Miljø- og Fødevareudvalget 2017-18
MOF Alm.del Bilag 80
Offentligt
1813884_0001.png
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
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0002.png
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
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0003.png
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
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
Contents
I
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
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
PAGE 2 OF 53
I
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
st
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
th
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:
1)
2)
3)
4)
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.
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om 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.
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0007.png
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
1
2
8
18
26
27
3
85
1%
2%
9%
21%
31%
32%
4%
100%
.
2
8
17
26
28
81
2013
.
2%
10%
21%
32%
35%
0%
100%
.
1
6
14
26
28
75
2014
.
1%
8%
19%
35%
37%
0%
100%
1
1
3
15
28
28
1
77
2015
1%
1%
4%
19%
36%
36%
1%
100%
2016
.
1
10
25
29
1
66
.
.
2%
15%
38%
44%
2%
100%
Source: The Danish Agrifish Agency Vessel Register, Logbook and Sales Notes Register 14
th
Feb. 2017.
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0008.png
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
7%
0%
34,593
5%
0%
16,090
21,057
2%
3%
37,872
11,635
4%
1%
40,901
6,539
6%
1%
32,880
10,027
5%
1%
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
th
Feb. 2017.
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0009.png
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
4
11%
7
19%
25
68%
1
3%
37
100%
2013
5
10
28
43
12%
23%
65%
0%
100%
3
9
25
37
2014
8%
24%
68%
0%
100%
th
2015
3
10
28
41
7%
24%
68%
0%
100%
2016
1
3%
9
27%
23
70%
0%
33
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
2%
15,487
2%
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
2%
non-15%-vessels
Total
199,693 100%
2013
301,201
1,267
302,468
100%
0%
100%
2014
751,409
22,053
773,462
2014
231,264
6,073
237,337
2015
97% 887,162
3%
23,742
97%
3%
2016
982,276
35,235
97%
3%
100% 910,904
2015
97% 287,543
3%
th
100% 1,017,511 100%
2016
99%
1%
100%
200,759
7,865
96%
4%
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.
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0010.png
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%
0%
71%
19%
10%
0%
60%
28%
5%
6%
53%
35%
9%
3%
60%
24%
14%
1%
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
8%
Other zones
875
0%
Total UK-EEZ 15%-
296,082 100%
vessels
2013
301,201
119,767
22,600
68%
27%
5%
0%
2014
231,264
173,470
5,656
21,057
54%
40%
1%
5%
2015
287,543
294,285
23,846
11,384
47%
48%
4%
2%
2016
200,759
162,674
30,156
3,320
51%
41%
8%
1%
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
th
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
5
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
5%
44,940
5%
26,459
3%
25,224
3%
24,837
3%
16,100
2%
14,642
1%
8,876
1%
982,276 98%
49%
30%
0%
7%
7%
1%
0%
1%
0%
0%
95%
38%
25%
0%
4%
28%
1%
0%
1%
0%
0%
98%
44%
33%
4%
6%
8%
1%
0%
1%
1%
1%
97%
37%
24%
2%
2%
25%
1%
1%
2%
1%
1%
96%
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0011.png
PAGE 8 OF 53
Table II.6, continued
Landing live weight (tonnes)
Species
2012
Herring
86,062
Mackerel
35,672
Blue whiting
15
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
62
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%
0%
13%
17%
0%
0%
1%
0%
0%
93%
34%
10%
0%
10%
43%
0%
0%
1%
0%
0%
98%
44%
15%
7%
12%
18%
0%
0%
1%
0%
0%
97%
28%
12%
3%
