Policy paper

Fisheries management plan for Southern North Sea and Channel skates and rays

Updated 16 December 2025

Applies to England

© Crown copyright 2025

This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: psi@nationalarchives.gov.uk.

Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.

This publication is available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/southern-north-sea-and-channel-skate-and-ray-fisheries-management-plan-fmp/southern-north-sea-and-channel-skate-and-ray-fisheries-management-plan

Executive summary

This fisheries management plan (FMP) was developed in collaboration with a working group made up of fisheries stakeholders, including commercial and recreational fishers. The Marine Management Organisation (MMO) also engaged with:

  • coastal communities
  • supply-chain businesses
  • scientists
  • government agencies

On strategic issues across all FMPs, Defra sought contributions from environmental non-governmental organisations. These contributions were considered in the preparation of this FMP.

This FMP covers the following species of rays:

  • blonde ray (Raja brachyura)
  • cuckoo ray (Leucoraja naevus)
  • small-eyed ray (Raja microocellata)
  • spotted ray (Raja montagui)
  • starry ray (Amblyraja radiata)
  • thornback ray (Raja clavata)
  • undulate ray (Raja undulata)

What is an FMP?

An FMP is an evidence-based action plan that charts a course to sustainable fisheries. They are long-term plans that must be reviewed and, if necessary, revised at least every 6 years. An FMP sets out a vision and goals for the target fishery (or fisheries), together with the policies and management interventions necessary to achieve these goals.

FMPs will be reviewed and updated to ensure they respond to new evidence and practical experience to remain effective.   

Why an FMP for Southern North Sea and Channel skates and rays?

Compared to most bony fish, skates and rays (Rajiformes) are long-lived, slow-growing and late to mature, and so were prioritised for an FMP due to the potential risk of over-exploitation. They are a valuable bycatch in most bottom-trawl fisheries, some of which may also target skates and rays in certain areas at certain times of year. They are also a target species or bycatch in:

  • gill net
  • tangle-net
  • long-line fisheries

Skates and rays are a popular target species for boat-based recreational fishers, although catches from shore-angling also occur. Anglers who target skates and rays will usually practise catch-and-release, and so levels of mortality from recreational fisheries are uncertain. 

Southern North Sea and Channel skates and rays FMP species will be referred to in this document as ‘FMP species’. In 2021, the 2,404 tonnes (t) landings of FMP species by UK and EU vessels fishing in these UK waters were valued at £3,948,895. These UK waters are:

  • the Southern North Sea (International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) areas 4b and 4c)
  • the English Channel (ICES areas 7d and 7e)

Within the 7 FMP species, there are 11 stocks in scope of the FMP. There is sufficient available scientific evidence to assess the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) reference points in English waters of the Southern North Sea and English Channel for 8 stocks within scope of this FMP. MSY reference points can be determined for stocks classified as ICES data categories 1 or 2, and MSY proxies can be established for data category 3 stocks.

5 of the stocks in the scope of the FMP assessed to MSY by ICES are considered data category 2. 3 of the stocks are considered data category 3, with MSY proxies in place. As the available scientific advice is sufficient to enable an assessment of MSY for these 8 stocks, this FMP sets out policies that maintain or restore those stocks to sustainable levels (or contribute to that).

The remaining 3 stocks in scope have not been assessed by ICES and are considered data category 5. As the available scientific evidence for those stocks is not sufficient to enable an assessment of their MSY, the FMP sets out policies that maintain or increase the level of the stocks, adopting a precautionary approach to fisheries management. It also sets out steps to improve the evidence of the stocks towards enabling an assessment of MSY.

FMP vision and policies

This FMP’s vision is that skate and ray fisheries in the Southern North Sea and English Channel will be managed to achieve environmental, social and economic sustainability, for the benefit of coastal communities and wider society.

The FMP policy goals are based around key themes of:

  • sustainable fisheries
  • social and economic factors
  • evidence

The policy goals will contribute towards the Fisheries Act 2020 (the Act) objectives. The policy goals are as follows.  

Sustainable fisheries:

  • harvest stocks of blonde ray (in 4b, 4c and 7d), cuckoo ray, spotted ray, thornback ray (in subarea 4, 3a and 7d) and undulate ray sustainably, with biomasses maintained above the level capable of producing MSY
  • implement effective management that contributes to the restoration of starry ray stocks to levels capable of producing MSY and to maintain or increase the level of blonde ray (in 7e), small eyed ray and thornback ray (in 7e)
  • deliver effective management through, where possible, identifying, minimising and mitigating pressures on skate and ray stocks

Evidence:

  • seek to improve datasets to support a MSY assessment of thornback ray in 7e, blonde ray in 7e and small-eyed ray in 7d and 7e
  • better understand wider skate and ray species evidence gaps and develop the evidence base

Social and economic:

  • better understand and optimise economic and social benefits
  • develop partnership working to build capacity for industry to be able to input into matters affecting skate and ray fisheries management

In certain situations, the FMP is required to have policies that contribute to maintaining the stocks at sustainable levels. This is required by section 6(3)(a) of the Act for stocks where:

  • there is sufficient available scientific evidence to enable an assessment of the stock’s maximum sustainable yield; and
  • their biomass levels are currently considered to be sustainable (because fishing pressure on the stock is below fish mortality at maximum sustainable yield (FMSY) or the FMSY proxy, and biomass or stock size is above MSY Btrigger or Itrigger)

Btrigger is the value of spawning stock biomass that triggers a specific management action. Itrigger is a proxy value for Btrigger from more data limited stock assessments.

For this FMP, the stocks that are maintained include:

  • blonde ray (in 4b, 4c and 7d)
  • cuckoo ray, spotted ray
  • thornback ray (in subarea 4 and divisions 3a and 7d)
  • undulate ray

This is covered by policy goal 1, which sets out to continue current management to contribute to maintaining their status.

In other situations, the FMP is required to have policies that contribute to restoring the stocks at sustainable levels. This is required by section 6(3)(a) of the Act for stocks where:

  • there is sufficient available scientific evidence to enable an assessment of the stock’s maximum sustainable yield; but
  • their biomass levels are currently not considered to be sustainable (fishing pressure on the stock is above FMSY or FMSY proxy, and biomass or stock size is below MSY Btrigger or Itrigger)

This applies to starry ray, and so policy goal 2 sets out an action to continue the current prohibition of fishing to contribute to resorting the stock.

For the remaining stocks, available scientific evidence is insufficient to assess the stocks’ MSY. The goal is to have policies that maintain or increase the level of the stocks, as required by section 6(3)(b) and (4) of the Act.

This applies to:

  • blonde ray (in 7e)
  • small eyed ray (in 7de)
  • thornback ray (in 7e)

Although the stocks are data-limited and there is not the available evidence to assess MSY, the ICES advice indicates the current level of exploitation is appropriate for the stocks. However, should this change further, we will consider taking action. As such, policy goal 2 sets out actions that will be taken forward and, where supported by evidence, management measures will be put in place, as listed below. If determined to be appropriate, these measures would aim to provide protection primarily for the 3 data-limited stocks. Where there are benefits to doing so, certain management measures will be considered more widely across all FMP stocks.

The measures are:

  • consider the implementation of a minimum conservation reference size (MCRS)
  • consider the implementation of a maximum conservation reference size (MaxCRS)
  • introduce voluntary handling guidelines for recreational and commercial fishers
  • explore alternative approaches to current group total allowable catches (TACs)
  • explore seasonal and spatial closures

There is an existing UK and EU commitment on alternative approaches to the current group TAC management. It covers all stocks that are currently managed by a group TAC, however this could provide particular benefit to the data-limited stocks.

The FMP recognises that Southern North Sea and English Channel fisheries are distinct, given the physical characteristics of these regions that support differing habitats and fish assemblages. Therefore, management interventions will need to take spatial-temporal variability into consideration.

Additionally, the stocks within scope of this FMP are shared with the EU, and relevant joint commitments have been made through the Specialised Committee on Fisheries (SCF). These commitments include to explore alternative approaches to the current group TAC management and the sentinel fishery for small-eyed ray in 7e. Therefore, the UK will seek to develop measures jointly where appropriate, in recognition of the importance and value of consistent management across shared stocks.

Introduction

The UK government has responsibilities under international law and is committed to managing our fisheries in a sustainable way. Meeting our responsibilities will support vibrant, profitable and sustainable fishing industries, alongside a healthy and productive marine environment.

The 2018 Fisheries White Paper: Sustainable fisheries for future generations states the objective of having ‘a more competitive, profitable and sustainable fishing industry across the whole of the UK and setting a gold standard for sustainable fishing around the world’. The subsequent Fisheries Act 2020:

  • sets out the legal framework governing fisheries in the UK
  • provides for UK fisheries policy authorities to prepare and publish FMPs
  • sets out policies designed to restore stocks and maintain them at sustainable levels

This Southern North Sea and Channel skates and rays FMP has been prepared and published for the purposes of the Act, in accordance with the policies and proposals in the Joint Fisheries Statement (JFS). It meets the requirements of the Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes Regulations 2004 (the SEA regulations). The relevant authority for this FMP is Defra.   

