriFish Agency database February 24

2017 (The Danish AgriFish Agency, 2017a)

Table II.18 below show the value and quantity of Danish fish imports from the UK, based on The

Danish Agrifish Agency (2017a). As seen in the table, of the total imports of fish to Denmark, fish

from the UK made up 3% of the import value and quantity in 2011-2015.

The table also shows the imports of different categories of fish to Denmark from the UK. Denmark

imported 37 thousand tonnes of fish from the UK on average in the years 2011-2015 with an average

value of 457 million DKK. It is seen that in terms of both value and quantity, whole saltwater fish is

the most imported fish category from the UK to Denmark. The import of whole saltwater fish from

the UK had an average yearly value of 188 million DKK in the same time period. This corresponds to

6% of the total Danish imports of whole saltwater fish and 1.2% of overall fish imports to Denmark

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 16 OF 53

in 2011-2015. Denmark imported on average 19 thousand tonnes whole saltwater fish yearly in

2011-2015. Whole saltwater fish from the UK thereby made up on average 9% of the total whole

saltwater fish imports to Denmark and 1.6% of the total fish imports to Denmark in the years 2011-

2015. Mackerel was also imported in the form of filets and in prepared/conserved form. Mackerel

filets from the UK made up around half of imports of mackerel filets to Denmark and 0.1 % of the

overall import value (The Danish Agrifish Agency, 2017a).

Table II.18 Denmark's import of fish from the UK, 2011-2015, and % of overall Danish imports of fish

type (as shown in Table II.17)

Import value (1,000 DKK)

Type

Fresh water fish

Filet

Fishmeal, oil, etc.

Whole saltwater fish

Reduction fish

Crustaceans and molluscs

Salted, dried, smoked

Prepared or conserved

Total, from the UK

2011

21,393

37,639

46,475

159,111

8,990

41,164

5,322

84,991

405,085

2012

66,593

29,449

48,721

121,121

4,680

35,233

4,007

67,067

376,872

2013

102,131

47,695

9,311

185,217

5,683

39,563

7,054

123,953

520,606

2014

34,853

47,926

46,693

212,320

46,503

26,285

4,167

82,626

501,372

2015

37,454

40,855

9,536

262,885

19,972

29,910

4,233

77,285

482,129

Average

2011-2015

52,485 2%

40,713 2%

32,147 1%

188,131 6%

17,165 2%

34,431 2%

4,956 1%

87,184 3%

457,213 3%

Average

2011-2015

1 2%

2 3%

2 1%

19 9%

9 2%

1 1%

0 0%

2 3%

37 3%

Import quantity (1,000 tonnes)

Type

Fresh water fish

Filet

Fishmeal, oil, etc.

Whole saltwater fish

Reduction fish

Crustaceans and molluscs

Salted, dried, smoked

Prepared or conserved

Total, from the UK

2011

2012

2013

2014

1 1%

2 3%

3 1%

25 11%

27 5%

0 1%

2 3%

61 5%

2015

1 1%

2 3%

0 0%

30 12%

12 2%

0 1%

0 0%

1 2%

46 4%

Source: The Danish AgriFish Agency database February 24

2017 (The Danish AgriFish Agency, 2017a)

Table II.19 provides a more detailed overview of the saltwater fish category from the UK to

Denmark. Whole UK mackerel make up the majority of imports of whole mackerel to Denmark. This

import represents on average 66% of the total import value of whole mackerel to Denmark in the

years 2011-2015 and 0.7% of the overall Danish fish imports. In terms of quantities, whole mackerel

from the UK make up on average 70% of the total, whole, mackerel quantity imported to Denmark

in 2011-2015 and 1.0% of the overall Danish fish imports. Besides as whole fish, mackerel was also

imported as filet or as prepared/conserved mackerel products (The Danish Agrifish Agency, 2017a).

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 17 OF 53

Table II.19 Whole saltwater fish import from UK, 2011-2015, and % of overall Danish import of fish

species

Import value (1,000 DKK)

Species

Other fish

Other codfish

Flatfish

Haddock

Mackerel

Saithe

Herring

Cod

Total, saltwater fish

from the UK

2011

7,480 2%

1,939 6%

416 0%

774 1%

111,389 61%

27,045 15%

4,266 2%

5,801 1%

159,111

2012

7,302

1,238

743

690

87,830 64%

14,724

6,672

1,922

2013

2014

7,654

2% 5,931

5,072

10% 7,312

13%

1,155

0% 2,204

16,722

13% 3,213

95,482

60% 144,173

81%

16,088

9% 14,722

1,912

1% 2,797

41,133

5% 31,967

6% 212,320

2015

29,422

17,399

3,725

3,984

107,103

31,086

37,043

33,124

262,885

Average

2011-2015

11,558

6,592 13%

1,648

5,077

109,195 65%

20,733 11%

10,538

22,789

188,131

22%

60%

13%

14%

7% 121,121

5% 185,217

Import quantity (1,000 tonnes)

Species

Other fish

Other codfish

Flatfish

Haddock

Mackerel

Saithe

Herring

Cod

Total, saltwater fish

from the UK

2011

0.4 1%

0.1 6%

0.0 0%

0.0 1%

8.2 60%

2.2 15%

1.1 3%

0.3 1%

12.4

2012

0.1

8.9 68%

1.2

1.3

0.1

11.8

2013

0.6

0.3

0.1

1.1

12%

10.0

65%

1.4

0.5

2.9

17.1

2014

0.3

0.4

12%

0.2

0.3

20.0

88%

1.2

0.8

1.8

25.0

11%

2015

0.34

1.10

0.24

0.34

15.08

2.33

8.94

1.44

29.80

21%

64%

12%

13%

12%

Average

2011-2015

0.4

0.4 11%

0.1

0.4

12.4 70%

1.7 11%

2.5

1.3

19.2

Source: The Danish AgriFish Agency database February 24 2017 (The Danish AgriFish Agency, 2017a)

Of the overall imported quantities of fish products to Denmark of 1,185 thousand tonnes on

average, the main type of fish products imported to Denmark were reduction fish, fishmeal/oil, and

whole saltwater fish in 2011-2015. The total import value was 15.5 billion DKK on average. The most

important fish imports by value were prepared/conserved fish products followed by whole

saltwater fish. In this time period, Denmark imported on average 37 thousand tonnes of fish and

fish products from the UK with an average value of 457 million DKK. The import to Denmark from

the UK consisted primarily of whole saltwater fish. This quantity represented 9% of the total import

of whole saltwater fish to Denmark and 6% of the value of imported whole saltwater fish on average.

Of the overall import value and quantity to Denmark, the import of whole saltwater fish from the

UK represented 1.2 and 2 % on average respectively. Of whole saltwater fish imported from the UK,

mackerel was the most important one, making up 70% of the total imported quantity of whole

mackerel to Denmark and 65% of the value of whole mackerel imports. Besides as whole fish,

mackerel was also imported as filet or as prepared/conserved mackerel products. Other important

whole saltwater fish from the UK in terms of quantity were herring, saithe, and cod while in terms

of value they were cod, saithe, and herring (The Danish AgriFish Agency, 2017a).

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 18 OF 53

Exports of fish from Denmark

In 2011-2015, Denmark on average exported 993 thousand tonnes of fish and fish products with a

value of 21.5 billon DKK. Of this, 9 % of the quantity and 8 % of the value was exported to the UK.

This corresponded to 87 thousand tonnes with a value of 1.7 billion DKK. By value, it was primarily

fish in the form of prepared/conserved products, fishmeal/oil and whole saltwater fish that were

important fish exports to the UK.

As seen in Table II.20 below (The Danish Agrifish Agency,20

a , De a k s e po t of fish had a

average yearly value of 21.5 billion DKK in the period 2011-2015. The categories of fish products

most important in terms of value were prepared/conserved fish, whole saltwater fish, and

fishmeal/oil with average fish export value shares of 20%, 20%, and 16% respectively. The average

yearly volume exported from Denmark was 993 thousand tonnes. The most important fish

categories in terms of quantity were fishmeal/oil, whole saltwater fish, and prepared/conserved fish

with average export quantity shares of 34%, 27% and 11%, respectively (The Danish Agrifish Agency,

2017a).

Table II.20 Denmark's export of fish 2011-2015, and % of total Danish fish exports

Export value (1,000 DKK)

Type

Fresh water

fish

Filet

Fishmeal, oil,

etc.

Whole

saltwater fish

Reduction fish

Crustaceans

and molluscs

Salted, dried,

smoked

Prepared or

conserved

Total

2011

1,488,068 8%

3,012,112 15%

3,301,938 17%

3,524,853 18%

100,169 1%

2,421,056 12%

1,739,566

2012

1,388,734 7%

2,848,522 14%

3,191,391 16%

3,514,701 18%

38,631 0%

2,780,735 14%

1,783,836

2013

2014

13%

15%

21%

14%

2015

2,058,534

3,161,022

3,912,376

5,245,623

81,499

3,256,333

2,030,503

Average

2011-2015

8% 1,676,708

13% 3,013,951

16% 3,426,757

22% 4,223,363

67,609

13% 2,887,894

8% 1,891,227

14%

16%

20%

13%

1,532,293

7% 1,915,912

3,072,790 14% 2,975,310

3,456,111 16% 3,271,969

4,212,290 20% 4,619,347

67,177

50,569

2,942,589 14% 3,038,757

1,978,640

9% 1,923,590

4,196,458 21% 4,265,068 22% 4,275,196 20% 4,314,144

20% 4,576,381 19% 4,325,449 20%

19,784,219 100% 19,811,618 100% 21,537,086 100% 22,109,599 100% 24,322,270 100% 21,512,959 100%

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 19 OF 53

Table II.20, continued

Export quantity (1,000 tonnes)

Type

Fresh water fish

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

32%

31%

10%

100%

Average

2011-2015

337

272

106

34%

27%

11%

Filet

73 8%

Fishmeal, oil,

386 40%

338 37%

316

30%

317

31%

327

etc.

Whole saltwater

fish

198 21%

233 25%

298

28%

317

31%

312

Reduction fish

9 1%

Crustaceans and

molluscs

87 9%

100

Salted, dried,

smoked

32 3%

Prepared or

conserved

111 12%

101 11%

105

10%

109

11%

104

Total

961 100%

917 100%

1.055 100%

1.010

100%

1.022

Source: The Danish AgriFish Agency database February 24 2017(The Danish AgriFish Agency, 2017a)

993 100%

Table II.21 below provides an overview of Danish fish exports to the UK in 2011-2015. The value of

fish products exported from Denmark to the UK was 1.7 billion DKK on average per year, while the

exported quantity was 87 thousand tonnes on average. Fish exports to the UK thus represented 8%

of the total Danish fish exports in terms of value and 9% in terms of volume.

In relation to the total exports from Denmark to the UK, prepared/conserved fish was the most

important followed by fishmeal/oil and saltwater fish, both in terms of value and quantity (The

Danish Agrifish Agency, 2017a). Exports of prepared/conserved shrimp to the UK made up 23% of

the total Danish export value of prepared/conserved shrimp products and 2.1% of the total Danish

fish export value, while prepared/conserved mackerel products to the UK made up 43% of the total

Danish export value of prepared/conserved mackerel products and 0.8% of the total fish export

alue. I the hole salt ate fish atego , haddo k a d a ke el ade up the la gest pa ts.

Exports of whole haddock to the UK thus made up both 58 % of export value and quantity of Danish

haddock exports while it corresponded to 0.4 % of the total Danish fish export value. Whole

mackerel to the UK corresponded to 23 % of the Danish export value of whole mackerel and 0.3 %

of the value of the total Danish fish exports (The Danish Agrifish Agency, 2017a).