4%
46%
0%
0%
1%
0%
0%
95%
48%
17%
10%
12%
7%
1%
1%
1%
0%
0%
97%
Source: The Danish Agrifish Agency Vessel Register, Logbook and Sales Notes Register 14
th
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
2A
0%
4A
542,014 62%
4B
313,894 36%
4C
593
0%
5B
6A
6B
7B
7D
5,779
1%
7E
2,656
0%
7G
7H
5,585
1%
7J
8,490
1%
Total
879,011 100%
2013
1,371
0%
588,594 59%
378,519 38%
2,532
0%
14,708
1%
2014
10,679
418,120
<173,077
144
2
139,485
2015
2016
1,662
0%
0%
488,106 55% 686,773 70%
335,706 38% 121,367 12%
15,948
2%
1,429
0%
145
0%
2,306
0%
35,500
4% 154,590 16%
4,400
0% 12,858
1%
2,105
0%
2,749
0%
286
0%
841
0%
2,431
0%
1%
56%
23%
0%
0%
19%
5,336
2,817
1%
0%
4,057
0%
1,738
0%
999,672 100%
2,420
2,339
671
3,172
1,299
751,408
0%
0%
0%
0%
1
0%
238
0%
0%
100% 887,163 100% 982,278 100%
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0012.png
PAGE 9 OF 53
Table II.7, continued
Landings live weight (tonnes)
Sub-division
2012
2A
0%
4A
101,131 52%
4B
85,596 44%
4C
207
0%
5B
0%
6A
0%
6B
0%
7B
0%
7D
933
0%
7E
416
0%
7G
0%
7H
2,888
1%
7J
4,473
2%
Total
195,644 100%
2013
144
0%
137,204 46%
156,632 52%
1,388
0%
0%
2,795
1%
0%
0%
929
0%
496
0%
0%
845
0%
769
0%
301,202 100%
2014
1,753
119,200
76,118
81
1
29,455
2015
2016
238
0%
0%
103,964 36% 123,172 61%
161,069 56% 35,984 18%
9,068
3%
726
0%
83
0%
973
0%
8,396
3% 32,923 16%
2,500
1%
5,550
3%
1,243
0%
0%
587
0%
140
0%
395
0%
1,181
1%
0%
0%
0%
111
0%
0%
0%
287,543 100% 200,760 100%
505
878
200
2,152
920
231,263
1%
52%
33%
0%
0%
13%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
1%
0%
100%
Source: The Danish Agrifish Agency Vessel Register, Logbook and Sales Notes Register 14
th
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
39
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
6
483
550,662
2015
72,918
21,014
93,520
31,528
3
315
219,298
2016
244,565
161,114
96,521
72,174
35%
39%
21%
6%
0%
0%
100%
39%
20%
29%
13%
0%
0%
1,411
604,288 100% 337,798
2013
80,451
25,347
88,653
29,175
88
42%
24%
20%
14%
0%
0%
100%
38%
16%
31%
14%
0%
0%
100% 574,374
43%
28%
17%
13%
0%
0%
100%
34%
23%
35%
7%
0%
0%
100%
36%
11%
40%
13%
0%
0%
996
223,714 100% 144,124
2014
58,719
20,550
43,381
20,478
41%
14%
30%
14%
0%
1%
100%
33%
10%
43%
14%
0%
0%
100%
2016
58,677
44%
27,776
21%
38,719
29%
8,784
7%
0%
0%
133,956 100%
Source: The Danish Agrifish Agency Vessel Register, Logbook and Sales Notes Register 14
th
Feb. 2017.
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0013.png
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
0%
Landings in UK harbours
from UK-EEZ
107,536
8%
Total landings in UK
108,785
9%
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
0%
6%
6%
2013
779
14,658
15,438
0%
3%
3%
2014
2,787
12,382
15,168
1%
3%
4%
2015
1,418
3,033
4,451
0%
0%
1%
2016
1,591
10,115
11,707
0%
3%
3%
2013
6,611
94,293
100,904
0%
7%
7%
2014
23,124
72,379
95,503
2%
6%
8%
2015
10,301
15,504
25,806
1%
1%
2%
2016
10,831
60,607
71,438
1%
4%
4%
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%
th
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
2%
Grimsby
3,798
3%
Total
108,786 100%
Landings live weight (tonnes)
Harbour
2012
Lerwick
3,879 21%
Peterhead
13,921 75%
Fraserbourgh
395
2%
Grimsby
285
2%
Total
18,480 100%
2013
68,048
67%
27,738
27%
1,360
1%
3,758
4%
100,904 100%
2013
9,260
60%
5,646
37%
190
1%
342
2%
15,438 100%
2014
73,846 77%
18,166 19%
449
0%
3,042
3%
95,503 100%
2014
9,379 62%
5,205 34%
280
2%
305
2%
15,169 100%
2015
22,060
2016
40,312 56%
27,905 39%
2,924
4%
297
0%
71,438 100%
2016
6,206 53%
4,865 42%
610
5%
25
0%
11,706 100%
85%
0%
0%
3,746 15%
25,806 100%
2015
4,111
92%
0%
0%
339
8%
4,450 100%
Source: The Danish Agrifish Agency Vessel Register, Logbook and Sales Notes Register 14
th
Feb. 2017.