In addition to meeting the requirements of the Act for FMPs, this FMP also supports the implementation of wider commitments to protect the marine environment, restore biodiversity, and address climate change. In particular, the Environment Improvement Plan 2025 restated the commitment to deliver FMPs. Each FMP also supports commitments under the:

Scope and status of the FMP fisheries

This section outlines the status of the Southern North Sea and English Channel skate and ray fisheries, as well as setting out the species in scope.

Species in scope

The Southern North Sea and Channel skates and rays FMP in this first iteration covers the following ray stocks:  

  • blonde ray (Raja brachyura) in divisions 4b, 4c and 7d
  • blonde ray (Raja brachyura) in division 7e
  • cuckoo ray (Leucoraja naevus) in subareas 6 and 7, and in divisions 8a, 8b and 8d
  • cuckoo ray (Leucoraja naevus) in subarea 4 and in division 3a
  • small-eyed ray (Raja microocellata) in divisions 7d and 7e
  • spotted ray (Raja montagui) in subarea 4 and in divisions 3a and 7d
  • spotted ray (Raja montagui) in divisions 7a and 7e to 7h
  • starry ray (Amblyraja radiata) in subareas 2 and 4, and in division 3a
  • thornback ray (Raja clavata) in division 7e
  • thornback ray (Raja clavata) in subarea 4 and in divisions 3a and 7d
  • undulate ray (Raja undulata) in divisions 7d to 7e

Future iterations of the FMP may expand the species list to include other skate and ray species found in English waters.

An overview of the stock status, biology and key evidence gaps relating to these species has been included in this FMP. Additional evidence has been included in the supporting evidence statement which is published in the Fisheries Management Plans Evidence Statements - MF1298.

At present, the stock boundaries for all species are considered to sit partly or wholly within the scope of this FMP.

Location

This FMP covers English waters of the Southern North Sea and English Channel, running from Northumberland to Cornwall. Specifically, the FMP area is defined by English waters in ICES divisions 4b and 4c (Southern North Sea) and 7d and 7e (English Channel), as shown in figure 1.

The MO is responsible for managing fisheries and carrying out assurance activities in English waters out to 200 nautical miles (nm). It leads on managing fishing activities between 6nm and 200nm. Within the Southern North Sea and Channel skate and ray FMP, 8 inshore fisheries and conservation authorities (IFCAs) deliver additional fisheries conservation and management within the inshore 0nm to 6nm zone, shown in figure 1.

Commercial UK and EU vessels operating in the English Channel and Southern North Sea have access to the shared stocks within scope of this FMP under the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) between the UK and the EU.

Stock status: stocks with ICES assessment

In total, there are 11 stocks of rays within scope of this FMP.

There is sufficient available scientific evidence to assess the MSY reference points in English waters of the Southern North Sea and English Channel for 8 stocks within scope of this FMP. MSY reference points can be determined for stocks classified as ICES data categories 1 or 2, and MSY proxies can be established for data category 3 stocks. Five of the stocks in the scope of the FMP assessed to MSY by ICES are considered data category 2. Three of the stocks are considered data category 3, with MSY proxies in place. As the available scientific advice is sufficient to enable an assessment of MSY for these 8 stocks, this FMP sets out policies that maintain or restore those stocks to sustainable levels (or contribute to that).

The remaining 3 stocks in scope have not been assessed by ICES and are considered data category 5. As the available scientific evidence for those stocks is not sufficient to enable an assessment of their MSY, the FMP sets out policies that maintain or increase the level of the stocks, adopting a precautionary approach to fisheries management. It also sets out steps to improve the evidence of the stocks towards enabling an assessment of MSY.

The following species are classified as ICES categories 1 to 3.

Blonde ray (Raja brachyura)

There are 2 blonde ray stocks assessed by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) within this FMP area. This blonde ray stock occurs in the central and southern North Sea and eastern English Channel (divisions 4b, 4c and 7d), with a separate stock in the western English Channel (division 7e). While the stock areas both extend beyond the FMP area, the waters of the FMP area are important grounds for this species. The waters around the Channel Islands are also important fishing grounds for blonde ray. 

These stocks are data category 2. See ICES advice: Blonde ray (Raja brachyura) in divisions 4b, 4c and 7d (Central and southern North Sea and eastern English Channel). The ICES advice sheet for 2024 and 2025 advises an MSY approach.

Fishing pressure on the stock is below FMSY, and biomass is above MSY Btrigger and Blim, so it is considered to be at a sustainable level.

Cuckoo ray (Leucoraja naevus)

There are 2 cuckoo ray stocks assessed by ICES within the FMP area. One of these stocks occurs in the North Sea ecoregion (North Sea, Skagerrak and eastern English Channel). A separate stock occurs along the western seaboard (West of Scotland, Celtic Sea, western English Channel and northern Bay of Biscay). While the stock definition would imply it is present in the eastern English Channel, cuckoo ray is infrequent in both the eastern English Channel and Southern North Sea. 

The details of the cuckoo ray in subarea 4 and division 3a are:

The details of the cuckoo ray in subareas 6 and 7 and divisions 8a to 8b, and 8d are:

Spotted ray (Raja montagui)

There are 2 spotted ray stocks assessed by ICES within the FMP area. One of these stocks occurs in the North Sea ecoregion (North Sea, Skagerrak and eastern English Channel, subarea 4 and divisions 3a and 7d). A separate stock occurs in the western English Channel, Bristol Channel, Irish Sea and Celtic Sea (divisions 7a, and 7e to 7h). 

The details of the spotted ray in subarea 4 and divisions 3a and 7d are:

The details of the spotted ray in divisions 7a, and 7e to 7h are:

Starry ray (Amblyraja radiata)

There is one starry ray stock in the FMP area, occurring in the North Sea, although the main area of starry ray distribution is outside the FMP area. The species is not known to occur in the English Channel.

The details of the starry ray in subareas 2 and 4 and division 3a are:

Thornback ray (Raja clavata)

There are 2 thornback ray stocks assessed by ICES within the FMP area. One of these stocks occurs in the North Sea, Skagerrak and eastern English Channel (subarea 4 and in divisions 3a and 7d). A separate stock occurs in the western English Channel (division 7e), detailed in the category 5 section below.

For the former stock, the southwestern parts of the North Sea, including the Wash and Outer Thames Estuary, are important grounds for this species. There is a high abundance of both adults and juveniles (Ellis and others, 2008a and b; McCully and others, 2013). Lyme Bay in the western English Channel is another area with a high local abundance of thornback ray. 

The details of the thornback ray in subarea 4 and in divisions 3a and 7d are:

Undulate ray (Raja undulata)

There is one undulate ray stock in the FMP area, occurring in the English Channel. Some of the waters of the FMP area have a high relative abundance of this stock, although there are also important grounds in French waters and around the Channel Islands, where undulate ray is also abundant. Individuals from the main English Channel stock may occur in the Southern North Sea occasionally, but these may be considered negligible. 

The details of the undulate ray in divisions 7d and 7e are:

Stock status: stocks lacking ICES stock assessment

The following species are considered data-limited and are category 5. Therefore, based on current ICES assessments, there is insufficient evidence to determine MSY or a proxy for MSY, and ICES provide precautionary approach advice for these species.

Blonde ray (Raja brachyura)

The details of the blonde ray in division 7e are:

Small-eyed ray (Raja microocellata)

There is one small-eyed ray stock in the FMP area, occurring in the English Channel, although individuals may occasionally occur in the Southern North Sea. Given the coastal nature of this species, the waters of the FMP area likely form a large proportion of the stock distribution. 

The details of the small-eyed ray in divisions 7d and 7e are:

Thornback ray (Raja clavata)

The details of the thornback ray in division 7e are:

  • data category 5
  • see ICES advice: Thornback ray (Raja clavata) in Division 7e (western English Channel)
  • the stock is not assessed using the MSY approach
  • ICES provide precautionary approach advice for 2025 to 2028 and did not apply the precautionary buffer
  • the landings have overall increased since 2009, along with a reduction in the fishing effort of the fleets associated with catch of thornback ray in the area, which suggests an increase in the stock biomass (ICES, 2024)

There is a variety in the quality of data for the FMP species, therefore this FMP lays out a suite of goals and measures aimed at improving data collection and understanding of fisheries and species covered by this FMP. In particular, these steps aim to facilitate future stock assessments for the species currently lacking ICES MSY assessments. For these data-limited stocks, the FMP seeks to follow a precautionary approach to domestic fisheries management to improve or maintain stock status. At the same time, we will work to improve evidence on these stocks as a priority to progress towards managing these against MSY.

Feedback from stakeholders has suggested some concern around the sustainability of thornback in ICES area 4c, and of undulate ray in 7d and 7e. Specifically:

  • IFCA officers and recreational anglers reported a localised reduction in undulate abundance within ICES areas 7d and 7e (English Channel)
  • commercial and recreational fishers expressed concern about a reduction in thornbacks in ICES Area 4c (southeast England), particularly the Thames Estuary area

Concerns raised about 7d and 7e (English Channel) centred on:

  • the reported localised reduction
  • potential impacts of TAC increases since updated ICES advice
  • exploring the efficacy of existing management for protecting juvenile and breeding assemblages

This FMP proposes actions to address concerns on the status of the stocks through evidence gathering and management intervention, where required.

