A long track record of building up fisheries for mackerel, and its strong attachment to Norwegian waters should weigh heavily in Norway’s favour as coastal states come together to work out a division of the TAC, according to Mia Høgi, senior advisor at the Pelagic Association, which represents the interests of Norwegian pelagic fishing companies.
She points out that mackerel accounts for close to 50% of the turnover of the Norwegian pelagic fleet, and that mackerel spend much of the year growing and feeding in Norwegian waters – to the benefit of all of the states that share the North-east Atlantic mackerel fishery.
‘Last week, the Coastal States once again convened preliminary negotiations on mackerel. There are few people outside the fishing industry who give this a thought. Maybe it’s time they should,’ she said, commenting that reaching an agreement has been challenging in recent years.
‘Mackerel is a highly migratory species that crosses several exclusive economic zones (EEZ) in search of food and to spawn. This migratory behavior makes the fair allocation of the mackerel stock both difficult and complicated; so what could form the basis for a fair and equitable sharing arrangement? In early summer, mackerel migrate northward to forage in the Norwegian Sea, searching for plankton and smaller prey fish. Mackerel spawn in the spring/early summer to a large extent in the Norwegian zone. When winter approaches, the fish move again and spend the winter west of Shetland. In recent years, the mackerel has stayed in the Norwegian EEZ to a greater and greater extent during the summer, feeding on Norwegian plankton, and the area the fish occupies has grown considerably in size.’
According to Mia Høgi, mackerel grow fat in the Norwegian EEZ, which comes at a cost to Norway’s marine areas.
‘Mackerel eat almost everything in their path. Other commercial species have had many more mackerel to compete with, both in relation to food and predation. It is suspected that the mackerel’s extensive grazing on herring larvae may have an impact on the population of Atlanto-Scandian herring,’ she said.
‘Mackerel’s dependence on the Norwegian EEZ, the biological, and ecological cost of a larger distribution area, together with the time it spends in our seas, should be to the advantage of Norwegian interests in the negotiations.’
She commented that there has been a mackerel fishery in Norway since the 1960s, and Norwegian producers have built up extensive export markets for it, especially in Asia – and that Norway that has led the way in building up this lucrative market.
‘In 2020, the previous joint mackerel agreement was terminated. At that time, the Coastal States shares were 26.67% to Norway, 58.40% to the EU and 14.93% to the Faroe Islands. More and more countries have applied to be approved as a Coastal State. Brexit became a reality, the United Kingdom became an Independent coastal State, and it was necessary to include the other coastal states that did not participate in the tripartite agreement. Iceland has been fishing for mackerel since 2008, without being part of the cooperation with the other coastal states. As a result, the mackerel was overexploited for several years,’ she said.
‘Since 2020, there has been no joint agreement. Now once again the Coastal States will try to come to a sharing arrangement for this erratic, and highly migratory protein resource with a high economic significance. Norway has the longest track record in the fishery, has the largest zonal attachment with breeding and feeding areas, and has the most extensive research effort. This should benefit Norway.’