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0014.png
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
9
Norway pout
131
Plaice
3,777
Landings live weight (tonnes)
Species
2012
Mackerel
4,366
Herring
13,705
Horse mackerel
4
Norway pout
50
Plaice
284
2013
86,683
8,801
1,662
3,719
2013
10,838
3,044
1,214
339
2014
77,836
12,225
13
963
3,033
2014
9,903
4,210
2
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
25
2%
6%
0%
0%
0%
6%
1%
0%
0%
0%
6%
1%
0%
0%
0%
1%
0%
0%
0%
0%
2%
2%
0%
0%
0%
1%
5%
0%
0%
0%
2%
1%
0%
0%
0%
2%
1%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
1%
2%
0%
0%
0%
Source: The Danish Agrifish Agency Vessel Register, Logbook and Sales Notes Register 14
th
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.
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0015.png
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
1
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
48
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
2
52
10
1,497
399
257
242
21
64
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
th
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.
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0016.png
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
23
120
19
2013
33
135
24
2014
31
131
24
2015
30
127
24
2016
47
148
32
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
5
3,056
65,228
5
2013
9,186
147,007
6
9,412
98,763
10
2014
12,956
105,704
12
15,294
103,872
15
2015
7,551
102,755
7
13,650
84,249
16
2016
14,257
77,946
18
22,911
84,549
27
Total
47,777
510,260
9
64,322
436,661
15
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
50
125
4
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.
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0017.png
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
3
340
775
300
6
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
78
25
2016
11,388
7,751
460
875
638
328
350
586
262
3
Total
23,548
18,779
6,800
4,252
3,958
2,128
1,375
950
679
393
141
170
60
25
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).
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0018.png
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
5%
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
4%
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
59
60
242
201
505
64
18
5%
5%
20%
16%
41%
5%
1%
2012
63
55
321
181
308
62
20
6%
5%
29%
17%
28%
6%
2%
2013
59
61
207
242
368
64
26
5%
5%
19%
22%
33%
6%
2%
2014
69
63
211
230
517
65
21
6%
5%
17%
18%
41%
5%
2%
2015
70
59
180
252
525
55
28
6%
5%
15%
20%
42%
4%
2%
Average
2011-2015
64
59
232
221
444
62
23
5%
5%
20%
19%
37%
5%
2%
Average
2011-2015
84
7%
1,233 100%
80
7%
1,089 100%
83
7%
1,109 100%
78
6%
1,255 100%
71
6%
1,240 100%
79
7%
1,185 100%
Source: The Danish AgriFish Agency database February 24
th
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
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0019.png
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%
1%
2%
2%
7%
1%
3%
1%
3%
3%
4%
2%
2%
5%
1%
2%
1%
2%
3%
5%
2%
0%
6%
1%
2%
1%
4%
3%
1%
2%
2%
7%
5%
1%
1%
3%
3%
1%
2%
0%
7%
2%
2%
0%
2%
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
1
2
4
12
2
1
0
2
24
2012
2
1
4
12
2
1
0
2
24
2013
3
2
0
17
3
1
0
3
28
2014
1 1%
2 3%
3 1%
25 11%
27 5%
0 1%
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%
1%
4%
2%
6%
0%
1%
0%
3%
2%
4%
2%
1%
7%
1%
1%
0%
3%
2%
5%
3%
0%
7%
1%
1%
1%
4%
3%
Source: The Danish AgriFish Agency database February 24
th
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).