Marine planning

Marine planning is a devolved function in the UK. In English waters, the MMO has delegated powers to prepare, implement, monitor and report on marine plans. The Secretary of State (SoS) for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs is the marine planning authority. English waters are divided into regional marine planning areas, and this FMP overlaps with the marine plans of the:

  • North East
  • East
  • South East
  • South
  • South West

The marine plans provide a policy framework and a clear, evidence-based approach to inform decision making by marine users and regulators. This helps them decide where, when or how activities might take place within the marine area, balancing environmental, economic and social factors.

Due to the extensive spatial remit of the Southern North Sea and English Channel skates and rays FMP, there are many other commercial and recreational activities within these FMP areas. Commercial activities include:

  • offshore windfarm development (particularly off the east coast)
  • marine aggregate extraction
  • major shipping routes
  • ports

Recreational activities include:

  • angling
  • yachting
  • diving

Marine protected areas (MPAs)

Within the geographic area covered by this FMP, there are 111 protected area designations, including:

Inside the boundaries of English MPAs, the MMO and IFCAs assess human activities that could interact with the designated features of MPAs and introduce management where required.

In parallel with the FMP development, the MMO are carrying out an evaluation of fishing activities in all the MPAs at least 6nm offshore. This evaluates the best available evidence on the impact of fishing gear in the MPAs, considering the current condition of the sites.

The Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 and Habitats Regulations give the MMO powers to:

  • manage a range of activities, including fishing, to further the conservation objectives of any MCZ and European Marine Sites in England up to 12nm inshore
  • manage fishing for the conservation of marine flora, fauna and habitats anywhere in England’s seas

The Act amended the Marine and Coastal Access Act, giving the MMO the power to manage fishing outside of MPAs. 

This work is at various stages of assessment, with some byelaws already in place. The upcoming stages of the review are due to go out to consultation, and where necessary, management will be put into place by the end of 2024. Further information on the management of fisheries activity occurring within MPAs can be found at Managing fishing in marine protected areas.

Therefore, appropriate management should either be in place or introduced soon, to ensure any fishing within MPAs is compatible with MPA conservation objectives.

Figure 1. Map showing jurisdictional boundaries and IFCA districts in the scope of this FMP. (Collins Bartholomew, ICES and MMO copyright and database right 2024)

Figure 1 shows the geographic extent of the Southern North Sea and Channel skates and rays FMP area. The map shows the southwest tip of Cornwall and ICES subdivisions 7e and 7d, and the southern North Sea coastline and ICES subdivisions 4c and 4b. The following IFCA districts are marked along the coastline:

  • Cornwall
  • Devon and Severn
  • Eastern
  • Isles of Scilly
  • Kent and Essex
  • North Eastern
  • Northumberland
  • Southern
  • Sussex

Other territorial sea boundaries and the UK exclusive economic zone line are also marked.

Description of the fisheries

The species within scope are caught across a range of seasonal and gear-specific fishery subsets and are generally caught in mixed fisheries with other quota stocks. The below information on landings weight and value has been extracted from commercial fisheries’ landings data for the years 2016 to 2021, to enable comparisons between available data for both UK and EU vessels. This information has been presented to give an overview of the commercial importance of the FMP species.

The total UK and EU combined landings (over a reference period from 2016 to 2021) for the species within this FMP amounts to 13,380 tonnes (t), the value being approximately £21.8 million.

By weight of catches, the UK and EU landings were relatively even, at 6,883t (51%) and 6,496t (49%) respectively.

EU vessels’ landings were worth significantly more, equating to £12.9 million (59%), with UK vessels’ landings totalling £8.9 million (41%).

Annual averages from 2016 to 2021 show that:

  • UK vessels landed 1,147t and £1.5 million
  • EU vessels landed 1,083t and £2.1 million

This highlights that although there is relative parity in weight of catch, the EU catch is of greater value. This may be due to increased commercial value for the species within EU markets.

Bottom trawls (73.7%) and drift and fixed nets (20.2%) account for the highest landings of FMP species. Broken down by weight:

  • demersal trawl landed 6,665t (49.8%)
  • beam trawl landed 3,189t (23.8%)
  • drift and fixed nets landed 2,708t (20.2%)

The remaining gears together landed 871t (6.1%), with:

  • demersal seine landing 3.6%
  • longlines landing 1.2%
  • a combination of dredge, pots and traps, handlines and pelagic trawls landing the remaining 1.4%

For the UK fleet, the predominant methods are:

  • demersal trawls landing 2,917t (42.4%)
  • drift and fixed nets landing 2.292t (33.3%)
  • beam trawls landing 1,305t (19%)

For the EU fleet, the predominant methods are:

  • demersal trawls, which landed 3,748t (57.7%)
  • beam trawls, which landed 1,884t (29.0%)

The EU fleet comprises significantly fewer drift and fixed nets than the UK fleet at 415t (6.4%). Demersal seines landed 357t (5.5%).

As skate and ray species are caught as mixed-fishery bycatch by recreational anglers, and through targeted seasonal fisheries by a range of gears and vessels, the range of fishing activities that interact with the species is broad. Furthermore, as the ray species assemblage and the availability of other fishing opportunities differs regionally, there is variation in the composition of skate and ray landings by species across the Southern North Sea and English Channel.

Distribution of landings by ICES area

Commercial fishing occurs across the Southern North Sea and English Channel, with the greatest quantities of landings coming from ICES area 7e. The combined catch weight for the focal species across all ICES areas from 2016 to 2021 within this FMP totals 13,380t. Averaged across the years, annual landings of skates and rays were 2,230t and £3.6 million for UK and EU vessels combined.

Distributed across the 4 ICES areas, the average weight and value of landings by ICES area for the UK and the EU are given in tonnes and pounds, respectively.

Table 1. Annual average landing weight (t) and value (£ thousands) for UK and EU vessels from 2016 to 2021.

Beside each data point in the table is the proportion (in brackets) which that data point represents, out of the combined UK and EU total.

ICES area UK weight (t) UK value (£ thousands) EU weight (t) EU value (£ thousands)
4b 14.43 (1%) 15.34 (Less than 1%) 30.38 (1%) 56.40 (2%)
4c 230.02 (10%) 277.98 (8%) 193.32 (9%) 406.19 (11%)
7d 258.34 (12%) 303.26 (8%) 407.82 (18%) 803.28 (22%)
7e 644.41 (29%) 887.26 (24%) 451.23 (20%) 877.63 (24%)
Total 1,147.20 (51%) 1,483.84 (41%) 1,082.74 (49%) 2,143.50 (59%)

Port landings data is not available for EU vessels. Port data has been provided for UK vessel landings from each ICES area below. Figures are given as summed totals from 2016 to 2021.

The Northeast (4b) landed 87t (1.3% of UK landings) of skates and rays during this reference period. Ports with the most landings were:

  • Harlingen
  • Netherlands with (23t, 27% of 4b catch)
  • North Shields (19t, 22%)
  • Hartlepool (14t, 16%)
  • Scarborough (13t, 16%)

All other ports landed less than 5t.

The East (4c) landed 1380t (20% of UK landings) of skates and rays during this reference period. Ports with the most landings were:

  • Ramsgate (246t, 18%)
  • Folkstone (153t, 11%)
  • West Mersea (135t, 10%)
  • Lowestoft (127t, 9%)

All other ports landed less than 100t.

The Southeast (7d) landed 1550t (22.5% of UK landings) of skates and rays during this reference period. Ports with the most landings were:

  • Shoreham-by-Sea (326t, 21%)
  • Rye (240t, 15%)
  • Newhaven (166t, 11%)
  • Eastbourne (133t, 9%)

 All other ports landed less than 100t.

The Southwest (7e) accounts for 3,867t (56.2% of UK landings) of skates and rays during this reference period. Ports with the most landings were:

  • Brixham (1,536t, 40%)
  • Newlyn (738t, 19%)
  • Lyme Regis (313t, 8%)
  • Plymouth (302t, 8%)

Consequently, the western Channel fishery for skates and rays is incredibly important for the skates and rays FMP.

Annual species landings by weight and value averaged across 2016 to 2021 for each ICES area are given in Table 2 and Table 3 below.

Table 2. Average annual landed weight (t) of FMP species by ICES area from 2016 to 2021.