When comparing overall imports and exports, Danish exports to the UK were on average in 2011-

2015 about 2 times larger than imports from the UK in terms of quantity and almost 4 times higher

in terms of value. Mackerel was primarily imported from the UK in the form of whole mackerels

and to a lesser extent as filets and prepared/conserved products. About two-thirds of the

mackerel export to the UK was whole mackerel and about a third was prepared/conserved

mackerel.

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 20 OF 53

Table II.21 Denmark's export of fish to the UK, 2011-2015, and % of total Danish fish exports (as

shown in Table II.20)

Export value (1,000 DKK)

Type

Fresh water fish

Filet

Fishmeal, oil,

etc.

Whole saltwater

fish

Reduction fish

Crustaceans and

molluscs

Salted, dried,

smoked

Prepared or

conserved

Total

2011

36,351

61,480

2012

41,501

126,085

273,998

249,854

92,674

14,864

2013

51,627

183,105

325,316

292,250

1,977

47,011

14,698

2014

28,382

73,265

2015

34,917

93,806

340,916

291,845

4,279

206,160

5,723

Average

2011-2015

38,556 2%

107,548 4%

369,875 11%

274,158

1,703

92,856

13,876

578,123 18%

209,016

1,289

46,112

16,303

331,022 10%

327,827

916

72,322

17,792

810,147 19%

1,758,821 9%

817,768 19%

1,616,796 8%

830,118 19%

1,746,100 8%

851,914 20%

1,703,439 8%

910,624 20%

1,888,271 8%

844,114 20%

1,742,685 8%

Average

2011-2015

1 2%

3 3%

38 11%

Export quantity (1,000 tonnes)

Type

Fresh water fish

Filet

Fishmeal, oil,

etc.

Whole saltwater

fish

Reduction fish

Crustaceans and

molluscs

Salted, dried,

smoked

Prepared or

conserved

Total

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

73 19%

19 10%

0 0%

31 10%

30 13%

0 0%

20 18%

118 12%

17 17%

83 9%

19 19%

83 8%

18 17%

82 8%

17 17%

67 7%

19 18%

87 9%

Source: The Danish AgriFish Agency database February 24th 2017 (The Danish AgriFish Agency, 2017a)

In summary, Denmark on average exported 993 thousand tonnes of fish and fish products at a value

of 21.5 billion DKK yearly in 2011-2015. The most exported fish products in terms of quantity were

fishmeal/oil, whole saltwater fish, and prepared/conserved fish. The most important fish exports in

terms of quantity were prepared/conserved fish, whole saltwater fish, and fishmeal/oil (The Danish

AgriFish Agency, 2017a).

Exports from Denmark to the UK were in the same time period on average 87 thousand tonnes at a

value of 1.7 billion DKK. This corresponds to 9% of the total Danish fish exports in terms of quantity

and 8% in terms of value. The most important export to the UK in terms of quantity was fishmeal/oil,

whole saltwater fish, and prepared/conserved fish. In terms of value, the most important exports

to the UK were prepared/conserved fish, fishmeal/oil and whole saltwater fish exports from

Denmark to the UK were about 2 times larger than imports from the UK in terms of quantity and

almost 4 times higher in terms of value. (The Danish AgriFish Agency, 2017a).

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 21 OF 53

Landings in Denmark

In Table II.22, the total yearly landing quantities and values in Danish harbours during 2011-2015

are shown. The average yearly landings in 2011-2015 in Denmark, regardless of fishing grounds,

were 889 thousand tonnes in live weight with a landings value of 3.4 billion DKK (The Danish AgriFish

Agency, 2017b).

On average, UK vessels landed 27 thousand tonnes live weight in Danish harbours per year,

corresponding to an average of 3% of the total live weight landed in Denmark. The value of UK

essels la di gs i De a k as o a e age

illio DKK ea l i

-2015 corresponding to

5% of the overall average landings in Danish harbours in that period (The Danish AgriFish Agency,

2017b). From a technical perspective, these are statistically also registered as import, while Danish

essels la di gs i UK ha ou s a e egiste ed as Da ish e po ts.

Considering the fish species landed by UK vessels in Danish harbours, mackerel make up the largest

proportion during the period in terms of quantity with 10 thousand tonnes live weight landed yearly

on average with a value of 70 million DKK on average in 2011-2015. On average, these make up 39%

of the landed quantities by UK vessels in Denmark. After mackerel, blue whiting and herring was the

most landed species in terms of quantity (The Danish AgriFish Agency, 2017b).

Ta le II. All essels a d UK s essels la di gs i De

landings of top 3 species by quantity

Total landings in live weight Denmark, 1,000 tonnes

of which by UK vessels

- Mackerel

- Blue whiting

- Herring

UK's share of total landing quantity

Total landings in Denmark, million DKK

of which by UK vessels

- Mackerel

- Blue whiting

- Herring

UK's share of total landing value

2011

895

3,523

161

2012

598

2,975

a k, a e age

a d UK essels

Average

2011-2015

889

3,363

156

2013

835

3,292

115

2014

978

3,201

200

124

2015

1139

3,826

210

Source: The Danish AgriFish Agency's database, June 6th 2017 (The Danish AgriFish Agency, 2017b)

Geographic distribution of UK landings in Denmark

According to The Danish AgriFish Agency (2017b), and as seen above, UK vessels landed on average

27 thousand tonnes of fish worth 156 million DKK in Danish harbours yearly in 2011-2015. In this

period, 2015 showed the highest value of landed fish while the largest amounts where landed in

2014, cf. Table II.23. Throughout the period, Hirtshals has seen the largest landings of fish by UK

vessels, both in terms of value and volume. The value of landings in Hirtshals represented 56% of

the total average landings by UK vessels in Denmark in 2011-2015. The volumes landed in Hirtshals

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 22 OF 53

represented 41% of the total landings by UK vessels. Hanstholm is the second most important

harbour for UK vessels landing in Denmark in the period (The Danish AgriFish Agency, 2017b). As

seen above, the landings by 15%-vessels in Denmark mostly take place in Skagen and Hirtshals. The

volumes landed by UK vessels in Danish harbours are in 2012 and 2013 about the same level as the

volumes landed by the 15%-vessels in UK harbours. In 2014 and 2015, UK vessels landed about 3

and 9 times more in Danish harbours than the 15%-vessels landed in UK harbours.

Table II.23 Landings by UK vessels by harbour in Denmark

Landings value (1,000 DKK)

Harbour

Esbjerg

Hanstholm

Hirtshals

Hvide Sande

Skagen

Thyborøn

Total

2011

3,197

29,885

89,532

5,220

33,520

161,410

2012

2013

2014

2015

1,563

199

1,225

17,832 19% 29,584 26% 32,795 16% 66,507 32%

49,489 54% 70,897 62% 124,221 62% 100,853 48%

195

885

803

13,571 15%

4,527

4% 37,531 19% 37,638 18%

9,543 10%

9,449

3,707

3,731

92,192 100% 114,720 100% 200,364 100% 209,532 100%

Average

2011-2015

1,237

35,321

23%

86,998

56%

401

19,697

13%

11,990

155,643

100%

Average

2011-2015

11%

41%

31%

15%

100%

19%

55%

21%

100%

Landings live weight (1,000 tonnes)

Harbour

Esbjerg

Hanstholm

Hirtshals

Hvide Sande

Skagen

Thyborøn

Total

2011

2012

2 10%

7 42%

5 29%

3 17%

16 100%

2013

2 16%

7 48%

2 12%

4 25%

16 100%

2014

18 44%

20 49%

41 100%

2015

6 16%

16 42%

14 37%

39 100%

11%

32%

49%

100%

Source: The Danish AgriFish Agency's database May 8th 2017 (The Danish AgriFish Agency, 2017b)

Landings by UK and EU vessels from UK-EEZ

Below, Table II.25 shows the yearly landings from the UK-EEZ as estimated by Napier (2016).

According to Napier (2016a), the estimated total landings originating from waters in the UK-EEZ was

1.1 million tonnes per year in 2012-2014 with a value of 8.6 billion DKK. Landings by EU vessels

(without the UK) in the UK-EEZ were estimated to be 58% of all landings by weight and 43% of the

landings value, corresponding to 650 thousand tonnes and 3.7 billion DKK. Landings by UK vessels

were an estimated 42% of the landings weight and 57% of landings value on average per year in the

same period, corresponding to 476 thousand tonnes and almost 5 billion DKK (Napier, 2016).

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 23 OF 53

Table II.24 Estimated average yearly landings 2012-2014 from the UK-EEZ by area

UK vessels

Landings

(1,000 tonnes)

260

55%

136

29%

17%

476

100%

Value

(1,000 DKK*)

2,459,700

50%

1,402,940

28%

1,047,650

21%

18,220

4,928,510 100%

EU vessels (excl. UK)

Total

Landings

Value

Landings

Value

(1,000 tonnes)

(1,000 DKK*)

(1,000 tonnes)

(1,000 DKK*)

412 63%

1,648,910

44%

671 60% 4,108,610 48%

117 18%

747,020

20%

254 23% 2,149,960 25%

116 18%

1,275,400

34%

195 17% 2,323,050 27%

45,550

63,770

650 100%

3,716,880 100%

1,127 100% 8,645,390 100%

ICES area 4

ICES area 6

ICES area 7

Others

Total

*Converted using the Danish National Bank’s average currency for 2016 of 9.11 DKK/GPB (available here:

http://www.nationalbanken.dk/da/statistik/valutakurs/Sider/Default.aspx)

Note: Due to rounding, the totals column may differ from totals of UK and EU vessels

Note: See Annex 2 for geographical location of the ICES-subdivisions.

Source: Napier (2016)

I the ea ti e, Napie

esti ated UK essels a e age ea l la di gs i

-2015 for

landings from the Northeast Atlantic, which represented 98 % of total UK landings (Napier, 2017).

These esti ates a e f o a o e e e t epo t a d a e a e ages fo a la ge ti e a ge. The UK s

total landings from the UK-EEZ are therefore not directly comparable to the ones in Table II.24

above. In the Northeast Atlantic, UK vessels on average caught 647 thousand tonnes per year in

2011-2015 with a value of approximately 7.2 billion DKK. Of these, the large majority (81 %),

corresponding to 527 thousand tonnes, was caught within the UK-EEZ, and 14% of UK

essels

landings, corresponding to 92 thousand tonnes, were caught in the EU-EEZ outside the UK (Napier,

2017).

A o di g to Napie

the UK s la di gs of de e sal spe ies f o the No theast Atla ti ade

up an estimated 158 thousand tonnes of which 18%, corresponding to almost 28 thousand tonnes,

was caught in EU waters outside the UK-EE).

Fu the , the UK s la di gs of pelagi spe ies ha e ee

estimated to 332 thousand tonnes. 16% of these landings, corresponding to 53 thousand tonnes,

were caught in EU waters outside the UK-EE).

Fu the o e, the UK essels la di gs of edu tio

fish species were estimated to be on average 11 thousand tonnes per year with 90 % being landed

from the UK-EEZ (Napier, 2017).

