Sand Eels (Hansard, 12 July 2001)

§ Lord Hardy of Wath
asked Her Majesty's Government:
What action is being taken to reduce the taking of sand eels and similar species given the effect this appears to be exerting upon the breeding of sea birds, particularly of kittiwakes and puffins on the Yorkshire coast.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord Whiny)
My Lords, in December 1999 the EU Fisheries Council agreed an initial closure for three years of the sand eel fishery off the north-east coast of England and the east coast of Scotland to protect seabirds and other species that rely on sand eels as a food source at particular times of the year. The impact of the closure is being carefully monitored, with reviews of its operation in 2001 and 2002. In the light of those reviews, the council will take a decision on the future of the closure. We shall then also be in a position to decide whether to press for action to safeguard other areas, including that off the Yorkshire coast.

§ Lord Hardy of Wath
My Lords, I am grateful for that Answer. Does my noble friend accept that an urgent decision may be needed? The present position of a number of seabirds is becoming crucial as the sand eel is their staple diet. Does my noble friend also accept that, while the situation off the Yorkshire coast causes anxiety, the latest evidence of the situation in the Orkneys and in Shetland is even more serious for the Arctic tern and the kittiwake? Given the ecological consequences, is it reasonable to assume that the harvesting of sand eels for the purpose of providing agricultural fertiliser should end as soon as possible?

§ Lord Whitty
My Lords, it is certainly true that since the closure of the sand eel fishery, the breeding of kittiwakes and others on that particular coast has been improved. Whether that relates directly to the closure will have to be assessed at the end of the monitoring. In regard to Scotland—I must be careful as this is a devolved responsibility—I have seen reports that distress has been caused to birds by the decline of sand eels, although there may be other reasons for the reduction in the numbers of sand eels. This year fishing took only 10 per cent of the agreed quota in that area, so there may be climatic effects as well. My colleague, 1172 Elliot Morley, has made absolutely clear that we want restrictions on industrial fishing for sand eels and other non-human consumption fish.

§ Baroness Nicol
My Lords, is not the sand eel also an important part of the diet for cod, mackerel and other fish on which we rely? Is it not odd that as late as 1999 the allowed catch for sand eels was 1 million tonnes, when so far no organisation has succeeded in reaching that limit. Can the Minister explain why the figure of 1 million tonnes was set? Was it just plucked out of the air or was it calculated and, if so, on what was it based?

§ Lord Whitty
My Lords, perhaps I should put this matter in context. There are a lot of sand eels around—some 650 billion I believe—therefore counting them is a little difficult. Nevertheless, the maxim um quota that was set followed two years of substantial breeding of sand eels and it may be that the quota was set at a relatively generous level. I do not believe that the fact that they have not reached the quota necessarily means that there is a significant decline in the actual number of sand eels there. In relation to cod, sand eels form about 4 per cent of their diet, but it is unlikely that the decline in cod catches and the cod population is related to the availability of sand eels. I believe that other factors are involved, but we need to keep an eye on the matter.

§ Baroness Strange
My Lords, is the Minister aware that sand eels form the staple diet of young seabirds and that many young seabirds of rare species are dying of starvation because they cannot get enough sand eels?

§ Lord Whitty
My Lords, that was one of the reasons for the closure of the sand eel fishery in Northumbria and off the coast of Scotland up to the Grampian area. It appears that there has been some recovery in breeding of seabirds in that area. We do not have full monitoring on the Yorkshire coast and further down the coast to draw that causal connection. Within the Shetlands it appears that any change in the sand eel population has been due, not to fishing, but to other factors. I repeat that we are concerned that this form of industrial fishing does not destroy the sand eel population and thereby have an effect on the seabird populations right up the east coast.

§ Lord Shutt of Greetland
My Lords, I am delighted to learn from the Minister of this great quantity of sand eels that he has been able to count. The expectations of the catch is 60 per cent of a million at the present time and if the Danes cannot catch the sand eels at the moment what chance do the birds have of getting theirs? Does he believe that the number of sand eels in the quota should be substantially reduced?

§ Lord Whitty
My Lords, that is exactly the reason that in 1999 we raised the matter with the Fisheries Council and achieved agreement to extend the closure of those fields to EU waters. We have had good 1173 discussions with the Danish authorities since then. As I have said, our aim is to restrict the industrial fishing of these creatures, but the fact that there has not been a full take-up of the quota does not necessarily mean that the number of sand eels up the coast has declined. I also understand that only some of the sand eels—the younger ones—are actually food for the young birds. So one has to distinguish between sand eels as well as count them!