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0020.png
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
3%
1,238
3%
743
0%
690
1%
87,830 64%
14,724
9%
6,672
3%
1,922
0%
2013
2014
7,654
2% 5,931
2%
5,072
10% 7,312
13%
1,155
0% 2,204
0%
16,722
13% 3,213
2%
95,482
60% 144,173
81%
16,088
9% 14,722
9%
1,912
1% 2,797
1%
41,133
5% 31,967
3%
6% 212,320
7%
2015
29,422
17,399
3,725
3,984
107,103
31,086
37,043
33,124
262,885
Average
2011-2015
11,558
4%
6,592 13%
1,648
0%
5,077
5%
109,195 65%
20,733 11%
10,538
5%
22,789
3%
188,131
6%
9%
22%
0%
3%
60%
13%
14%
3%
7%
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
6%
2012
0.1
0%
0.1
3%
0.1
0%
0.1
1%
8.9 68%
1.2
9%
1.3
3%
0.1
0%
11.8
7%
th
2013
0.6
1%
0.3
6%
0.1
0%
1.1
12%
10.0
65%
1.4
8%
0.5
1%
2.9
6%
17.1
7%
2014
0.3
1%
0.4
12%
0.2
1%
0.3
3%
20.0
88%
1.2
8%
0.8
1%
1.8
3%
25.0
11%
2015
0.34
1.10
0.24
0.34
15.08
2.33
8.94
1.44
29.80
1%
21%
1%
4%
64%
12%
13%
2%
12%
Average
2011-2015
0.4
1%
0.4 11%
0.1
0%
0.4
5%
12.4 70%
1.7 11%
2.5
5%
1.3
3%
19.2
9%
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).
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0021.png
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
9%
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
9%
2013
2014
9%
13%
15%
21%
0%
14%
9%
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
0%
67,609
13% 2,887,894
8% 1,891,227
8%
14%
16%
20%
0%
13%
9%
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
0%
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%
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0022.png
PAGE 19 OF 53
Table II.20, continued
Export quantity (1,000 tonnes)
Type
Fresh water fish
2011
43
5%
2012
46
5%
2013
44
4%
2014
56
6%
2015
59
6%
7%
32%
31%
2%
8%
4%
10%
100%
Average
2011-2015
49
73
337
272
31
89
35
106
5%
7%
34%
27%
3%
9%
4%
11%
Filet
73
8%
73 8%
76
7%
73
7%
73
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
34
3%
9 1%
77
7%
14
1%
24
Crustaceans and
molluscs
87
9%
87 9%
100
9%
88
9%
85
Salted, dried,
smoked
29
3%
32 3%
40
4%
37
4%
39
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
th
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.
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0023.png
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
51
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
6%
3%
3%
1%
2%
2%
3%
4%
9%
7%
0%
3%
1%
3%
6%
9%
7%
3%
2%
1%
1%
2%
2%
3%
9%
6%
5%
6%
0%
578,123 18%
209,016
1,289
46,112
16,303
6%
1%
2%
1%
331,022 10%
327,827
916
72,322
17,792
7%
2%
2%
1%
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%
24
1
2
0
9%
2%
2%
1%
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
1
2
2012
1
3
29
2013
1
4
29
26
1
1
0
2014
1
2
2015
1
2
26
16
1
3
0
2%
2%
2%
4%
9%
3%
5%
9%
9%
2%
1%
1%
1%
3%
2%
3%
8%
5%
4%
4%
0%
73 19%
19 10%
0 0%
1
0
2%
1%
31 10%
27
0
2
1
9%
0%
2%
2%
30 13%
0 0%
2
0
2%
1%
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).