Table II.25 Estimated average yearly landings by UK vessels, average 2011-2015

Landings

(1,000 tonnes)

647

100%

527

81%

14%

Value

(1,000 DKK*)

7,166,837

100%

5,875,039

82%

997,545

14%

294,253

Total UK vessels landings

Landings from UK-EEZ

Landings from EU-waters excl. UK-EEZ

Landings from outside EU

*Converted using the Danish National Bank’s average currency for 2016 of 9.11 DKK/GPB (available here:

http://www.nationalbanken.dk/da/statistik/valutakurs/Sider/Default.aspx)

Source: Napier (2017)

To sum up, the total landings in Denmark were on average 889 thousand tonnes yearly between

2011-2015 with a value of 3.4 billion DKK. UK vessels landed 27 thousand tonnes in Denmark on

average per year with a value of 156 million DKK. This corresponded to 3% of the landed quantity in

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 24 OF 53

Denmark and 5% of the landed value. The most landed species were mackerel, blue whiting, and

herring. On average in 2011-2015, UK vessels landed the largest quantities in Hirtshals, followed by

Skagen, Thyborøn, and Hanstholm. In terms of value, the largest values were landed in Hirtshals,

followed by Hanstholm, Skagen, and Thyborøn (The Danish AgriFish Agency, 2017b).

Yearly landings in the UK-EEZ in 2012-2014 were estimated by Napier (2016) to an average of 1,127

thousand tonnes with a value of 8.6 billion DKK. Of these, UK vessels landed 42% of the landed

quantity and 57% of the landing value. EU vessels, which were not from the UK, landed 58% of the

quantities and 43% of the value (Napier 2016).

UK vessels landed most of their catch, 81% of the quantity, from waters in the UK-EEZ, while a

smaller proportion (14%) was landed from EU waters outside the UK-EEZ (Napier, 2017).

The fish processing industry in Denmark

Nielsen (2016) provides an assessment of the economic situation of the fish processing industry in

Denmark in recent years, both overall and by fish processing segment. On this basis of this, this

section provides an overview of the processing industry and the role of processing herring and

mackerel and fishmeal. Table II.26 below provides a summary of the relevant numbers in the text.

There were 103 fish processing companies in 2013 accounting for 3,019 full time positions. The

number of companies processing herring and mackerel was nine with 426 full time positions. There

were five fishmeal factories employing 356 full time positions (Nielsen, 2016).

The total production in the processing industry was 449,356 tonnes of fish and shellfish in 2015.

Excluding reduction species, the total production of fish and fish products for consumption was

167,605 tonnes. Of this, herring represented almost 30% and mackerel almost 7%. The production

by the companies processing herring and mackerel was almost 58,000 tonnes, which corresponded

to 34% of the production of fish for consumption (169,995 tonnes) and 13% of the total production

(449,361 tonnes incl. production by fishmeal companies). Fishmeal factories produced 279,361

tonnes, representing 62% of the total (Nielsen, 2016).

, he i g a d a ke el p o essi g o pa ies g oss e e ue of ,

illion

DKK

ep ese ted % of the p o essi g i dust s total g oss e e ue of ,

illio DKK, i l. the

production of fishmeal. With 4,469 million DKK in gross revenue, fishmeal represented 32% of the

total. Of the total revenue excl. fishmeal, herring and mackerel processing represented 9,062 million

DKK corresponding to 16% (Nielsen, 2016).

The i dust s total osts e e ,

illio DKK i

, of hi h he i g a d a ke el p o essi g

companies made up almost 10% with 1,224 million DKK in costs. Fishmeal production made up 35%

of the costs with 4,348 million DKK. Excluding fishmeal production, the costs were 8,033 million DKK,

of which the herring and mackerel companies represented 15% (Nielsen, 2016).

The la ge ajo it of the total i dust s ea

ings were made by processing companies dealing with

fish products for consumption. Here, the earnings were 1,569 million DKK in 2013, compared to the

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 25 OF 53

total earnings of 1,690 million DKK, including the production of fishmeal. Fishmeal factories had 121

million DKK in earnings, corresponding to 7% of the total earnings. Herring and mackerel processing

had earnings of 350 million DKK, representing almost 22% of total earnings in the whole processing

industry and 22% of the consumption processing earnings (Nielsen, 2016).

The net profits of the processing industry were 335 million DKK in 2013. The companies processing

fish for consumption had net profits of 458 million DKK, of which herring and mackerel represented

23% with 106 million DKK in earnings. Companies producing fishmeal had negative profits of 122

million DKK in 2013, although being positive in 2012 and 2011 (Nielsen, 2016).

Table II.26 Overview of the fish processing industry in Denmark in 2013 or 2015 and herring and

a ke el as ell as fish eal s

elative part

Unit

Total no. of companies, 2013

herring and mackerel

fishmeal

Total no. of employees (full-time), 2013

herring and mackerel

fishmeal

Total production (incl. fishmeal), 2015

herring and mackerel

fishmeal

Total gross revenue (incl. fishmeal), 2013

herring and mackerel

fishmeal

Total costs (incl. fishmeal), 2013

herring and mackerel

fishmeal

Total earnings (incl. fishmeal), 2013

herring and mackerel

fishmeal

Total net profits (incl. fishmeal), 2013

herring and mackerel

fishmeal

Source: Nielsen (2016)

Value

103

3,019

426

356

449,356

57,903

279,361

14,071

1,575

4,469

12,381

1,224

4,348

1,690

350

121

355

106

-122

No.

Tonnes

Million DKK

The Danish processing industry employed 3,019 full time positions in 2013, of which 426 were

employed by companies processing herring and mackerel. The industry as whole produced about

450 thousand tonnes in 2015. Of this, 167 thousand tonnes were for consumption purposes of which

herring represented almost 30%. About a third of the production for consumption was made up by

herring and mackerel while these species made up 13% of the overall production in the processing

industry. The production of fishmeal made up 62% of the total production by the processing industry

(Nielsen, 2016).

The gross revenue of the industry as a whole was 14 billion DKK in 2013, of which herring and

mackerel companies represented 11% and fishmeal companies 32%. Earnings were 1.7 billion DKK

of which companies processing fish for consumption made up the large majority with 1.6 billion

DKK. Earnings by companies processing fishmeal and oil were 121 million DKK. Net profits for the

whole industry were 335 million DKK. Companies processing herring and mackerel had net profits

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 26 OF 53

of 106 million DKK while companies processing fishmeal and oil had negative profits of 122 million

DKK in 2013, although being positive in 2011 and 2012 (Nielsen, 2016).

Onshore service industry

Besides the processing industry, the fishery generates activity in the local harbours and communities

not just through the income they generate to the crew, which they then use for private consumption

in the local town or region, but also through buying supplies, maintaining the vessels and gears etc.

A reduced activity level in the fishery will necessarily result in a reduced level of activity for

shipyards, oil bunkers, gear producers, provision suppliers etc. Depending on the level of this activity

reduction, some of these industries will be flexible enough to either reduce their cost level or find

alternative ways of counteracting these developments. Unfortunately, no data is available for the

onshore service industry, which in isolation shows the importance of the fishing activity in contrast

to their other activities.

However, a few indicators are available in order to reflect where the economic impact on the

onshore service industry will most likely happen.

The first indicator is the homeport of each vessel. A vessel will most likely undertake some of their

onshore services in their homeport in form of repairs and various supplies. Table II.27 shows the

homeport for the 15%-vessels have. Thyborøn is homeport for around 50% of all these vessels, while

the remaining ports are primarily Skagen, Esbjerg, Hanstholm and Hirtshals. Thus, it will be the

onshore service industry on the west coast part of Northern Jutland that are expected to be affected

the most following the Brexit, but the magnitude is dependent on the likely outcome of the

negotiations.

Table II.27 Number of 15%-vessels distributed by homeport

Homeport

Skagen

Østerby, Læsø

Frederikshavn

Grenå

Esbjerg

Hvide Sande

Thyborøn

Hanstholm

Hirtshals

Christiansø

Total

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

Source: The Danish Agrifish Agency Vessel Register and Sales Notes Register 14

February 2017.

Although a vessel does not always land its landings in its homeport, the distribution of total landings

value on homeport gives some added information compared to the distribution of vessels by

homeport. For instance, it is observed from Table II.28 that a larger share of the total landings value

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 27 OF 53

of the 15%-vessels is by vessels with homeport in Skagen. This thus indicates that these vessels have

larger activity on average, and the onshore service industry will therefore expectedly be impacted

higher than what was noted from Table II.27.

Table II.28 Landings value of 15%-vessels distributed by homeport (1,000 DKK)

Homeport

Skagen

Østerby, Læsø

Frederikshavn

Grenå

Esbjerg

Hvide Sande

Thyborøn

Hanstholm

Hirtshals

Christiansø

Total

2012

251,284

2013

145,602

10,256

4,152

19,942

200,373

1,121

258,853

58,184

703,657

12,864

1,415,004

2014

223,022

12,962

4,363

11,582

166,511

1,449

208,913

61,399

548,635

8,716

1,247,552

2015

472,028

2016

421,877

195,676

9,167

226,986

29,438

545,052

8,434

1,266,037

46,794

185,281

382,917

51,606

524,912

16,712

1,680,249

182,577

295,863

117,303

609,289

10,314

1,637,223

Source: The Danish Agrifish Agency Vessel Register and Sales Notes Register 14

February 2017.

Furthermore, the total landings value can be used as indicator for the crew payments, and thus be

used as a proxy for the effects on private consumption, if it is assumed that the crew lives in the

area around the homeport of the vessel they work on.

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 28 OF 53

III Analysis and results

Scenarios

Depending on the expected outcome of the Brexit negotiations between EU and UK, various

scenarios can be relevant to analyse. However, at the time of this analysis there are no indications

of the negotiation range, and the analysis is therefore based on assumptions about a few potential

outcomes.

The consequences for Danish vessels will for instance be influenced by the level of access to the UK-

EEZ, the quotas available and the possibility for vessels to reallocate their activity from the UK-EEZ

to the NEW-EU-EEZ.

To determine some boundaries for the expected outcome and to assess the consequences of Brexit,

two stylized/limiting scenarios

with clear and transparent assumptions

will be used to set the

boundaries of the possible outcome for Danish fisheries of Brexit:

1) The negotiations end up with unchanged access to the UK-EEZ, i.e. a continuation of the

current CFP (i.e. quota distribution, technical rules, capacity restrictions etc.) and a baseline

for the following scenarios.

2) All Danish (and other EU) vessels are excluded from fishing in the UK-EEZ, without possibility

to take some of the catches previously taken in UK-EEZ in the NEW-EU-EEZ after Brexit.

The UK-EEZ and NEW-EU-EEZ does not strictly follow the ICES-rectangles, thus some of the current

fishing activity takes place in rectangles, which in the future will be divided between UK and EU. In

the scenarios above, the fishery is allocated to each part of the divided rectangle based on the

geographical size of the rectangles belonging to UK and EU. A third scenario, lying between scenario

1 and scenario 2 will therefore consider the potential effects of assuming that the landings from

these divided rectangles can still be caught. Thus, it is in scenario 3 assumed that:

3) As in scenario 2, all Danish (and other EU) vessels are excluded from fishing in the purely UK-

EEZ rectangles but the fishing activity taking place in the UK part of the divided rectangles

can take place in the NEW-EU-EEZ, assuming this geographical move of fishing effort in itself

does not imply additional costs.

Building on top of the latter scenario, a fourth scenario is defined.

4) Catches taken in UK-EEZ before Brexit can to a varying degree be caught in the NEW-EU-EEZ,

depending on historical catch patterns of the different species.

A asi assu ptio is that essels u e t allo atio of thei a ti it is ased o e o o i

considerations about where to obtain the highest profit. If the Danish fishing vessels are excluded

from the UK-EEZ, their future behaviour and thus fishing activity will be based on the possibility to

obtain a profit from fishing in another area, where they are allowed to fish. The vessels will

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 29 OF 53

reallocate their fishing effort to the best available alternative. Their considerations in relation to

such a decision are based on the availability of fish and quota, the landings value, and the costs

related to undertake this change in activity. If the value of the landings is below the operating costs

(variable costs), fishing will be stopped. However, no matter where and how much they eventually

decide to fish, this will give rise to a lower profit than when they fished in the previous UK-EEZ zone.