ICES area 4b 4c 7d 7e Total
Blonde ray 12.21 57.1 78.99 360.25 508.56
Cuckoo ray 0.79 0.06 0.81 213.1 214.74
Raja rays (not elsewhere included) 0.97 0.44 1.72 3.49 6.62
Rays and skates (not elsewhere included) 0.01 0.06 0.89 3.09 4.05
Rays, stingrays, mantas (not elsewhere included) 0.11 0.93 3.66 0.01 4.7
Small-eyed ray None 0.06 12.86 10.13 23.04
Spotted ray 9.3 50.06 25.33 126.37 211.07
Starry ray Less than 0.01 Less than 0.01 0.06 0.19 0.26
Thornback ray 21.41 314.58 524.73 333.9 1,194.63
Undulate ray None 0.05 17.12 45.11 62.29
Cross-species average 44.81 423.34 666.17 1,095.64 2,229.95

Table 3. Average annual landed value (£ thousands) of FMP species by ICES area from 2016 to 2021.

ICES area 4b 4c 7d 7e Total
Blonde ray 22.62 124.42 167.20 667.57 981.81  
Cuckoo ray 0.50 0.10 1.37 294.02 295.98  
Raja rays (not included elsewhere) 0.81 0.55 2.27 2.44 6.06  
Rays and skates (not included elsewhere) 0.03 0.11 1.28 4.17 5.59  
Rays, stingrays, mantas (not included elsewhere) 0.21 1.86 7.35 0.02 9.34  
Small-eyed ray None 0.12 15.38 15.73 31.24  
Spotted ray 14.37 96.27 39.61 199.74 349.99  
Starry ray Less than 0.01 Less than 0.01 0.07 0.24 0.32  
Thornback ray 33.20 460.68 852.43 514.06 1,860.35  
Undulate ray None 0.08 19.70 66.90 86.67  
Cross-species average 71.74 684.18 1,106.55 1,764.89 3,627.35  

Status of the fisheries

The South North Sea and Channel skates and rays FMP stocks are of both commercial and recreational importance.

Commercial fisheries

The Southern North Sea and Channel skates and rays FMP fisheries average £1.5 million to UK vessels a year. 98% of this is landed by English vessels. The remaining 2% is landed by Scottish, Northern Irish and Crown Dependency registered vessels.

Species EU annual mean landings by weight (t) UK annual mean landings by weight (t)
Starry ray 0 0.31
Small-eyed ray 3.79 19.25
Undulate ray 16.74 45.55
Cuckoo ray 141.44 73.31
Spotted ray 128.18 82.89
Blonde ray 203.87 304.69
Thornback ray 578.22 616.40

Figure 2. Annual average landings by ranked by weight (t) of UK landings compared to the EU27 (annual average of 2016 to 2021).

An average of 2,230 tonnes (t) of focal species were landed annually from the FMP area (see figure 2), 54% of which was thornback ray (total accounting for 1,195 tonnes (t) was £1.9 million), 27% was blonde ray (total accounting for 509t was £997,000), 10% spotted ray (total accounting for 211t was £349,000) and 8% cuckoo ray (total accounting for 215t was £297,000). Together these comprise 96% of the average annual landings by weight and value. Undulate ray, small-eyed ray, starry ray and aggregated skate and ray species groupings (that is ‘rays and skates not elsewhere included (nei)’) make up the remaining 4% of the average landed catch annually by weight and value.

Species EU value (£ GBP) UK value (£ GBP)
Starry ray 9 375
Small-eyed ray 7,462 23,775
Undulate ray 33,734 52,935
Cuckoo ray 244,897 51,080
Spotted ray 260,843 89,151
Blonde ray 461,361 520,452
Thornback ray 1,118,081 742,273

Figure 3. Annual average landings ranked by value (GBP £) of UK landings compared to the EU27 (annual average of 2016 to 2021).

Figure 3 fisheries landings data show thornback rays to be the most important species within scope of the FMP, by weight and value, for both the UK and EU fleets. Blonde rays, spotted rays, cuckoo rays and undulate rays emerge as the second, third, fourth and fifth most important species by weight and value, respectively. Notably, catch composition and landing value does vary between UK and EU fleets. See below for more detail.

Small-eyed rays average 20t and £33,700, mostly from UK vessels. Starry ray landings (less than £1,000) are virtually negligible.

Table 4. The weight (t) and value of UK and EU landings of the top 5 species.

Species UK weight (t) UK value (£ thousands) EU weight (t) EU value (£ thousands)
Thornback ray 616.40 746.18 578 1,118.08
Blonde ray 304.69 535.98 204 461.36
Spotted ray 82.89 89.12 128 260.84
Cuckoo ray 73.31 52.34 141 244.90
Undulate ray 45.55 58.47 17 33.73

Table 5 shows the price per tonne and difference in average annual landings value for the 5 most commercially important skate and ray species. It is notable that EU vessels consistently command a higher price per tonne for skates and rays than UK vessels, suggesting a stronger EU market for these species.

Table 5. The price per tonne difference between UK and EU landings.

Species UK price per tonne (£) EU price per tonne (£) Difference in price per tonne (£)
Thornback ray 1,210.55 1,933.65 -723.10
Blonde ray 1,759.12 2,263.01 -503.89
Spotted ray 1,075.14 2,035.02 -959.88
Cuckoo ray 714.06 1,731.47 -1,017.42
Undulate ray 1,283.65 2,015.72 -732.07

FMP economy

FMP dependence groups Under 5% 5 to 20% 20 to 40% 40 to 60% 60 to 80% 80 to 100% Total
2016 727 162 40 15 7 9 960
2017 674 187 46 14 6 12 936
2018 617 161 48 19 12 13 870
2019 584 165 41 18 9 9 826
2020 503 169 41 5 6 6 730
2021 535 144 33 17 4 8 741
2022 518 149 26 6 4 4 707

Figure 4. Number of vessels involved in the Southern North Sea and Channel skate and ray fishery by level of economic dependence.

Figure 4 shows what proportion of vessels’ income is earned through FMP species, and how that proportion has changed over the years. In most cases, FMP species landed make up less than 5% of a vessel’s income.

In 2022, 706 vessels landed skates and rays, and 94% (666) of these vessels had an economic dependence on FMP species of less than 20%. Vessels with less than 20% economic dependence on FMP species average 84% of landings.

There were 20 vessels for which skates and rays represented more than 20% of annual income in 2022, averaging 16% of annual landings. The vessels most reliant on skates and rays are predominately under 10 metres (m) in length. The size of the fleet landing FMP species has reduced by as much as 23% since 2016.

FMP dependence groups France Spain Belgium All other Total
2016 245 170 3 30 445
2017 323 198 2 49 570
2018 338 337 8 39 754
2019 474 349 47 49 919
2020 612 128 16 35 791
2021 987 130 51 8 1176
2022 1121 71 43 1 1236

Figure 5. Annual UK export value of skate and ray products by destination country.

During 2022, skates and rays were a net export. The UK exported 179t or £741,000 more skate and ray products than it imported. Figure 5 shows that in 2022, £1.24 million worth of FMP products were exported. Most of these (around £1.12 million worth) were exported to France.

Recreational fisheries

Nationally, recreational sea fishing is a high-participation activity delivering economic and social benefits. There is limited recreational catch data in respect of the FMP species. According to the Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (Cefas) report on sea angling in the UK 2016 and 2017, and Cefas’ report on sea angling in the UK 2018 and 2019, around 772,000 UK adults participated in sea angling each year between 2016 and 2019, at a value of £1.6 to £1.9 billion per year. A thriving support industry has grown alongside this activity, including fishing tackle and bait shops in key recreational angling locations.

Detailed information on the economic and social value of recreational fishing within the spatial scope of this FMP could be better defined, but existing research indicates that it is of high economic and social value and may form a key component of coastal community income. Further evidence gathering is required through the implementation of the FMP.

Skates and rays are important for recreational match fishing, due to their relatively large size. Notable recreational species that are within scope of this FMP include blonde, undulate and thornback ray.

Existing management of skates and rays

Exploitation of skates and rays is regulated through the current system of total allowable catches (TAC). Currently, there are combined TACs for skates and rays in the North Sea, the eastern English Channel and the Celtic Sea. There is some ability to transfer a proportion of these TACs to adjacent TAC areas. There has been a separate stock-specific TAC in place for undulate ray in the English Channel since 2019, and various sub-TACs for this stock in place since March 2015.

In addition to TACs, there are other restrictions in place. Those most relevant to this FMP are detailed below.

North Sea

The Secretary of State determination of fishing opportunities for British fishing boats (2023) requires a ‘bycatch quota’ for larger vessels, which stipulates that skates and rays should not comprise “more than 25% by live weight of the catch retained on board per fishing trip” for those vessels greater than 15m in length overall.

This TAC does not apply to small-eyed ray in UK and EU waters. Small-eyed ray caught in the North Sea should be released promptly.

Western Channel and Celtic Sea

The TAC does not apply to small-eyed ray, except in divisions 7f to 7g (where a sub-TAC is in place), and so small-eyed ray in the western English Channel should be released promptly. In the negotiations between the UK and the EU for 2024, a joint ambition was agreed to lift the non-retention regulation in favour of a sentinel fishery for small-eyed ray in 7e. In the Secretary of State determination of fishing opportunities for British fishing boats, a limited quota to land small-eyed ray in 7e has been made available for the sentinel fishery in 2024 and 2025.