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0024.png
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
24
7
0
2
3%
3,523
161
86
0
8
5%
2012
598
16
6
0
1
3%
2,975
92
50
0
6
3%
a k, a e age
-
a d UK essels
Average
2011-2015
889
27
10
5
4
3%
3,363
156
70
7
14
5%
2013
835
16
7
0
1
2%
3,292
115
0
0
2
3%
2014
978
41
18
14
7
4%
3,201
200
124
19
18
6%
2015
1139
39
13
10
9
3%
3,826
210
89
17
35
5%
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
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0025.png
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
55
5,220
33,520
161,410
2012
2013
2014
2015
1,563
2%
199
0%
1,225
1%
0
0%
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
0%
64
0%
885
0%
803
0%
13,571 15%
4,527
4% 37,531 19% 37,638 18%
9,543 10%
9,449
8%
3,707
2%
3,731
2%
92,192 100% 114,720 100% 200,364 100% 209,532 100%
Average
2011-2015
1,237
1%
35,321
23%
86,998
56%
401
0%
19,697
13%
11,990
8%
155,643
100%
Average
2011-2015
0
0%
3
11%
11
41%
0
0%
8
31%
4
15%
27
100%
2%
19%
55%
0%
3%
21%
100%
Landings live weight (1,000 tonnes)
Harbour
Esbjerg
Hanstholm
Hirtshals
Hvide Sande
Skagen
Thyborøn
Total
2011
0
3
8
0
2
12
24
2012
0
1%
2 10%
7 42%
0
0%
5 29%
3 17%
16 100%
2013
0
0%
2 16%
7 48%
0
0%
2 12%
4 25%
16 100%
2014
0
0%
2
6%
18 44%
0
0%
20 49%
0
1%
41 100%
2015
0
0%
6 16%
16 42%
0
0%
14 37%
2
5%
39 100%
1%
11%
32%
0%
7%
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).
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0026.png
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%
79
17%
2
0%
476
100%
Value
(1,000 DKK*)
2,459,700
50%
1,402,940
28%
1,047,650
21%
18,220
0%
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%
5
1%
45,550
1%
7
1%
63,770
1%
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%
92
14%
28
4%
Value
(1,000 DKK*)
7,166,837
100%
5,875,039
82%
997,545
14%
294,253
4%
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
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om 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).
I
, 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
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0028.png
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
9
5
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.
No.
Tonnes
Million DKK
Million DKK
Million DKK
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
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0029.png
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
5
2013
6
1
1
1
4
1
18
4
6
1
43
2014
5
1
1
1
4
1
15
3
5
1
37
2015
6
2016
3
4
2
16
2
7
1
37
2
4
20
2
6
1
41
4
16
4
5
1
33
Source: The Danish Agrifish Agency Vessel Register and Sales Notes Register 14
th
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
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0030.png
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
th
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.
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om 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
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om 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
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om 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.
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om 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.
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0035.png
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
Herring
Sandeel
Species #2
Sandeel
Hake
Mackerel
Mackerel
Norway pout
Species #3
Species #4
Species #5
Monk
Sandeel
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
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0036.png
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.
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0037.png
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
90
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
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0038.png
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.
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0039.png
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
5,133
22,700
25,645
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
2,312
6,801
7,568
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
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0040.png
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
2,502
4,880
6,995
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
1,181
1,442
1,994
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
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0041.png
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
649
-26
1,465
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
341
-53
335
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
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0042.png
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
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
2,640
15,017
16,182
794
794
2,995
3,192
3,290
3,500
4,444
5,319
34
34
19,042
20,484
30
30
21,099
21,863
11,083
11,158
89,500
92,130
996
997
3,211
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
49
29,422
86
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
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0043.png
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
UK
Skagen
Hirtshals
xDKUK
UK
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
36
688
33
39
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
47
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
UK
Hanstholm
Scenario 1
Given the
current CFP
1,381
348
211
915
772
558
88
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
55
78
25
115
48
170
952
1,102
3,579
4,578
Scenario 4
Transferred
landings
1,024
300
211
686
564
414
87
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
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0044.png
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
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
338,337
7%
0%
67%
34,593
5%
0%
16,090
21,057
538,297
2%
3%
72%
37,872
11,635
675,276
4%
1%
77%
40,901
6,539
505,029
6%
1%
75%
32,880
10,027
507,657
5%
1%
73%
481,345
72%
502,702 100%
669,678 100%
745,139 100%
875,022 100%
th
674,283 100%
693,365 100%
Source: The Danish Agrifish Agency Vessel Register, Logbook and Sales Notes Register 14 February 2017.
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om 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,
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0046.png
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.
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om 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.
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0048.png
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
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0049.png
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.