It is of central importance to consider whether it is possible to catch the fish previously caught in

UK-EEZ in a new area, i.e. the question asked in scenario 4. For instance, is it possible to catch the

entire or parts of the current mackerel landings from the UK-EEZ in the NEW-EU-EEZ? And if so, is it

profitable?

Optimally, this type of analysis makes use of very detailed information about the biological situation

and possibilities in different areas, together with earnings and costs information in order to

determine in which new areas it will be economically attractive to fish, if it is no longer possible to

fish in the UK-EEZ. However, such detailed information on especially the biological side is not

available, and it has therefore been necessary to approach the analysis in a more simplistic and

stylized way, as explained in detail below.

Approach to analysis

The analysis is based on data covering 2014, 2015 and 2016. These three years are considered to be

representative for the situation in the Danish fishery leading up to Brexit negotiations regarding

fishing rights, with regard to negative as well as positive fluctuations in quotas, prices, and costs

between various years.

The calculation is static-comparative and addresses the question of what would have happened in

each of the three years in each of the considered scenarios, if Brexit had been in place in those years.

The models is thus not a dynamic model, which is able to account for changed fishing behaviour,

stock developments, fleet adjustments, price changes in landings and costs etc. Thus, the analysis is

not a prediction of the future situation since this would require knowledge on future stock

abundance, quotas, prices, costs, and behavioural changes.

Distribution of landings weight, landings value, and fishing effort is obtained from the databases of

the Danish Agrifish Agency covering information at vessel and trip level for the Danish fishery. Cost

information, based on a representative sample of the Danish fishing fleet, is obtained from Statistics

Denmark, covering the years 2014 and 2015, while costs for 2016 are estimated using the data for

previous years.

Given that the earnings and cost information from Statistics Denmark represent an average vessel

within a specific fleet, it is necessary to adjust these to reflect the earnings and costs of the vessels

fishing specifically in the UK-EEZ. From the Agrifish Agency database, average earnings are available

for the vessels fishing in the UK-EEZ zone, and assuming the same proportional distribution, relative

to earnings, of the various cost components for these vessels as the average Danish vessel, costs for

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 30 OF 53

the UK-EEZ vessels are adjusted with the proportion between their earnings and the earnings of an

average Danish vessel.

The cost components are divided into variable and fixed costs. Of the former, fuel costs and costs

for provisions and ice/chilled sea water are considered dependent on the number of days at sea,

while sales costs and crew payments are dependent on the landings value. Fixed costs cover

insurance costs, maintenance costs, various other costs, and capital costs. These are all considered

to be fixed and independent on the level of activity. As such, these costs can only be avoided if the

vessel is scrapped (which can potentially also come with a cost, if the scrap value is lower than the

remaining debt in the vessel) or sold.

Thus, in scenarios 2-4, where the activity is lower than in scenario 1 where nothing is changed, the

costs for fuel, provisions, and ice is reduced proportionally with the reduction in number of days at

sea, while sales costs and crew payments are reduced proportionally with the reduction in landings

value. However, the fixed costs are not reduced as the number of vessels is assumed constant in

each year.

In scenario 2, the fishing effort previously used strictly in UK-EEZ, including the part of UK-EEZ lying

on the UK side of the divided rectangles is assumed not to be applied elsewhere. Thus, the only

fishing effort applied is the effort previously applied in the NEW-EU-EEZ, leading to a reduction in

landings value (relative to scenario 1). In this situation, the landing values only include the previously

obtained landings values in the NEW-EU-EEZ. Variable costs are reduced according to the reduction

in effort.

In scenario 3, it is assumed that the effort previously applied on the UK side in the dividing rectangles

is still applied and the corresponding landings values previously obtained on the UK side of the

dividing rectangles are still obtained. In rectangles on the UK side outside the dividing rectangles no

effort is applied, and this effort is not moved to the NEW-EU-EEZ. Thus, effort and the obtained

landings value are slightly higher than in scenario 2, and the costs are adjusted accordingly.

In scenario 4, which builds upon scenario 3, the focus is on the up to five economically most

important species caught in the UK-EEZ by each of the fleets in 2014-2016, and on to which degree

the fraction of these species previously caught in UK-EEZ outside the dividing rectangles can be

caught in NEW-EU-EEZ. A number of assumptions are applied when asking this question:

1) Catches of a given species can only be moved within an ICES area, i.e. if a fleet has caught

herring in the UK-EEZ part of ICES area 4A, it is assumed that this herring catch can only be

taken in the NEW-EU-EEZ part of ICES area 4A, and not in any other areas.

2) There is only the possibility for a given fleet to move catches of a given species from the UK-

EEZ part of an ICES area to the NEW-EU-EEZ part of the ICES area, if the fleet has previously

caught that species in the NEW-EU-EEZ part of the ICES area. I.e. relating to the example

given in point 1 above, it is only allowed that the herring previously caught in the UK part of

area 4A is caught in the NEW-EU-EEZ part of 4A, if scenario 1 shows that the fleet has caught

herring in this area.

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 31 OF 53

3) For a species previously caught in UK-EEZ, the effort needed in NEW-EU-EEZ to take this catch

(or part of it) is based on historical catch per effort in NEW-EU-EEZ of this species. I.e. if the

historical catches per effort of a given species is lower in NEW-EU-EEZ than it was in UK-EEZ

it will demand more effort, and thus cost more to catch this species in NEW-EU-EEZ.

4) The effort used to catch a given species in NEW-EU-EEZ must not exceed the effort used to

catch that species in UK-EEZ. This assumption is made to avoid that any fleet suddenly

operates beyond what is physically possible when moving catches. Thus, if the effort needed

to catch a given species is higher in NEW-EU-EEZ than in UK-EEZ, only the effort originally

applied in UK-EEZ to catch the species will be applied, and less will be caught in NEW-EU-

EEZ, although at the same cost.

5) If the historical catch of a given species taken by a given fleet in the NEW-EU-EEZ part an ICES

area is less than 5% of the historical catch of that species taken by the fleet in the UK-EEZ

part of the ICES area, it is assumed that it is not possible to move any of the catch taken in

the UK-EEZ part of that area. Thus, it is assumed that if a given species is taken mainly in UK-

EEZ, then the catch taken in the NEW-EU-EEZ is accidental and/or noise in catch recordings,

and that it is therefore unrealistic that the UK-EEZ part of the catch can be taken elsewhere.

6) If the historical catch of a given species taken by a given fleet in the NEW-EU-EEZ part of an

ICES area is between 5% and 25% of the historical catch of that species taken by the fleet in

the UK-EEZ part of the ICES area, it is assumed that the maximum amount of that species

that can be moved is equal to the amount previously taken in NEW-EU-EEZ. As in point 5,

this assumption is made to avoid that the calculations predict an unrealistic large catch of a

given species in NEW-EU-EEZ, compared with historical catch patterns.

7) When the historical catch of a given species taken by a given fleet in the NEW-EU-EEZ part

of an ICES area is above 25% of the historical catch of that species taken by the fleet in the

UK-EEZ part of the ICES area, the catch of that species moved from the UK-EEZ to the NEW-

EU-EEZ part of the ICES area is evaluated using points 1-4 above.

Given these assumptions, scenario 4 will build further onto scenario 3 by analysing the economic

consequences, if the entire or parts of the catches previously taken in UK-EEZ can be taken in NEW-

EU-EEZ following the assumptions described above.

Table III.1 below shows the up to five economically most important species taken by each fleet in

UK-EEZ during the period 2014-2016. The number of species varies between the fleets depending

on their fishing pattern in the UK-EEZ. For instance for Danish seine 18-24m, plaice is the by far most

important species caught in the UK-EEZ, while five species are to a varying degree economically very

important for the reduction trawlers above 40m.

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 32 OF 53

Table III.1 Key species from the UK-EEZ based on landing value

18-24m

24-40m

>40m

Danish seine

Trawl reduction

Trawl consumption

Purse seine

Trawl reduction

Trawl mixed

Species #1

Plaice

Norway pout

Cod

Herring

Sandeel

Species #2

Sandeel

Hake

Mackerel

Norway pout

Species #3

Species #4

Species #5

Monk

Sandeel

Herring

Saithe

Blue whiting

Sprat

Horse mac.

Note: Reduction vessels are vessels, where at least 80% of their yearly landings value consist of reduction species,

Consumption vessels are vessels, where at least 80% of their yearly landings value consist of species for human consumption,

Mixed vessels are vessels in between the above.

Within scenario 4, a sub-scenario will be analysed for each key species individually and furthermore

a sub-scenario assuming that the landings of all these key species can be moved to the NEW-EU-

EEZ.

With this array of scenarios, it is possible to address a range of potential outcomes following Brexit.

The results are of course dependent on the assumptions made, but they are informative for further

discussion and potential analysis.

The analysis is solely undertaken for the active 15%-vessels, i.e. vessels having caught at least 15%

of the landings value in the UK-EEZ in a year and still active by the end of the year. As described in

Section I, these vessels undertake almost the entire Danish fishery in the UK-EEZ.

Economic effects for the fishing fleets

This section will present and comment on the economic (financial) effects for the fishing fleets

obtained from each scenario described above. The first part will focus on scenario 1-3, while

scenario 4 and the accompanied sub-scenarios are addressed afterwards.

The presentation will focus on three economic measures:

1) Landings value

2) Gross profit defined as landings value minus operating (variable) costs

3) Net profit defined as gross profit minus crew payments

Gross profit provides a measure for profit, which is left to pay for labour and capital, and the net

profits illustrate the amount left to pay for capital and any excess payments to the owner.

Each table will show the outcomes of each measure as a three-year average for 2014-2016, but

more detailed information is provided in the annexes referred in each table. The tables include the

total value for each fleet as well as the average value per vessel.

The development in landings value in scenario 1 to 3 is shown in Table III.2. In scenario 1, the total

landings value 2014-16 would have been 1.4 billion DKK with the current CFP. In the case that Danish

vessels are not allowed to fish in the UK-EEZ, the total landings value would be reduced by 57% to

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 33 OF 53

0.6 billion DKK. Assuming that the landings from the shared ICES-squares can be caught in the NEW-

EU-EEZ, this implies a reduction of 50% compared to scenario 1.

It is especially the vessels above 40m which are affected. These vessels catch large volumes of

mackerel and herring in the UK-EE).

The Da ish sei es la di gs alues a e edu ed sig ifi a tl due

to large landings of plaice caught in the English Channel, but a lot of this is caught in divided ICES-

squares, thus in scenario 3, the reduction is only 12%.