Skerries Bank, Devon

The mixed recreational and commercial fishery at Skerries Bank in Devon has been identified by members of the Southern North Sea and Channel skates and rays FMP working group as a good example of the commercial and recreational fishing sector working together. The fishery is controlled via a voluntary code of conduct which includes various provisions designed to balance the 3 main user groups. The zone also includes various netting restrictions which are controlled via an IFCA Permit Byelaw.

Starry ray

Starry ray in UK and EU waters of divisions 2a, 3a, 7d and subarea 4 has a species-level prohibition, under which UK and EU fishing vessels “shall not fish for, retain on board, tranship or land” this species.

Undulate ray

There is a separate stock-specific TAC in place for undulate ray in the English Channel. Undulate ray may be retained in divisions 7d and 7e, subject to the following domestic fishing vessel licence conditions: closed period during May to August inclusive. During open periods, undulate ray may only be retained on board or landed whole or gutted. There is also a minimum and maximum landing size of 78 cm and 97 cm respectively, measured from the tip of the snout to the tip of the tail. A 200kg per trip landing restriction applies to UK vessels.

Small-eyed ray

In ICES subarea 4, the North Sea skates and rays TAC does not apply to small-eyed ray and therefore the species cannot be fished for. This is implemented in the annex of domestic fishing vessel licences.

In ICES division 7e, from 2024 onwards a small TAC is available for landing only by fishing vessels registered on the forthcoming sentinel fishery monitoring programmes.

Minimum conservation reference sizes (MCRS)

Except for undulate ray, there are no national MCRSs for the other skates and rays included in the scope of this FMP. The current FMP area includes the inshore waters of 8 IFCAs, of which 2 have minimum sizes for skates and rays.

Kent and Essex IFCA byelaws stipulate an MCRS of 40cm (distance between the wing tips) for whole skates and rays, or 19cm for detached wings (measured from the wing tip and across the wing to the cut edge).

Southern IFCA byelaws stipulate an MCRS of 40cm (distance between the wing tips) for whole skates and rays, or 20cm for detached wings.

There is no MCRS for skates and rays in other IFCA districts within the FMP area (Cornwall IFCA, Devon and Severn IFCA, Sussex IFCA, Eastern IFCA, Northeastern IFCA and Northumberland IFCA).

FMP vision  

The FMP vision is that skate and ray fisheries in the Southern North Sea and English Channel will be managed to achieve environmental, social, and economic sustainability, for the benefit of coastal communities and wider society.

FMP policies

This FMP sets out specific policy goals that have been grouped into 3 distinct themes: 

  • sustainable fisheries

  • evidence

  • social and economic

The following section outlines the policy goals and actions that are being proposed for this first iteration of the FMP. These are given from the point of FMP publication and will subsequently fall into the implementation phase of FMP delivery. Actions to support these policy goals may be developed further.  

In terms of delivering the FMP policy goals:

  • short term is considered to be approximately within 2 years of publication of the FMP

  • short to medium term is when some actions within the goal are considered to be within 2 years of publication, and some 2 years or more after publication

  • medium to long term is 2 years or more after publication
  • long term is considered to be more than 2 years after publication of the FMP

Each FMP goal is detailed and provides the actions and approach to help achieve the goals, and the timeframe that it should be delivered in. 

Any fisheries management intervention will result in a range of social, economic and biological impacts. When implementing a new management measure, there is a statutory requirement to estimate the anticipated wider national benefits (for example, improved stock status of target species), as well as the likely impacts on stakeholders and how negative impacts can be mitigated.

We will analyse broader impacts on local communities, and economic, social and human rights impacts, in associated impact assessments. These will be required as part of the development of measures.

Sustainable fisheries goals

Policy goal 1: harvest stocks of blonde ray (in 4b, 4c and 7d), cuckoo ray, spotted ray, thornback ray (in subarea 4, 3a and 7d) and undulate ray sustainably

The goal is to maintain these species above the level capable of producing MSY.

This policy goal applies to the stocks where:

  • there is sufficient available scientific evidence to enable an assessment of the stock’s maximum sustainable yield
  • their biomass levels are currently considered to be sustainable because fishing pressure on the stock is below FMSY or FMSY proxy, and biomass or stock size is above MSY Btrigger or Itrigger.

This includes:

  • blonde ray (in 4b, 4c and 7d)
  • cuckoo ray
  • spotted ray
  • thornback ray (in subarea 4 and divisions 3a and 7d)
  • undulate ray

As required by section 6(3)(a) of the Act, this policy goal and actions are designed to contribute to maintaining the stocks at sustainable levels. It will positively contribute to achieving good environmental status (GES) for UK Marine Strategy descriptor D3 (commercially exploited fish and shellfish) in English waters.

The actions to deliver this policy goal are:

  • continue to seek to set TACs and determine fishing opportunities based on the best available scientific advice
  • continue to work with the EU in accordance with the policies in the JFS, including the principles of international fisheries negotiations, with the aim of agreeing TACs to maintain the sustainable harvesting of the stocks through international negotiations
  • continue to work with the EU on existing joint commitments, in particular the existing written record commitment on exploring alternatives to the current group TAC management that is ongoing through the SCF, which covers all jointly managed group TACs, including the FMP stocks

Timeframe: ongoing

Policy goal 2: implement effective management that contributes to the restoration of starry ray stocks to levels capable of producing MSY and to maintain or increase the level of blonde ray (in 7e), small eyed ray and thornback ray (in 7e)

For starry ray, the available scientific evidence is sufficient to enable an assessment of the stocks’ MSY. However, the stock’s biomass levels are currently not considered to be sustainable because fishing pressure on the stock is above FMSY proxy, and stock size indicator is below Itrigger. This policy goal and associated actions aim to contribute to restoring stocks to sustainable levels as required by section 6(3)(a) of the Act.

For blonde ray (in 7e), small eyed ray (in 7de) and thornback ray (in 7e), the available scientific evidence is not sufficient to assess the stocks’ MSY, therefore this policy goal and actions aim to maintain or increase the level of the stocks as required by section 6(3)(b) and 6(4) of the Act. Although the stocks are data-limited, and there is not the available evidence to assess MSY, the ICES advice indicates the current level of exploitation is appropriate for the stocks. Should this change further action will be considered.

The actions below will be taken forward and, where supported by evidence, management measures will be put in place. These measures are dependent on further research to:

  • determine the most suitable approach
  • understand demographic impacts, efficacy and unintended consequences

If determined to be appropriate, these measures would aim to provide protection primarily for the 3 data-limited stocks. Where there are benefits to doing so, certain management measures will be considered more widely across all FMP stocks. There is an existing UK-EU commitment on alternative approaches to the current group TAC management. Whilst this commitment covers all stocks that are currently managed by a group TAC, it could provide particular benefit to the data-limited stocks.

Action 1: continue current management for these stocks and species level prohibition of starry ray

Although the main area of starry ray distribution is outside the FMP area, the ICES stock assessment for starry ray advises for zero catches up to 2027. Existing management currently prohibits catches of starry ray in UK and EU waters of divisions 2a, 3a, 7d and subarea 4, to contribute to restoring the stock by not allowing it to be landed. This FMP action continues this.

For blonde ray (in 7e), small eyed ray (in 7de) and thornback ray (in 7e), the ICES advice indicates the current level of exploitation is appropriate for the stocks. Therefore, this action continues the current management in line with the actions set out in policy goal 1.

Timeframe: ongoing

Action 2: consider alternative approaches to the current group total allowable catches

Although ICES provide single-species advice for each of the FMP species, most skate and ray species within this FMP are currently managed under a combined (multi-species) TAC. Blonde ray 7e, small-eyed ray in 7e and thornback ray in 7e are covered by the Western skates and rays group TAC. Small-eyed ray in 7d is covered by the Eastern channel skates and rays group TAC.

There are concerns that the current group TAC management provides limited protection for vulnerable stocks and under-exploitation of healthy stocks. Importantly, these are jointly managed stocks with the EU, as set out in the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA), and TACs for skates and rays are agreed annually in bilateral negotiations between the UK and the EU. As such, any alternative to the current group TAC management will require bilateral work with the EU.

There is an existing joint UK-EU written record commitment, and an indicative roadmap was developed for this work in the SCF, setting out next steps and considerations in addressing these concerns. This work is jointly progressing through the SCF. This UK-EU commitment covers all skates and rays in the group TACs, including the data-limited stocks, any alternative approach to the group TAC management needs to be considered holistically.

This FMP has identified some priority areas that could be considered as part of that work. This includes exploring the possible introduction of single-species or single-stock TACs as recommended in the ICES advice, noting the species’ differing conservation statuses and biological traits. More evidence is required to better understand the impact of this, including the possible choke risks.

Timeframe: short to medium term

Approach: gather evidence required to support the ongoing joint work with the UK and EU to identify improvements to the current group TAC management.