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0050.png
PAGE 47 OF 53
Annex 2 ICES statistical rectangles (square grid) FAO areas (blue bold lines) and country EEZ (red
bold lines)
2A
5b
5b
4A
6A
4B
7B
7A
4C
7G
7F
7E
7H
7J
7D
Source: Danish Agrifish Agency
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0051.png
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
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0052.png
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
90
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
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0053.png
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
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0054.png
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
6,664
16,389
18,030
18,030
78,187
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
207,426
229,106
209,988
207,426
231,668
616,833
2015
6,028
6,028
38,208
45,020
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
2,706
13,505
13,885
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
5,133
22,700
25,645
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
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0055.png
PAGE 52 OF 53
Annex 6, continued
Landings value
2014
2,221
2,221
4,097
4,507
4,507
15,637
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
23,047
25,456
23,332
23,047
25,741
2015
2,009
2,009
9,552
11,255
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
2,706
6,752
6,942
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
2,312
6,801
7,568
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
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
91
561
341
370
91
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
MOF, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 80: Nyhed og notat om mulige konsekvenser for dansk fiskeri som følge af Storbritanniens udmeldelse af EU
1813884_0056.png
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
44
2,732
24,520
9,903
908
233
99
642
45
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
37
913
810
339
80
39
339
1,317
2016
0
32,716
1,441
14,841
8,319
94,662
0
0
3,856
4,807
2,376
650
0
12,343
0
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
10
195
25
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
88
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
40
759
3,842
870
405
12,812
0
34
74
1,577
2,668
589
233
97
522
45
260
120
52
64
1,012
Scenario 2
2015
5,270
19,654
42
38,550
12,368
144,341
2,374
8,269
15,627
2,001
904
1,318
0
10,483
50
562
2,606
5,471
1,646
13,537
90
46
582
8,323
1,250
753
312
37
511
362
214
37
3
78
956
2016
0
13,743
430
13,908
8,245
92,790
0
0
3,856
2,677
128
0
0
2,597
0
231
13,460
8,200
3,105
9,401
20
20
341
3,278
1,563
1,174
274
497
545
551
523
9
21
3
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
34
19,042
30
517
6,636
4,847
1,719
11,917
36
33
332
4,393
1,827
839
273
210
526
319
332
55
25
48
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
40
844
7,686
4,392
830
17,233
0
38
330
3,436
3,343
692
233
98
563
45
290
161
116
243
1,151
Scenario 3
2015
5,270
20,080
42
39,530
12,470
149,830
2,378
8,269
15,893
2,584
1,132
1,665
0
13,481
50
574
4,890
7,002
1,675
18,602
260
58
621
10,782
1,250
913
332
37
666
637
264
64
39
240
1,079
2016
0
14,716
430
14,841
8,319
94,418
0
0
3,856
2,684
128
0
0
2,597
0
237
18,059
10,310
3,210
11,508
1,805
23
732
3,686
1,900
1,439
331
497
716
907
678
10
189
25
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
34
20,484
30
552
10,212
7,235
1,905
15,781
688
39
561
5,968
2,164
1,014
299
211
648
530
411
78
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
40
844
7,863
4,915
1,296
17,501
0
39
422
4,941
4,568
692
233
98
563
45
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
47
25,364
219
579
6,823
7,568
1,736
20,707
579
72
866
12,113
1,414
942
337
37
726
679
270
78
39
324
1,100
2016
0
15,530
475
14,841
8,319
94,512
0
0
3,856
4,774
128
0
0
3,712
0
261
20,855
11,681
3,430
13,534
2,010
31
1,102
5,295
2,282
1,439
331
497
769
970
678
10
195
25
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
49
29,422
86
561
11,847
8,055
2,154
17,247
863
47
797
7,450
2,755
1,024
300
211
686
564
414
87
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
xDKUK
Hanstholm
Skagen
Hirtshals
Thyborøn
Hvide Sande
Hanstholm
Skagen
Hirtshals
Thyborøn
xDKUK
UK
Skagen
Hirtshals
xDKUK
UK
Hanstholm
Thyborøn
xDKUK
Hanstholm
Thyborøn
Hanstholm
Thyborøn
xDKUK
UK
Hanstholm
Source: Own calculations