Table III.2 Landings value 2014-16-average for scenario 1-3 (1,000 DKK)

Scenario 1

Given the

current CFP

Total

18-24m

24-40m

>40m

Danish seine

Trawl reduction

Trawl consumption

Purse seine

Trawl reduction

Trawl mixed

Danish seine

Trawl reduction

Trawl consumption

Purse seine

Trawl reduction

Trawl mixed

5,232

39,022

138,217

372,858

215,666

633,245

1,404,240

2,346

11,535

22,488

103,860

16,255

69,748

Scenario 2

No landings from UK-

EEZ

1,949

20,182

90,187

127,311

149,840

211,789

601,258

739

6,101

14,880

35,012

11,226

23,382

-63%

-48%

-35%

-66%

-31%

-67%

-57%

-69%

-47%

-34%

-66%

-31%

-66%

Scenario 3

Landings from shared ICES-

squares between UK-EEZ and

NEW-EU-EEZ

4,425

-15%

22,700

-42%

107,036

-23%

153,102

-59%

157,883

-27%

256,654

-59%

701,800

-50%

2,061

-12%

6,801

-41%

17,558

-22%

42,074

-59%

11,836

-27%

28,369

-59%

Total

18-24m

24-40m

>40m

Source: Own calculations

Note: Please see Annex 3 for a detailed table

The effects on gross profits are shown in Table III.3 below. Gross profit is thus also reduced despite

that some of the activity reduction will imply lower variable costs. Total gross profit in scenario 1 is

956 million DKK, reduced to 243 million DKK in scenario 2 and in scenario 3, it is 328 million DKK in

total.

At the vessel level, gross profit is in scenario 2 reduced by more than 80% for the mixed trawlers

above 40m and reduction trawlers 24-40m. In scenario 3, purse seiners above 40m together with

the two fleets previously mentioned see a reduction in gross profit above 70%. The amounts left to

handle expenditures for labour and capital is thereby reduced considerably.

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 34 OF 53

Table III.3 Gross profit 2014-16-average for scenario 1-3 (1,000 DKK)

Scenario 1

Given the

current CFP

Total

18-24m

24-40m

>40m

Danish seine

Trawl reduction

Trawl consumption

Purse seine

Trawl reduction

Trawl mixed

Danish seine

Trawl reduction

Trawl consumption

Purse seine

Trawl reduction

Trawl mixed

2,584

17,391

82,664

291,567

94,335

467,498

956,039

1,209

5,035

13,296

81,698

7,017

51,254

Scenario 2

No landings from UK-

EEZ

3,037

45,487

66,517

43,531

84,840

243,502

-25

943

7,445

18,430

3,187

9,211

-97%

-83%

-45%

-77%

-54%

-82%

-75%

-102%

-81%

-44%

-77%

-55%

-82%

Scenario 3

Landings from shared

ICES-squares between

UK-EEZ and NEW-EU-

EEZ

1,977

-23%

4,880

-72%

58,608

-29%

89,626

-69%

49,578

-47%

123,507

-74%

328,175

-66%

995

-18%

1,442

-71%

9,519

-28%

24,767

-70%

3,637

-48%

13,511

-74%

Total

18-24m

24-40m

>40m

Source: Own calculations

Note: Please see Annex 4 for a detailed table

After having settled the payments to the crew, net profits show what is left to pay the invested

capital and any extra payments to the owners. Table III.4 shows that in scenario 2, net profit is in

total reduced by 82% from 700 million DKK to 127 million DKK. All fleets are influenced significantly,

and despite that scenario 3 shows a small improvement compared to scenario 2, the reduction is

still 72%.

Table III.4 Net profit 2014-16 -average for scenario 1-3 (1,000 DKK)

Scenario 1

Given the

current CFP

Total

18-24m

24-40m

>40m

Danish seine

Trawl reduction

Trawl consumption

Purse seine

Trawl reduction

Trawl mixed

Danish seine

Trawl reduction

Trawl consumption

Purse seine

Trawl reduction

Trawl mixed

695

8,976

43,595

235,691

49,172

361,620

699,750

356

2,507

6,941

66,155

3,571

39,574

Scenario 2

No landings from UK-

EEZ

-612

-1,330

20,003

47,278

12,250

49,474

127,063

-292

-401

3,239

13,149

815

5,301

-188%

-115%

-54%

-80%

-75%

-86%

-82%

-182%

-116%

-53%

-80%

-77%

-87%

Scenario 3

Landings from shared

ICES-squares between

UK-EEZ and NEW-EU-

EEZ

377

-46%

-26

-100%

28,373

-35%

66,604

-72%

16,590

-66%

80,628

-78%

192,546

-72%

245

-31%

-53

-102%

4,559

-34%

18,450

-72%

1,134

-68%

8,763

-78%

Total

18-24m

24-40m

>40m

Source: Own calculations

Note: Please see Annex 5 for a detailed table

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 35 OF 53

Turning to scenario 4 and its sub-scenarios, Table III.5 gives a summary of the aggregated economic

effect of scenarios 1-3 and the version of sub-scenario 4, where increased landings of all of the up

to five most important species in the UK-EEZ for each fleet is assumed to take place. In these sub-

scenarios 4, it is assumed that more effort than previously used in the UK-EEZ cannot be applied in

the NEW-EU-EEZ and that landings from the NEW-EU-EEZ cannot be higher than the landings

previously obtained in the UK-EEZ, given the assumptions previously described.

Thus, given the assumptions about the possibility and restrictions to transfer landings from UK-EEZ

to NEW-EU-EEZ for all top 5-species will naturally result in an improved economic situation for the

fishery compared to scenario 2 and scenario 3, but it is still far from scenario 1.

Table III.5 Aggregated landings value, gross profit and net profit, average of 2014-16 -scenario 1-3

and scenario 4 with increased landings of top-5 species (1,000 DKK)

Scenario 1

Given the

current CFP

Landings value

Gross profit

Net profit

Source: Own calculations

Scenario 2

No landings from UK-

EEZ

601,258

243,502

127,063

-57%

-75%

-82%

1,404,240

956,039

699,750

Scenario 3

Landings from shared

ICES-squares between

UK-EEZ and NEW-EU-

EEZ

701,800

-50%

328,175

-66%

192,546

-72%

Scenario 4

All landings of top 5

species transferred

from UK-EEZ to NEW-

EU-EEZ, if possible

772,963

-45%

386,711

-60%

238,824

-66%

In order to describe which species contribute the most to the improvement in the economic

measures, Table III.6, Table III.7, and Table III.8 show detailed economic effects of allowing increased

landings of the up to five most important species in the UK-EEZ for each fleet.

Take for instance the landings value in Table III.6 for purse seiners, where three important species

are identified. The analysis shows that it is primarily transfers of mackerel which increases the

landings value, while sandeel and herring increases landings value to a minor extent. Furthermore,

the figures for purse seiners show that given the assumptions made, the landings value is still only

around half of the level in scenario 1.

For some of the species, no change is observed at all, for instance Trawl reduction 24-40m and

Norway pout. Specifically, for this example, the no change result is due to the fact that despite that

Norway Pout is caught in 4A of the NEW-EU-EEZ, the amounts are so small that it is not considered

possible to transfer any of the amounts caught in 4A UK-EEZ, cf. assumption 5. Other factors could

be that the species caught in the UK-EEZ is not caught at all in the corresponding ICES-subdivision in

the NEW-EU-EEZ.

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 36 OF 53

Table III.6 Landings value following transfer of landings from UK-EEZ to NEW-EU-EEZ 2014-16-

average (1,000 DKK)

Scenario 1

Given the

current CFP

Total

18-24m

24-40m

Danish seine

Trawl reduction

Plaice

All Above

Norway pout

Sandeel

All Above

Cod

Hake

Monkfish

Saithe

All Above

Herring

Mackerel

Sandeel

All Above

Sandeel

Norway pout

Herring

Sprat

All Above

Herring

Mackerel

Sandeel

Blue whiting

Horse mac.

All Above

Plaice

All Above

Norway pout

Sandeel

All Above

Cod

Hake

Monkfish

Saithe

All Above

Herring

Mackerel

Sandeel

All Above

Sandeel

Norway pout

Herring

Sprat

All Above

Herring

Mackerel

Sandeel

Blue whiting

Horse mac.

All Above

Scenario 2

No landings

from UK-EEZ

Scenario 3

Landings from

shared areas

Scenario 4

Transferred

landings

5,133

22,700

25,645

107,302

108,228

107,153

107,184

108,760

156,779

168,084

157,555

176,213

166,442

157,883

159,558

159,755

169,990

269,315

258,400

264,979

258,632

262,510

287,222

2,312

6,801

7,568

17,602

17,741

17,579

17,584

17,833

43,050

46,115

43,187

48,205

12,465

11,836

11,964

11,955

12,713

29,725

28,545

29,310

28,588

28,978

31,668

>40m

Purse seine

Trawl reduction

Trawl mixed

18-24m

24-40m

Danish seine

Trawl reduction

>40m

Purse seine

Trawl reduction

Trawl mixed

Source: Own calculations

Note: Please see Annex 6 for a detailed table

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 37 OF 53

Table III.7 Gross profit following transfer of landings from UK-EEZ to NEW-EU-EEZ 2014-16-average

(1,000 DKK)

Scenario 1

Given the

current CFP

Total

18-24m

24-40m

Danish seine

Trawl reduction

Plaice

All Above

Norway pout

Sandeel

All Above

Cod

Hake

Monkfish

Saithe

All Above

Herring

Mackerel

Sandeel

All Above

Sandeel

Norway pout

Herring

Sprat

All Above

Herring

Mackerel

Sandeel

Blue whiting

Horse mac.

All Above

Plaice

All Above

Norway pout

Sandeel

All Above

Cod

Hake

Monkfish

Saithe

All Above

Herring

Mackerel

Sandeel

All Above

Sandeel

Norway pout

Herring

Sprat

All Above

Herring

Mackerel

Sandeel

Blue whiting

Horse mac.

All Above

Scenario 2

No landings

from UK-EEZ

Scenario 3

Landings from

shared areas

Scenario 4

Transferred

landings

2,502

4,880

6,995

58,813

59,571

58,690

58,716

59,967

92,708

103,967

92,668

110,092

55,784

49,578

50,979

51,140

58,747

134,810

125,162

128,455

125,258

128,753

148,409

1,181

1,442

1,994

9,553

9,667

9,533

9,538

9,735

25,582

28,638

25,528

30,213

4,093

3,637

3,743

3,737

4,299

14,716

13,677

14,071

13,704

14,053

16,178

>40m

Purse seine

Trawl reduction

Trawl mixed

18-24m

24-40m

Danish seine

Trawl reduction

>40m

Purse seine

Trawl reduction

Trawl mixed

Source: Own calculations

Note: Please see Annex 6 for a detailed table

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 38 OF 53

Table III.8 Net profit following transfer of landings from UK-EEZ to NEW-EU-EEZ 2014-16-average

(1,000 DKK)

Scenario 1

Given the

current CFP

Total

18-24m

24-40m

Danish seine

Trawl reduction

Plaice

All Above

Norway pout

Sandeel

All Above

Cod

Hake

Monkfish

Saithe

All Above

Herring

Mackerel

Sandeel

All Above

Sandeel

Norway pout

Herring

Sprat

All Above

Herring

Mackerel

Sandeel

Blue whiting

Horse mac.

All Above

Plaice

All Above

Norway pout

Sandeel

All Above

Cod

Hake

Monkfish

Saithe

All Above

Herring

Mackerel

Sandeel

All Above

Sandeel

Norway pout

Herring

Sprat

All Above

Herring

Mackerel

Sandeel

Blue whiting

Horse mac.

All Above

Scenario 2

No landings

from UK-EEZ

Scenario 3

Landings from

shared areas

Scenario 4

Transferred

landings

649

-26

1,465

28,506

29,003

28,423

28,441

29,252

69,115

78,830

69,092

83,828

20,954

16,590

17,628

17,785

23,187

89,856

81,999

84,135

82,045

84,919

100,444

341

-53

335

4,581

4,656

4,568

4,571

4,699

19,114

21,748

19,072

23,033

1,452

1,134

1,212

1,210

1,607

9,746

8,901

9,161

8,919

9,206

10,881

>40m

Purse seine

Trawl reduction

Trawl mixed

18-24m

24-40m

Danish seine

Trawl reduction

>40m

Purse seine

Trawl reduction

Trawl mixed

Source: Own calculations

Note: Please see Annex 6 for a detailed table

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 39 OF 53

Economic effects for the processing sector

For the processing industry, the future possible supplies from the fleet are of key interest. Large

reductions will most likely result in changes in the production capacity, unless other suppliers can

be attracted, for instance from UK vessels catching species which Danish vessels previously have

caught.