Action 3: consider the implementation of minimum conservation reference sizes (MCRS)

Skates and rays are slow-growing species with varying sizes at maturity (McCully and others 2012, Phillips and others, 2020, and Thys and others, 2023). The current lack of an MCRS in most areas leaves juveniles at an increased risk of being removed before being able to spawn at least once. As discard survival rates within skates and rays are perceived to be high, and the species are exempt from the landing obligation, MCRS measures may be a favourable tool to protect juvenile populations (Catchpole and others, 2007, Ellis and others, 2008a and b, Enever and others, 2009 and 2010, Ellis and others, 2018, and Van Bogaert and others, 2020). However, this is dependent on the survival rates of smaller individuals.

Currently, 2 IFCAs (Kent and Essex IFCA and Southern IFCA) within the FMP’s spatial jurisdiction have active, non-species-specific MCRS regulations for skates and rays. The MCRS for Kent and Essex IFCA is 40cm for whole rays, 19cm for a wing. For Southern IFCA this is 40cm for whole rays and 20cm for a wing. However, there is no national MCRS beyond the 6nm boundary (except for undulate ray).

Outside of the FMP area, there are different MCRSs for skates and rays around the UK, including the waters of:

  • Guernsey (36cm)
  • North-Western IFCA (45cm)
  • parts of Wales (45cm)

There is also a voluntary code agreed by the North Devon Fishermen’s Association (45cm).

This aim of this measure, if implemented, would be to provide protection to juvenile skates and rays, allowing more to reach maturity and reproduce. This would positively promote population growth and therefore increasing stock levels. However, the introduction of an MCRS across the FMP area may shift fishing pressure onto larger individuals in the stock, which may in turn have a detrimental effect on reproductive potential.

Given each of the FMP species exhibit different life-history parameters, including size at maturity and fecundity at size, a universal MCRS may be less effective than grouped or species-specific approaches.

Additional life-history data are required to understand the potential benefits of size restrictions, and further analyses are needed to consider social and economic impacts of any proposed approaches. Such information can inform whether size restrictions are appropriate and enforceable measures. This should include evidence to develop robust options for minimum sizes if the measures are deemed to be useful.

Timeframe: medium to long term

Approach:

  • gather further evidence
  • undertake demographic modelling
  • undertake an economic assessment
  • consult stakeholders

We will gather further evidence to understand the potential effectiveness of MCRS as a method for protecting stock health and promoting population growth, through affording protection to juvenile skates and rays in English waters of ICES divisions 4b, 4c, 7d and 7e. This will focus on gathering the additional data required to inform demographic modelling.

We will undertake a demographic modelling exercise to better understand the potential benefits of minimum and maximum sizes. The focus should be on exploring the efficacy of an MCRS (or a MaxCRS) on skates and rays, considering uncertainties on:

  • selection patterns
  • quota availability
  • life-history
  • discard survivability

This will assess the potential effectiveness of each measure and gather additional evidence to determine how size-based restrictions would interact with the reproductive potential of skates and rays at different sizes. The egg laying potential and fecundity of larger rays is a recognised evidence gap for the FMP, and this should be addressed in order to determine which approach would be more favourable.

We will undertake an economic impact assessment to assess and better understand the economic impact of different potential approaches to implementing a MCRS. This will help determine the most suitable approach.

If the evidence gathered supports this measure, we will consult stakeholders to determine a favourable approach for implementation in the medium-term to longer-term.

Action 4: consider the implementation of a maximum conservation reference size

Maximum sizes and the use of harvest slot-limits have a theoretical basis in simultaneously affording a degree of protection to both immature fish and the most fecund part of the stock. They have also been shown to be effective for managing multiple use fisheries (for example for commercial and recreational activities), and so may promote greater general landings of fish, as well as greater catches of larger specimen (trophy) fish (Gwinn and others, 2015, and Ahrens and others, 2020).

Skates and rays exhibit slow growth, late maturity and low fecundity. Therefore, as a species group, skates and rays would particularly benefit from the protection of larger, more fecund individuals (Kasper and others, 2020). Further evidence on fecundity-at-length is needed before this measure can be implemented.

Future evidence gathering should also explore the MaxCRS in relation to potential health risks posed by the accumulation of certain contaminants in older or more fish-eating (piscivorous) skates and rays, which may bioaccumulate and bio-magnify contaminants. Comparable work on 2 offshore skate species, including a review of other relevant studies (Nicolaus and others, 2017) would suggest there is a likelihood of the largest skates exceeding safe levels of mercury, and indicate that work on this topic is required. There is not enough data to come to an evidence-based selection of maximum size on the basis of mercury.

Timeframe: medium to long term

Approach:

  • gather evidence
  • consult stakeholders

We will gather evidence to understand the effectiveness of a MaxCRS as a method for managing landings of key FMP skate and ray species in English waters of ICES divisions 4b, 4c, 7d and 7e. As with action 3 for an MCRS, additional data on maturity-at-length, and fecundity-at-length are required to inform a demographic modelling exercise, alongside an economic impact assessment of the impact of maximum sizes on key skate and ray species. As part of the evidence gathering, we will also explore the trade-offs between increasing the MCRS versus introducing a MaxCRS.

If the evidence gathered supports this measure, stakeholders will be consulted to determine a favourable approach for implementation in the medium-term to longer-term.

Action 5: introduce voluntary guidelines

There are known identification issues amongst some of the stocks in this FMP which impact the reliability of the species-specific reporting. This impacts our understanding of the stock, as well as the potential effectiveness of any future species-specific management measure.

Discard survival rates within skates and rays are perceived to be high, and so the species are exempt from the landing obligation. It is therefore important that the stocks are handled and released in the appropriate way to maximise the chance of survivability.

Voluntary guidelines would aim to improve handling and identification of the FMP stocks, to:

  • improve survivability, species-specific reporting and evidence gathering
  • support compliance with management and regulation

In turn, this aims to contribute to improving or maintaining stock levels for all FMP managed stocks but providing particular benefit to the data-limited stocks.

Timeframe: short to medium term

Approach:

  • building on the existing work of stakeholders (the Shark Trust’s ID and handling guidelines), we will review, update and distribute skate and ray handling, regulatory and identification guidelines to commercial and recreational fishers
  • consider arranging training workshops to support the distribution and implementation of the guidelines

Action 6: explore and, where appropriate, implement spatial and temporal closures

Numerous scientific studies have reported that FMP species exhibit site fidelity during mating (Ellis and others, 2011 and Papadopoulo and others, 2023) or as juveniles (Martin and others, 2012). Spatial-temporal measures have been shown to be effective in managing skate and ray species (Thorburn and others, 2021).

The aim of this measure is to explore and, where appropriate, implement spatial and temporal closures to protect essential habitats for skate and ray species. This involves protecting breeding and juvenile aggregations of skates and rays, allowing more to reach maturity and reproduce, which will increase the level of the stocks.

This will be contingent on:

  • developing a robust evidence base to identify habitats important for skate and ray recruitment
  • putting in place appropriate protections to encourage stock health

It will build evidence on the effectiveness of spatial-temporal management. It will also seek opportunities to align protections with MPA closures to maximise sustainability impact for skates and rays, while minimising impact on fishers.

Timeframe: medium to long term

Approach:

  • consider research to identify areas and habitats that are considered essential for skates and rays
  • where appropriate, implement spatial and temporal closures to protect breeding and juvenile aggregations of skate and ray species
  • build evidence on the effectiveness of spatial and temporal management, such as closed seasons and areas (‘ray boxes’) for protecting breeding and juvenile assemblages.
  • seek opportunities to align protections with MPA closures, to maximise sustainability impact for skates and rays while minimising impact on fishers.

Policy goal 3: deliver effective management through, where possible, identifying, minimising and mitigating pressures on skate and ray stocks

This goal has been developed to improve biological and environmental sustainability within the FMP remit. It does so by identifying, minimising and mitigating fishing pressures both exerted on skates and rays and also on the environment and other species as a result of skates and rays fishing. It will positively contribute to achieving GES for UK Marine Strategy descriptors:

  • D1 (biological diversity)
  • D3 (commercially exploited fish and shellfish)
  • D4 (food webs)
  • D6 (sea-floor integrity)
  • D10 (marine litter) in English waters

Action 1: define key interactions of fisheries landing skates and rays 

Look to define key interactions of fisheries landing skates and rays in targeted or bycatch fisheries. Better understand the pressures exerted on these stocks, including consideration of the targeting behaviour of the fleet and recreational fishery. 

Timeframe: medium to long term 

Approach:  

  • consider research into fisheries catching skates and rays, to model interactions and pressures exerted on skate and ray stocks from fishers catching and targeting skates and rays. 

  • consider research to identify and capture fisher targeting patterns for skates and rays.

Relevant Fisheries Act objectives:  

  • sustainability objective 

  • scientific evidence objective 

  • bycatch objective 

Action 2: seek to manage key interactions to minimise adverse impacts of fisheries landing skates and rays

Following the outcome of action 1, seek to manage key interactions to minimise adverse impacts. Consider the integration of mixed and multi-species management approaches for the relevant skate and ray fisheries, where appropriate. 

Timeframe: medium to long term  

Approach:  

  • seek to effectively manage the interactions identified in action 1 to minimise adverse impacts on skates and rays stocks 

  • approaches to mixed fishery and mixed species management will be considered and assessed for implementation into management of skate and ray fisheries

Relevant Fisheries Act objectives:  

  • sustainability objective 

  • ecosystem objective 

  • scientific evidence objective 

  • bycatch objective 

  • precautionary objective 

Action 3: better understand the impact of non-fishing pressures on skate and ray stocks

This is to include, but is not limited to, the impact of anthropogenic non-fishing pressures and the impact and species sensitivities to climate change. Identify where climate change mitigation and adaptation measures can be implemented.

Timeframe: medium to long term  

Approach:  

  • consider research into broader anthropogenic impacts on skate and ray stocks

  • consider research to evaluate the potential impact of climate change on skate and ray species and identify opportunities to implement climate change mitigation and adaptation measures 

  • adapt the fishery management where appropriate to align with species sensitivities 

Relevant Fisheries Act objectives:  

  • sustainability objective 

  • ecosystem objective 

  • scientific evidence objective 

  • national benefit objective 

  • climate objective 

Action 4: better understand the impact of fishing gear interactions with the marine environment in the skate and ray fishery. 

This includes investigating the key issues in current unwanted and protected species bycatch within the fishery where skates and rays are being targeted. 

Timeframe: medium to long term  

Approach:  

  • consider research to map and define the demersal gear and benthos interactions 

  • consider research to identify and reduce bycatch of unwanted and protected species

  • where appropriate, align with existing and developing UK bycatch strategies  

  • consider data collection requirements to monitor and track key skate and ray fishing impacts on bycatch of unwanted and protected species

Evidence goals

Policy goal 4: seek to improve datasets to support an MSY assessment of thornback ray in 7e, blonde ray in 7e and small-eyed ray in 7d and 7e

The stocks are data-limited, with insufficient evidence to support an MSY assessment, and so receive precautionary advice from ICES. The aim of this goal is to explore the data limitations and how these can be improved, and where possible set out to improve them. Important to note that improving the assessments of these stocks is heavily dependent on ICES resourcing as well as there being sufficient scientific evidence to support an MSY assessment.

A prioritisation exercise will be carried out to focus research efforts across all FMP stocks and plans, to increase data collection, which will be reviewed over time. By improving the availability of data, and in turn the assessment of the stock, this would help inform the sustainable management of these fisheries.

This policy goal and associated actions will contribute towards obtaining the scientific evidence necessary to enable an assessment of the stock’s maximum sustainable yield, as required by section 6(3)(b)(ii) of the Act.

Timeframe: ongoing

Actions:

  • explore and prioritise management and evidence gathering to contribute to improving the assessment of thornback ray in 7e, blonde ray in 7e and small-eyed ray in 7d and 7e

  • consider the catch per unit effort for the under 10m fleet using Inshore Vessel Monitoring System (iVMS) data to support implementation of effort data into fishing records

  • update and distribute skate and ray handling, regulatory and identification guidelines to commercial and recreational fishers, to help improve data collection of these species as well as survivability

  • management and evidence gathering includes the continuation of the small-eyed ray 7e sentinel fishery ahead of potential future precautionary reopening of the fishery, as per the UK-EU joint commitment. This will require resource from ICES, and so improvement in any future assessment will be contingent on that.

  • seek to ensure gathered data supports the implementation of MSY or a suitable proxy for all skate and ray stocks 

  • seek to manage catches so fishing effort remains below MSY or MSY proxy 

Relevant Fisheries Act objectives:  

  • sustainability objective 

  • precautionary objective 

  • scientific evidence objective 

Policy goal 5: better understand the wider skate and ray species evidence gaps and develop the evidence base

This policy goal has been developed to improve on the evidence base for skates and rays. Fulfilling this goal will not directly contribute to achieving GES, but may indirectly feed into the achievement of GES in English waters by contributing to effective management and sustainability of the fishery. 

Build on the supporting evidence statement that will be regularly developed and updated to establish what evidence is required to meet the wider goals of the FMP, as well as any further policy or legislative objectives. Identify how current data channels can be adapted or improved to meet evidence gaps. Prioritise evidence gaps based on current evidence baselines and evidence needs. 

Timeframe: ongoing 

Approach:  

  • identify what evidence is currently available through a robust and systematic process and understand the data channels that currently source this evidence 

  • identify and evaluate data channels for integration into the development of the FMP evidence base 

  • develop an evidence strategy to focus on evidence gaps, which will cover all fisheries, environmental, ecological, and social and economic data requirements  

Relevant Fisheries Act objectives:  

  • scientific evidence objective 

Action 2: establish new data collection channels to close evidence gaps

Where necessary, establish new data collection channels to close evidence gaps. Investigate opportunities to gather non-traditional or novel sources of data to complement this, including using new technologies. Explore methods to consolidate new data with existing data in a single platform. 

Timeframe: ongoing 

Approach:  

  • address evidence gaps that cannot be filled by existing data with new evidence and data, where available

  • where possible, collect this new data using new technologies or through novel, non-traditional methods

  • approach managing data in a way that is consistent with data protection regulation, aiming to be transparent and accessible for agreed partners and stakeholders 

Relevant Fisheries Act objectives:  

  • scientific evidence objective 

Social and economic goals

Policy goal 6: better understand and optimise social and economic benefits

This goal has been developed to improve the evidence base for social, cultural and economic values of skates and rays. Fulfilling this goal will indirectly feed into the achievement of GES in English waters by improving the socioeconomic evidence base, and it looks to optimise fishery management where possible for the long-term sustainability of the fishery.

Building on the existing evidence base, undertake research on the reliance on skate and ray fisheries. Identify social and economic data on the current direct and indirect benefits derived from skate and ray fisheries on coastal communities. Using this evidence, develop indicators to monitor social and economic impacts.

Timeframe: short to medium term

Approach:

  • consider evidence gathering to identify groups (commercial and recreational fishers, coastal communities, local supply chains) that are reliant on skate and ray fisheries
  • carry out research to understand who is benefitting from these species and how these are integrated into social, economic and cultural values
  • understand the direct social and economic benefits of the skate and ray fishery for the groups identified
  • target management appropriately so that these benefits are maintained and, where appropriate, optimised
  • using the evidence gathered, identify and establish monitoring indicators that can be used to assess the effectiveness of the FMP’s social and economic goals

Relevant Fisheries Act objectives:

  • sustainability objective
  • scientific evidence objective
  • national benefit objective
  • equal access objective

Action 2: identify new ways to collect social and economic data

Where data is not currently available, seek to identify new ways to collect social and economic data against the monitoring indicators identified in action 1. Additionally, seek to understand if there are opportunities to optimise direct and indirect benefits from skate and ray fisheries.

Timeframe: medium to long term

Approach:

  • identify evidence gaps and start work to close them
  • map and understand benefits from skate and ray fisheries, and put in place mechanisms to optimise these benefits

Relevant Fisheries Act objectives:

  • sustainability objective
  • scientific evidence objective
  • national benefit objective
  • equal access objective

Action 3: sector support measures

Reports suggest that there is a low market interest in ray landings compared to other species. Alongside the suite of other management recommendations (which work to enhance sustainability in the fishery), this measure sets out to understand what else can be done to improve the market.

While this approach is a non-statutory requirement, and the associated actions and measures go beyond the legal obligations for FMPs in section 6 of the Act, Defra welcomes these industry commitments to complement and support the delivery of the FMPs and objectives in the Act.

Timeframe: long term

Approach:

  • explore options for supporting initiatives that are developing the domestic market for skate and ray products
  • explore ways to balance recreational and commercial fishers’ needs in the skate and ray fisheries
  • implement strategies identified in the evidence gathered, to increase the social and economic benefits of the skate and ray fisheries

Supporting initiatives to develop the market will rely on evidence gathering and collaboration with stakeholders. Together, we will be able to determine appropriate ways of supporting skate and ray markets without compromising stock sustainability.

Policy goal 7: Develop partnership working with industry

Working as partners will build capacity for industry to be able to input into matters affecting skate and ray fisheries management.

This goal has been developed to ensure that stakeholders in the FMP area have an appropriate forum to contribute to the management of skates and rays. Through effective engagement and management, it will positively contribute to achieving GES for UK Marine Strategy descriptors:

  • D1 (biological diversity)
  • D3 (commercially exploited fish and shellfish)
  • D4 (food webs)
  • D6 (sea-floor integrity)
  • D10 (litter) in English waters

Action 1: consider the establishment of a skates and rays management group

Consider the establishment of a skates and rays management group or another similar forum, which may develop over time to allow for continued engagement in ongoing management of skate and ray fisheries.

Timeframe: short term

Approach: the relevant authority will consider establishing a skates and rays management group, which will be recognised as the key group for matters related to the review and revision of the FMP. The FMP proposes that the group will comprise:

  • industry
  • recreational fishers
  • wider supply-chain businesses
  • the regulatory authority
  • fisheries scientists
  • policy makers
  • other interested stakeholders

The remit of this group in its proposed state will be to act as a forum for engagement and give the group the initiative to set the direction of FMP development. Where appropriate, this group could be combined with similar groups proposed in other FMPs to alleviate stakeholder fatigue.