The total supplies landed in various Danish harbours, harbours in UK (UK) and harbours not located

in either Denmark or UK (xDKUK) for the four scenarios are presented in Table III.9 for reduction

species, Table III.10 for pelagic consumption species and Table III.11 for demersal consumption

species.

Large potential reductions in the supply of the reduction species (blue whiting and sandeel) and the

pelagic consumption species (mackerel and herring) are observed, but only minor changes for sprat.

However, the figures also indicate that some of the reduced landings in Danish harbours of mackerel

and herring could potentially be offset by attracting landings of these species currently landed in UK

harbours or other foreign harbours.

Table III.9 Total supplies of reduction species to harbours 2014-16-average (tonnes)

Species

Blue whiting

Harbour

Hanstholm

Skagen

xDKUK

Hanstholm

Skagen

Hirtshals

Thyborøn

Hvide sande

Hanstholm

Skagen

Thyborøn

Hvide sande

Grenå

xDKUK

Scenario 1

Given the

current CFP

3,907

26,082

2,268

4,980

16,526

18,836

1,091

48,317

397

22,107

11,177

93,501

997

3,211

6,903

260,300

Scenario 2

Scenario 3

No landings

Landings from

from UK-EEZ

shared areas

2,640

15,017

16,182

794

2,995

3,192

3,290

3,500

4,444

5,319

19,042

20,484

21,099

21,863

11,083

11,158

89,500

92,130

996

997

3,211

6,806

6,895

180,981

188,429

Scenario 4

Transferred

landings

2,640

17,206

949

4,022

6,947

9,028

29,422

22,081

11,158

92,903

997

3,211

6,895

207,594

Horse mackerel

Sandeel

Sprat

Total

Source: Own calculations

Note: Please see Annex 7 for a detailed table

xDKUK refers to landings in harbours not located in Denmark or UK

UK refers to landings in harbours located in UK

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 40 OF 53

Table III.10 Total supplies of pelagic consumption species to harbours 2014-16-average (tonnes)

Species

Herring

Harbour

Hanstholm

Skagen

Hirtshals

Thyborøn

xDKUK

Skagen

Hirtshals

xDKUK

Scenario 1

Given the

current CFP

900

37,835

21,206

2,950

45,544

3,929

142

5,566

24,899

5,732

148,703

Scenario 2

Scenario 3

No landings

Landings from

from UK-EEZ

shared areas

517

552

6,636

10,212

4,847

7,235

1,719

1,905

11,917

15,781

688

332

561

4,393

5,968

1,827

2,164

32,257

45,105

Scenario 4

Transferred

landings

561

11,847

8,055

2,154

17,247

863

797

7,450

2,755

51,776

Mackerel

Total

Source: Own calculations

Note: Please see Annex 7 for a detailed table

xDKUK refers to landings in harbours not located in Denmark or UK

UK refers to landings in harbours located in UK

Table III.11 Total supplies of demersal consumption species to harbours 2014-16-average (tonnes)

Species

Cod

Harbour

Hanstholm

Thyborøn

xDKUK

Hanstholm

Thyborøn

Hanstholm

Thyborøn

xDKUK

Hanstholm

Scenario 1

Given the

current CFP

1,381

348

211

915

772

558

130

223

1,443

6,069

Scenario 2

Scenario 3

No landings

Landings from

from UK-EEZ

shared areas

839

1,014

273

299

210

211

526

648

319

530

332

411

115

170

952

1,102

3,579

4,578

Scenario 4

Transferred

landings

1,024

300

211

686

564

414

129

217

1,114

4,746

Hake

Monk

Plaice

Saithe

Total

Source: Own calculations

Note: Please see Annex 7 for a detailed table

xDKUK refers to landings in harbours not located in Denmark or UK

UK refers to landings in harbours located in UK

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 41 OF 53

IV Summary and perspectives

The decision by the UK about leaving the European Union causes a range of negotiations about the

future collaboration between the remaining EU Member States and the UK. Fisheries are one of the

areas that will be a part of these negotiations.

Importance of the UK-EEZ to Danish fisheries

Overall, the Danish fisheries obtained a substantial part of its landings from the UK Exclusive

Economic zone (UK-EEZ) in 2012-2016, cf. Table IV.1 below. The volume of landings from the UK-

EEZ has varied between 200-300 thousand tonnes, with a landings value between 0.7-1.0 billion

DKK. Given that the total landings by Danish vessels has been between 500-875 thousand tonnes,

corresponding to a value of 2.9-3.4 billion DKK, the landings from the UK-EEZ thus correspond to 27-

34% of Danish landings value and 31-45% of landings measured in live weight.

Table IV.1 Landings by Danish vessels, their dependency on UK-EEZ and UK-EE)

a ti e essels

landings on areas

Landings value (1,000 DKK)

Zone

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

UK-EEZ by UK-

EEZ active

vessels

901,059 31% 1,015,159 34% 773,462 27% 910,904 27% 1,017,511 28% 923,619 29%

NEW-EU-EEZ by

UK-EEZ active

vessels

402,191 14% 431,512 14% 618,324 21% 772,433 23% 672,589 18% 579,410 18%

Norwegian by

UK-EEZ active

vessels

360,188 12% 326,054 11% 232,541

8% 387,566 11% 420,105 11% 345,291 11%

Other by UK-EEZ

active vessels

5,766

75,682

58,965

24,338

41,188

Total by UK-EEZ

vessels

1,669,203 57% 1,772,725 59% 1,700,009 58% 2,129,868 63% 2,134,543 58% 1,881,270 59%

Total by all

Danish vessels

2,947,787 100% 3,026,654 100% 2,918,495 100% 3,404,765 100% 3,653,240 100% 3,190,188 100%

Landings live weight (tonnes)

Zone

UK-EEZ by UK-

EEZ active

vessels

NEW-EU-EEZ by

UK-EEZ active

vessels

Norwegian by

UK-EEZ active

vessels

Other by UK-EEZ

active vessels

Total by UK-EEZ

vessels

Total by all

Danish vessels

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

Average

2012-2016

Average

2012-2016

199,693

40%

302,468

45%

237,337

32%

291,638

33%

208,625

31%

247,952

36%

102,828

20%

144,284

22%

263,813

35%

334,131

38%

248,964

37%

218,804

32%

34,942

875

338,337

67%

34,593

16,090

21,057

538,297

72%

37,872

11,635

675,276

77%

40,901

6,539

505,029

75%

32,880

10,027

507,657

73%

481,345

72%

502,702 100%

669,678 100%

745,139 100%

875,022 100%

674,283 100%

693,365 100%

Source: The Danish Agrifish Agency Vessel Register, Logbook and Sales Notes Register 14 February 2017.

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 42 OF 53

In total, 66 vessels fished in the UK-EEZ in 2016, but only 33 of these had more than 15% of their

landings value from the UK-EEZ. However, these vessels (named 15%-vessels) are the larger Danish

fishing vessels and are primarily above 24 meters in overall length. The 15%-vessels lands 98% of

both landings value and weight from the UK-EEZ, and the analysis therefore focuses on these

vessels.

The most important species for these vessels in the UK-EEZ are herring and mackerel, while sandeel

and other species for reduction (fish meal and oil) in some years also are important species. They

primarily catch these species in the North Sea, but the fishing waters west of Scotland has become

of increasing importance. The vessels mainly land their catches in Skagen, Hirtshals, Thyborøn, and

Hanstholm, while landings in UK harbours are around 5% out of the total landings made by the 15%-

vessels.

In 2011-2

, UK essels la di gs i De a k o espo ded to o a e age % of total landings

weight in Denmark and 5% of the total landings value while the most landed species were mackerel,

blue whiting, and herring. Of the landings by UK vessels in Denmark, most of the catch was landed

in Hirtshals and Hanstholm.

In the same period, import of fish and fish products from the UK constituted 3 % of Danish fish

import value as well as quantity on average. The export of fish and fish products to the UK was 8 %

of the total Danish fish exports by value and 9% by quantity.

The processing industry in Denmark consisted of 103 companies and employed 3,019 full time

positions in 2013. In the same year, the industry had revenue of 14.1 billion DKK, costs of 12.4 billion

DKK, earnings of 1.7 billon DKK, and net profits of 355 million DKK. The production by this industry

was 449 thousand tonnes in 2015, of which 58 thousand tonnes were by herring and mackerel

companies and 279 thousand tonnes by fishmeal companies.

Consequences of Brexit for Danish fisheries

With this overall picture in mind, the analysis focuses on the vessels which may experience the

largest consequences of Brexit, that is, vessels obtaining more than 15% of their landings value from

the UK-EEZ. With focus on these vessels, the analysis considers 98% of Danish landings value and

weight from UK-EEZ. Based on the landing and cost information for the 15%-vessels, an economic

analysis has been undertaken in order to show the effects for the Danish fishing fleet following

Brexit. The analysis is data demanding, and various assumptions have therefore been set up in order

to define the possible effects following different scenarios. In total, four overall scenarios have been

investigated:

1) The negotiations end up with unchanged access to the UK-EEZ, i.e. a continuation of the

current CFP,

2) All Danish (and other EU) vessels are excluded from fishing in the UK-EEZ, without possibility

to take some of the catches previously taken in UK-EEZ in the NEW-EU-EEZ after Brexit,

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 43 OF 53

3) As in scenario 2, all Danish (and other EU) vessels are excluded from fishing in the purely UK-

EEZ rectangles but the fishing activity taking place in the UK part of the divided ICES-

statistical rectangles can take place in the NEW-EU-EEZ, assuming that this geographical

move of fishing effort in itself does not imply additional costs,

4) Catches taken in UK-EEZ before Brexit can for the top-5 most important species to a varying

degree be caught in the NEW-EU-EEZ, depending on historical catch patterns of the different

species.

The analysis has been based on the years 2014, 2015 and 2016, and it shows what would potentially

have happened if Brexit had been in place in those years. The analysis is thus a short run analysis,

without taking for instance any capacity adjustments into consideration.

The results of these four scenarios are shown in Table IV.2 as an average of 2014-2016.

Table IV.2 Aggregated landings value, gross profit and net profit, average of 2014-16 (1,000 DKK)

and %.

Scenario 1

Given the

current CFP

Landings value

Gross profit

Net profit

Source: Own calculations

Scenario 2

No landings from UK-

EEZ

601,258

243,502

127,063

-57%

-75%

-82%

1,404,240

956,039

699,750

Scenario 3

Landings from shared

ICES-squares between

UK-EEZ and NEW-EU-

EEZ

701,800

-50%

328,175

-66%

192,546

-72%

Scenario 4

All landings of top 5

species transferred

from UK-EEZ to NEW-

EU-EEZ, if possible

772,963

-45%

386,711

-60%

238,824

-66%

The overall picture is that the economic consequences for all fleets in all scenarios are severe. Unless

the current CFP continues, Brexit will lead to a significant decline in landing values, gross profit, and

net profit for the fleets involved. Despite the fact that gross profit and net profit for most fleets are

still positive, the situation will require an adaption in the number of vessels to adjust to the changes

in fishing opportunities due to significant fixed costs in the fisheries, if one of these scenarios

becomes the outcome of the negotiations.

It must be noted that the scenarios are formulated within the current framework for the Danish

fishery. The Danish vessels might change behaviour in a way, which has not been foreseen in the

analysis, or other fishing opportunities might become possible, for instance in the Norwegian zone.

However, the analysed scenarios are useful to set the scene, and if the negotiations result in

improvements compared to this, the negative economic consequences of Brexit will, of course,

consequently be reduced.

Furthermore, the analysis has not considered any price effects following any change in trade

agreements and consequences in trade patterns between the EU and UK. Analyses of such

outcomes are beyond the scope of this report. However, given that fish prices in Denmark are mainly

determined by world prices, no major price effects can be expected of Brexit.

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 44 OF 53

Looking at the Danish harbours and their landings from the 15%-vessels, they primarily locate and

land their fish in the harbours on the west coast of Northern Jutland. Skagen receives mostly herring

and some reduction species, Hirtshals mostly receives herring and mackerel, while Thyborøn

receives reduction species and some amounts of herring and some landings of demersal species.

Hanstholm mostly receives demersal species. Some of the landings from these vessels take place in

the UK, where Lerwick and Peterhead are the most important harbours. It is mostly mackerel and

herring being landed in the UK harbours, but these landings are relatively small compared to the

overall landings by the vessels.

Given the results from the analysed scenarios, Brexit can potentially lead to significantly reduced

supplies of especially mackerel, herring and various species for reduction, and this can have an effect

on the economic situation for the processing industry. A modelling framework for undertaking a

detailed economic analysis of the processing industry is not available. If it is not possible to find

substitutions for the supplies from the Danish fishery, production capacity and thus the related

employment will most likely have to be adapted to this new situation.

For instance, UK vessels could potentially start to catch increased amounts of the reduction species

or pelagic consumption species, if they are not caught by the Danish vessels, and these landings

could be used in the Danish processing industry, if the UK vessels are allowed to land in Danish

harbours. However, if the access to the landings from the UK vessels does not become possible, the

Danish processing industry would require other suppliers of fish in order to continue the current

level of production. The possibilities for this and the derived effects thereof have not been

investigated.

The potentially reduced activity for the Danish fishing fleet in primarily the Northern part of western

Jutland will also influence the onshore service industry, which delivers maintenance and supplies

for the vessels and the crew. However, besides basic information about where the Danish fishing

vessels have their homeport and most of their activity, it is not possible to do a more detailed

analysis of the potential effects locally following each of the presented scenarios.

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 45 OF 53

Literature

Gibin, M., Guillen, J., Carvalho, N., Casey, J., Contini, F., Holmes, S., Martinsohn, J., and Zanzi, A.

Landings by EU-8 Member States from the United Kingdom's Exclusive Economic Zone

, JRC

Technical Report, JRC105794.

Napier, I. R. (2016):

Fish La di gs fro the U ited Ki gdo ’s E lusive E o o i Zo e:

nationality & species.

NAFC Marine Centre, University of the Highlands and Islands.

area,

Napier, I. R. (2017):

Fish Landings from the UK Exclusive Economic Zone and UK Landings from the

EU EEZ.

NAFC Marine Centre, University of the Highlands and Islands.

Nielsen, R. (2016).

Fiskeriets økonomi 2016: Fiskeforarbejdning,

13 s., jun. 13, 2016. (IFRO

Udredning; Nr. 2016/13)

http://curis.ku.dk/ws/files/162715147/TFRO_Udredning_2016_13.pdf

The Danish Agrifish Agency (2017a):

Udenrigshandel

http://fd-statweb.fd.dk/udenrigshandelsrapport/udenrigshandelsrapport__front_matter

The Danish Agrifish Agency (2017b):

Landinger registreret af NaturErhvervstyrelsen

http://fd-statweb.fd.dk/landingsrapport/landingsrapport__front_matter

The Danish Agrifish Agency (2017):

Landings

http://fd-statweb.fd.dk/landingsrapport/landingsrapport__opsaetning

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 46 OF 53

ANNEXES

Annex 1 ICES rectangles (square grid) and country EEZ (coloured areas)

Source: Beukhof, E. and van Gemert, R. (2017). Preparing for Brexit: A historical overview of the abundance and Danish catch

distribution of North Sea herring and Northeast Atlantic mackerel. January 2017. DPPO headquarters, Copenhagen, Denmark.

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 47 OF 53

Annex 2 ICES statistical rectangles (square grid) FAO areas (blue bold lines) and country EEZ (red

bold lines)

Source: Danish Agrifish Agency

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 48 OF 53

Annex 3 Landings value for scenario 1-3 (1,000 DKK)

Scenario 1

Continuation of the current CFP

2014

6,770

29,291

93,986

318,704

132,978

560,230

1,141,958

2,257

7,323

18,797

79,676

11,081

62,248

2015

6,219

66,415

120,000

416,638

365,838

521,833

1,496,943

2,073

16,604

20,000

104,160

22,865

65,229

2016

2,708

21,359

200,664

383,231

148,182

817,673

1,573,818

2,708

10,680

28,666

127,744

14,818

81,767

3-year

average

5,232

39,022

138,217

372,858

215,666

633,245

1,404,240

2,346

11,535

22,488

103,860

16,255

69,748

2014

2,991

14,986

71,065

106,469

87,177

167,710

450,397

997

3,747

14,213

26,617

7,265

18,634

Scenario 2

No landings from UK-EEZ

2015

2,453

32,887

81,001

160,822

261,881

189,817

728,861

818

8,222

13,500

40,206

16,368

23,727

2016

402

12,672

118,495

114,642

100,463

277,841

624,516

402

6,336

16,928

38,214

10,046

27,784

3-year

average

1,949

20,182

90,187

127,311

149,840

211,789

601,258

739

6,101

14,880

35,012

11,226

23,382

Scenario 3

Landings from shared ICES-squares between UK-

EEZ and NEW-EU-EEZ

3-year

2014

2015

2016

average

5,678

4,958

2,638

4,425

16,389

38,208

13,505

22,700

78,187

97,986

144,934

107,036

136,111

186,466

136,730

153,102

93,995

274,402

105,251

157,883

207,426

232,301

330,234

256,654

537,786

834,320

733,292

701,800

1,893

1,653

2,638

2,061

4,097

15,637

34,028

7,833

23,047

9,552

16,331

46,617

17,150

29,038

6,752

20,705

45,577

10,525

33,023

6,801

17,558

42,074

11,836

28,369

Total

18-24m

24-40m

>40m

Danish seine

Trawl industrial

Trawl consumption

Purse seine

Trawl industrial

Trawl mixed

Danish seine

Trawl industrial

Trawl consumption

Purse seine

Trawl industrial

Trawl mixed

Total

18-24m

24-40m

>40m

Source: Own calculations

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 49 OF 53

Annex 4 Gross profit for scenario 1-3 (1,000 DKK)

Scenario 1

Continuation of the current CFP

2014

3,631

15,663

47,554

238,977

52,130

393,712

751,666

1,210

3,916

9,511

59,744

4,344

43,746

2015

2,557

28,259

73,263

318,689

170,171

365,521

958,461

852

7,065

12,210

79,672

10,636

45,690

2016

1,563

8,251

127,176

317,036

60,703

643,262

1,157,991

1,563

4,125

18,168

105,679

6,070

64,326

3-year

average

2,584

17,391

82,664

291,567

94,335

467,498

956,039

1,209

5,035

13,296

81,698

7,017

51,254

2014

839

5,114

32,054

47,080

22,360

51,877

159,325

280

1,278

6,411

11,770

1,863

5,764

Scenario 2

No landings from UK-EEZ

2015

-320

1,793

42,308

87,638

83,350

64,239

279,009

-107

448

7,051

21,910

5,209

8,030

2016

-249

2,203

62,100

64,831

24,881

138,405

292,172

-249

1,102

8,871

21,610

2,488

13,840

3-year

average

3,037

45,487

66,517

43,531

84,840

243,502

-25

943

7,445

18,430

3,187

9,211

Scenario 3

Landings from shared ICES-squares between

UK-EEZ and NEW-EU-EEZ

3-year

2014

2015

2016 average

2,826

1,593

1,511

1,977

6,055

5,914

2,670

4,880

36,904

55,860

83,060

58,608

73,729

110,161

84,987

89,626

26,745

93,776

28,213

49,578

81,699

102,866 185,957 123,507

227,958

370,169 386,397 328,175

942

531

1,511

995

1,514

7,381

18,432

2,229

9,078

1,479

9,310

27,540

5,861

12,858

1,335

11,866

28,329

2,821

18,596

1,442

9,519

24,767

3,637

13,511

Total

18-24m

24-40m

>40m

Danish seine

Trawl industrial

Trawl consumption

Purse seine

Trawl industrial

Trawl mixed

Danish seine

Trawl industrial

Trawl consumption

Purse seine

Trawl industrial

Trawl mixed

Total

18-24m

24-40m

>40m

Source: Own calculations

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 50 OF 53

Annex 5 Net profit for scenario 1-3 (1,000 DKK)

Scenario 1

Continuation of the current CFP

2014

1,160

9,566

20,536

199,225

20,038

296,388

546,914

387

2,391

4,107

49,806

1,670

32,932

2015

362

14,211

40,530

247,492

98,764

277,673

679,033

121

3,553

6,755

61,873

6,173

34,709

2016

562

3,152

69,719

260,356

28,715

510,799

873,303

562

1,576

9,960

86,785

2,872

51,080

3-year

average

695

8,976

43,595

235,691

49,172

361,620

699,750

356

2,507

6,941

66,155

3,571

39,574

2014

-252

1,994

11,626

33,801

1,322

22,742

71,233

-84

499

2,325

8,450

110

2,527

Scenario 2

No landings from UK-EEZ

2015

-1,186

-5,163

20,213

60,156

32,234

32,285

138,539

-395

-1,291

3,369

15,039

2,015

4,036

2016

-398

-822

28,171

47,876

3,195

93,394

171,416

-398

-411

4,024

15,959

319

9,339

3-year

average

-1,330

20,003

47,278

12,250

49,474

127,063

-292

-401

3,239

13,149

815

5,301

Scenario 3

Landings from shared ICES-squares between

UK-EEZ and NEW-EU-EEZ

3-year

2014

2015

2016

average

754

-157

535

377

2,644

-2,167

-554

-26

14,428

29,132

41,560

28,373

56,752

78,296

64,765

66,604

4,060

40,216

5,493

16,590

45,664

63,759 132,459

80,628

124,303 209,079 244,257

192,546

251

-52

535

245

661

2,886

14,188

338

5,074

-542

4,855

19,574

2,513

7,970

-277

5,937

21,588

549

13,246

-53

4,559

18,450

1,134

8,763

Total

18-24m

24-40m

>40m

Danish seine

Trawl industrial

Trawl consumption

Purse seine

Trawl industrial

Trawl mixed

Danish seine

Trawl industrial

Trawl consumption

Purse seine

Trawl industrial

Trawl mixed

Total

18-24m

24-40m

>40m

Source: Own calculations

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 51 OF 53

Annex 6 Total landings value, gross profit and net profit 2014, 2015 and 2016 for scenario 4 (1,000 DKK)

Landings value

2014

6,664

16,389

18,030

78,187

78,331

78,349

78,493

138,769

159,664

149,468

175,678

104,284

93,995

96,011

93,995

106,300

207,426

229,106

209,988

207,426

231,668

616,833

2015

6,028

38,208

45,020

98,765

99,627

98,186

98,265

100,884

192,779

197,196

186,466

203,509

287,951

274,402

276,697

279,829

295,674

243,001

232,409

235,597

233,652

235,024

250,482

901,595

2016

2,706

13,505

13,885

144,954

146,869

144,942

144,938

146,902

138,790

147,391

136,730

149,452

107,092

105,251

105,966

105,441

107,997

357,517

335,365

330,234

332,257

345,079

379,515

800,457

3-year

average

5,133

22,700

25,645

107,302

108,228

107,153

107,184

108,760

156,779

168,084

157,555

176,213

166,442

157,883

159,558

159,755

169,990

269,315

258,400

264,979

258,632

262,510

287,222

772,962

Gross profit defined as landings value minus

operating costs

3-year

2014

2015

2016

average

3,543

2,402

1,562

2,502

3,543

2,402

1,562

2,502

6,055

5,914

2,670

4,880

7,381

10,656

2,946

6,995

7,381

10,656

2,946

6,995

36,904

56,459

83,077

58,813

36,904

57,192

84,618

59,571

36,993

56,011

83,065

58,690

37,012

56,074

83,063

58,716

37,101

58,156

84,644

59,967

75,901

115,636

86,587

92,708

96,096

120,549

95,255

103,967

82,857

110,161

84,987

92,668

107,396

126,024

96,855

110,092

34,482

103,505

29,364

55,784

26,745

93,776

28,213

49,578

28,411

95,737

28,788

50,979

26,745

98,302

28,372

51,140

36,149

109,994

30,098

58,747

81,699

111,908 210,822

134,810

81,699

102,943 190,844

125,162

94,196

105,213 185,957

128,455

83,853

104,062 187,858

125,258

81,699

104,970 199,592

128,753

96,350

117,633 231,244

148,409

287,920

424,865 447,349

386,711

Net profit defined as earnings minus crew

payments (bruttooverskud)

3-year

2014

2015

2016

average

1,111

274

561

649

1,111

274

561

649

2,644

-2,167

-554

-26

3,628

1,134

-369

1,465

3,628

1,134

-369

1,465

14,428

29,519

41,571

28,506

14,428

30,017

42,565

29,003

14,476

29,229

41,564

28,423

14,490

29,270

41,562

28,441

14,537

30,638

42,581

29,252

58,593

82,693

66,060

69,115

76,182

86,851

73,456

78,830

64,214

78,296

64,765

69,092

85,484

91,247

74,751

83,828

9,315

47,301

6,246

20,954

4,060

40,216

5,493

16,590

5,240

41,729

5,913

17,628

4,060

43,682

5,611

17,785

10,495

52,281

6,785

23,187

45,664

71,000

152,904

89,856

45,664

63,818

136,515

81,999

54,395

65,551

132,459

84,135

47,373

64,728

134,033

82,045

45,664

65,404

143,689

84,919

56,104

75,466

169,763

100,444

171,360

251,040

294,073

238,824

18-24m

24-40m

Danish seine

Trawl reduction

Trawl consumption

>40m

Purse seine

Trawl reduction

Trawl mixed

Plaice

All Above

Norway pout

Sandeel

All Above

Cod

Hake

Monkfish

Saithe

All Above

Herring

Mackerel

Sandeel

All Above

Sandeel

Norway pout

Herring

Sprat

All Above

Herring

Mackerel

Sandeel

Blue whiting

Horse mackerel

All Above

Total

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 52 OF 53

Annex 6, continued

Landings value

2014

2,221

4,097

4,507

15,637

15,666

15,670

15,699

34,692

39,916

37,367

43,920

8,690

7,833

8,001

7,833

8,858

23,047

25,456

23,332

23,047

25,741

2015

2,009

9,552

11,255

16,461

16,605

16,364

16,377

16,814

48,195

49,299

46,617

50,877

17,997

17,150

17,294

17,489

18,480

30,375

29,051

29,450

29,207

29,378

31,310

2016

2,706

6,752

6,942

20,708

20,981

20,706

20,705

20,986

46,263

49,130

45,577

49,817

10,709

10,525

10,597

10,544

10,800

35,752

33,536

33,023

33,226

34,508

37,952

3-year

average

2,312

6,801

7,568

17,602

17,741

17,579

17,584

17,833

43,050

46,115

43,187

48,205

12,465

11,836

11,964

11,955

12,713

29,725

28,545

29,310

28,588

28,978

31,668

Gross profit defined as landings value minus

operating costs

3-year

2014

2015

2016

average

1,181

801

1,562

1,181

801

1,562

1,181

1,514

1,479

1,335

1,442

1,845

2,664

1,473

1,994

1,845

2,664

1,473

1,994

7,381

9,410

11,868

9,553

7,381

9,532

12,088

9,667

7,399

9,335

11,866

9,533

7,402

9,346

11,866

9,538

7,420

9,693

12,092

9,735

18,975

28,909

28,862

25,582

24,024

30,137

31,752

28,638

20,714

27,540

28,329

25,528

26,849

31,506

32,285

30,213

2,874

6,469

2,936

4,093

2,229

5,861

2,821

3,637

2,368

5,984

2,879

3,743

2,229

6,144

2,837

3,737

3,012

6,875

3,010

4,299

9,078

13,988

21,082

14,716

9,078

12,868

19,084

13,677

10,466

13,152

18,596

14,071

9,317

13,008

18,786

13,704

9,078

13,121

19,959

14,053

10,706

14,704

23,124

16,178

Net profit defined as earnings minus crew

payments (bruttooverskud)

3-year

2014

2015

2016

average

370

561

341

370

561

341

661

-542

-277

-53

907

284

-184

335

907

284

-184

335

2,886

4,920

5,939

4,581

2,886

5,003

6,081

4,656

2,895

4,871

5,938

4,568

2,898

4,878

5,937

4,571

2,907

5,106

6,083

4,699

14,648

20,673

22,020

19,114

19,045

21,713

24,485

21,748

16,053

19,574

21,588

19,072

21,371

22,812

24,917

23,033

776

2,956

625

1,452

338

2,513

549

1,134

437

2,608

591

1,212

338

2,730

561

1,210

875

3,268

678

1,607

5,074

8,875

15,290

9,746

5,074

7,977

13,652

8,901

6,044

8,194

13,246

9,161

5,264

8,091

13,403

8,919

5,074

8,176

14,369

9,206

6,234

9,433

16,976

10,881

18-24m

24-40m

Danish seine

Trawl reduction

Trawl consumption

>40m

Purse seine

Trawl reduction

Trawl mixed

Plaice

All Above

Norway pout

Sandeel

All Above

Cod

Hake

Monkfish

Saithe

All Above

Herring

Mackerel

Sandeel

All Above

Sandeel

Norway pout

Herring

Sprat

All Above

Herring

Mackerel

Sandeel

Blue whiting

Horse mackerel

All Above

Source: Own calculations

EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 104: Analyse af mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU

PAGE 53 OF 53

Annex 7 Total supplies of reduction species, pelagic consumption species and demersal consumption species to harbours 2014-16-average

(tonnes)

Scenario 1

2014

5,250

22,600

1,910

11,219

12,684

32,142

614

1,365

935

5,130

20,058

24,054

101

59,360

830

1,645

33,695

17,782

1,727

54,634

4,060

2,732

24,520

9,903

908

233

642

358

174

155

305

1,397

2015

6,470

22,930

3,453

40,263

12,529

153,700

2,378

8,269

15,918

5,002

27,144

31,804

3,173

73,249

360

599

28,091

15,828

2,274

44,589

1,610

235

7,705

25,960

2,250

1,128

365

913

810

339

1,317

2016

32,716

1,441

14,841

8,319

94,662

3,856

4,807

2,376

650

12,343

457

51,718

30,007

4,848

37,411

6,116

146

6,261

24,218

5,043

2,108

446

497

1,190

1,462

979

195

1,614

3-yr

average

3,907

26,082

2,268

22,107

11,177

93,501

997

3,211

6,903

4,980

16,526

18,836

1,091

48,317

397

900

37,835

21,206

2,950

45,544

3,929

142

5,566

24,899

5,732

1,381

348

211

915

772

558

130

223

1,443

2014

2,650

11,655

1,910

10,839

12,637

31,368

614

1,365

935

4,307

8,837

12,013

101

44,046

759

3,842

870

405

12,812

1,577

2,668

589

233

522

260

120

1,012

Scenario 2

2015

5,270

19,654

38,550

12,368

144,341

2,374

8,269

15,627

2,001

904

1,318

10,483

562

2,606

5,471

1,646

13,537

582

8,323

1,250

753

312

511

362

214

956

2016

13,743

430

13,908

8,245

92,790

3,856

2,677

128

2,597

231

13,460

8,200

3,105

9,401

341

3,278

1,563

1,174

274

497

545

551

523

889

3-yr

average

2,640

15,017

794

21,099

11,083

89,500

996

3,211

6,806

2,995

3,290

4,444

19,042

517

6,636

4,847

1,719

11,917

332

4,393

1,827

839

273

210

526

319

332

952

2014

2,650

13,750

1,910

11,219

12,684

32,142

614

1,365

935

4,307

9,242

14,293

101

45,373

844

7,686

4,392

830

17,233

330

3,436

3,343

692

233

563

290

161

116

243

1,151

Scenario 3

2015

5,270

20,080

39,530

12,470

149,830

2,378

8,269

15,893

2,584

1,132

1,665

13,481

574

4,890

7,002

1,675

18,602

260

621

10,782

1,250

913

332

666

637

264

240

1,079

2016

14,716

430

14,841

8,319

94,418

3,856

2,684

128

2,597

237

18,059

10,310

3,210

11,508

1,805

732

3,686

1,900

1,439

331

497

716

907

678

189

1,075

3-yr

average

2,640

16,182

794

21,863

11,158

92,130

997

3,211

6,895

3,192

3,500

5,319

20,484

552

10,212

7,235

1,905

15,781

688

561

5,968

2,164

1,014

299

211

648

530

411

115

170

1,102

2014

2,650

15,656

1,910

11,219

12,684

32,142

614

1,365

935

4,307

18,734

24,054

101

59,190

844

7,863

4,915

1,296

17,501

422

4,941

4,568

692

233

563

294

173

153

302

1,166

Scenario 4

2015

5,270

20,430

461

40,185

12,470

152,056

2,378

8,269

15,893

2,985

1,978

3,030

25,364

219

579

6,823

7,568

1,736

20,707

579

866

12,113

1,414

942

337

726

679

270

324

1,100

2016

15,530

475

14,841

8,319

94,512

3,856

4,774

128

3,712

261

20,855

11,681

3,430

13,534

2,010

1,102

5,295

2,282

1,439

331

497

769

970

678

195

1,076

3-yr

average

2,640

17,206

949

22,081

11,158

92,903

997

3,211

6,895

4,022

6,947

9,028

29,422

561

11,847

8,055

2,154

17,247

863

797

7,450

2,755

1,024

300

211

686

564

414

129

217

1,114

Blue whiting

Sprat

Horse mac

Sandeel

Herring

Mackerel

Cod

Hake

Monk

Plaice

Saithe

Hanstholm

Skagen

xDKUK

Hanstholm

Skagen

Thyborøn

Hvide Sande

Grenå

xDKUK

Hanstholm

Skagen

Hirtshals

Thyborøn

Hvide Sande

Hanstholm

Skagen

Hirtshals

Thyborøn

xDKUK

Skagen

Hirtshals

xDKUK

Hanstholm

Thyborøn

xDKUK

Hanstholm

Thyborøn

Hanstholm

Thyborøn

xDKUK

Hanstholm

Source: Own calculations