Relevant Fisheries Act objectives:

  • sustainability objective
  • national benefit objective

Environmental considerations

All FMPs are subject to legal obligations for environmental protection arising from:

The Southern North Sea and Channel skate and ray FMP will contribute to the commitments to improve our marine ecosystem set out in the Environmental Improvement Plan 2025, the UK Marine Strategy and Marine Plans.

The FMP will contribute to policies relating to the wider marine environment. Specifically, the requirement to ensure the health of our seas for future generations, and our ambitions to restore biodiversity and address climate change.

A range of current monitoring and evidence programmes gather data to inform the risks of fishing activity to both MPAs and the UK Marine Strategy descriptors relevant to this FMP.

Advice provided by Natural England and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee identified 5 key areas of risk to the marine environment associated with Southern North Sea and English Channel skate and ray fisheries. The advice has been developed to provide this FMP with a steer on the primary risks posed by different gear types to MPA features and UK Marine Strategy descriptors, to identify where efforts to understand and mitigate wider environmental impacts of the fishing activities managed by this FMP may be best focused.

However, given the comparative lack of data on the direct impacts of skate and ray fisheries, a suite of new work is required. As a key goal of the FMP, this should be undertaken jointly by:

  • the fishing industry
  • the wider research community
  • environmental non-governmental organisations
  • government

This FMP was not able to fully quantify the pressures associated with skate and ray fisheries and instead provides a high-level risk assessment based on the best available evidence.

Marine protected areas

Inside the boundaries of English MPAs, the MMO and IFCAs assess human activities that could interact with the designated features of MPAs and introduce management where required. Therefore, the existing assessment and management pathways mitigate risks arising from fishing activity within English MPA boundaries, and no additional action is suggested for the FMP within MPA site boundaries.

Of the pressures identified, those that impact habitat are thought to primarily operate inside site boundaries. Instead, this advice focuses on risks to MPA features from fishing activities occurring outside site boundaries.

There are 3 key areas of risk, outlined below.

High risk of bycatch of marine mammals and seabirds in static nets

Static nets pose a high bycatch risk to all 3 marine mammal species that are features of MPAs in English waters. They are considered the gear type responsible for the highest level of marine mammal bycatch in UK waters.

To address this issue, it is recommended that further mitigation measures be developed and implemented to reduce the bycatch risk in gillnet fisheries. This is likely to be set out by:

  • modifications to gear design
  • changes in fishing practices
  • the establishment of spatial or temporal closures in areas of high bycatch risk

We will also consider:

  • expansion of the mandatory fitting of active acoustic deterrent devices (ADD) to the small-scale fishery for cetacean bycatch mitigation
  • trialling new seabird bycatch mitigation options, such as illuminating fishing nets with green light-emitting diodes (LEDs)

Currently, mitigation is considered weak for cetaceans and seabirds of the gillnet fishery, of which the Southern North Sea and Channel skates and rays fishery is a component (French and others, 2022).

High risk of seabird bycatch in longlines

The incidental capture of non-target species, particularly seabirds, constitutes a prominently reported threat to biodiversity within longline fisheries. Seabird bycatch mitigation options for longlines should be considered, such as the addition of weights to longlines and the use of streamer lines, which have been demonstrated to reduce bycatch by as much as 76% and 99% respectively (Melvin and others, 2001, and Løkkeborg 2008). Data limitations regarding the inshore region, where bycatch rates may be elevated due to closer proximity to seabird breeding colonies, need to be addressed.

Overall, short-term improvements to achieve greater certainty in bycatch estimates would result from a more systematic approach to data collection, particularly in inshore fisheries. This approach would also generate a better understanding of the temporal and spatial patterns of bycatch estimates, and demographic information about which individuals are caught as bycatch.

This information could then be used to highlight species and areas most at risk. It would also enable possible pilot areas for more focused development of mitigation trials and monitoring to be identified with stakeholders. Additionally, a risk-based prioritisation of remote electronic monitoring (REM) (French and others, 2022) could prioritise seabirds for a set number of years to improve data collection.

Moderate risk of bycatch of mobile species that are designated features of MPAs in demersal trawls

While these gears are associated with occasional bycatch of designated seabirds and marine mammals, results from the bycatch monitoring programme (Kingston and others 2021; Northridge and others 2020; Bradbury and others 2017; Trancart and others 2014 and ICES 2014) suggest that risks are much lower for pelagic gears than for static nets. However, due to the episodic nature of bycatch incidences and the relatively low sampling efforts, risk will vary greatly over space and time.

Strategic actions to improve the evidence base and implement appropriate mitigation is required. Demersal gears also have the potential to result in the unintentional catch of a range of fish species. Some of these may be species that are mobile features of MPAs or other protected sites. Based on the limited data available, a bycatch risk was identified for the 2 shad species from demersal towed gears used in the skate and ray fishery.

In the short term, improvements to achieve greater certainty in bycatch estimates would result from a more systematic approach to data collection, particularly large offshore pelagic fisheries. This approach would also generate better understanding of the temporal and spatial patterns of bycatch estimates, and demographic information about which individuals are caught as bycatch. This information could then be used to highlight species and areas most at risk and enable possible pilot areas for more focused development of mitigation trials and monitoring to be identified with stakeholders.

Ongoing work focusing on understanding and mitigating the impact of bycatch on the wider population is being progressed through Defra’s marine wildlife bycatch mitigation initiative (BMI) and the Clean Catch UK programme. This work is crucial to help mitigate bycatch risks and evidence gaps identified in this advice, however an action plan to deliver the BMI has not yet been published. Building the evidence base through self-reporting of bycatch events may help support future iterations of this assessment. However, the implementation of REM, prioritised by risk (French and others, 2022) would vastly improve our knowledge of, and ability to mitigate, designated species bycatch.

Wider sea evidence: beyond MPAs

The UK Marine Strategy provides the framework for delivering clean, healthy, safe, productive, and biologically diverse oceans and seas. It consists of a 3-stage framework for achieving GES in our seas through protecting the marine environment, preventing its deterioration, and restoring it, where practical, while allowing sustainable use of marine resources.

A screening exercise found 5 key issues and a rapid assessment of risk has been undertaken against key descriptors of the UK Marine Strategy. The FMP introduces policies aimed at addressing these 5 key issues and sets out goals and subgoals which contribute to improving GES. These are: 

  • D1 biological diversity
  • D3 commercially exploited fish
  • D4 food webs
  • D6 seafloor integrity
  • D10 litter

High risk to cetaceans from gillnets

Based on current evidence, gillnets pose a high risk to the biological diversity of cetaceans. The SNCB advice follows a precautionary stance, given the significant data gaps. As further evidence is collected and analysed, the perceived risk may change.

A better understanding of the actual risk posed by the fisheries will require closer examination of the bycatch associated with this activity. Any new management measures should contribute to achieving GES targets for D1 and D4. The following goals have been developed to address the issue of bycatch associated with skate and ray fisheries:

  • deliver effective management of skate and ray fisheries in the Southern North Sea and English Channel
  • contribute to improving biological and environmental sustainability by understanding and reducing the wider impacts of skate and ray fishing

These goals will also positively contribute to achieving GES for UK Marine Strategy descriptor 1 (biological diversity) and descriptor 4 (food webs), in English waters. 

High risk to seabirds from longlines

Based on current evidence, longlines pose a high risk to the biological diversity of seabirds. The SNCBs advise a precautionary stance, given the significant data gaps. As further evidence is collected and analysed, the perceived risk may change.

A better understanding of the actual risk posed by the fisheries will require closer examination of the bycatch associated with this activity. Any new management measures should contribute to achieving GES targets for D1 and D4. The following goals have been developed to address the issue of bycatch associated with skate and ray fisheries:

  • deliver effective management of skate and ray fisheries in the Southern North Sea and English Channel
  • contribute to improving biological and environmental sustainability by understanding and reducing the wider impacts of skate and ray fishing

These goals will also positively contribute to achieving GES for UK Marine Strategy descriptor 1 (biological diversity) and descriptor 4 (food webs), in English waters. 

High risk to seafloor integrity by beam and otter trawling

Demersal trawls pose a high risk to the integrity of the seafloor. A strategic approach is required, covering the geographic scope of the FMP, to identify strategies to reduce or eliminate risk posed to the seafloor. There will be a need to understand and frame the trade-offs in limiting benthic impacts against the other Fisheries Act objectives.

The impacts will need to be considered by the FMP management group following publication of the FMP. The following goals have been developed to address the issue of seabed disturbance associated with the skate and ray fisheries:

  • deliver effective management of skate and ray fisheries in the Southern North Sea and English Channel
  • contribute to improving biological and environmental sustainability by understanding and reducing the wider impacts of skate and ray fishing

These 2 goals will positively contribute to achieving GES for UK Marine Strategy descriptor 1 (biological diversity) and descriptor 6 (seafloor integrity) in English waters. 

Working with stakeholders, Defra will consider the evidence and then develop further recommendations on the potential effects of fishing activities (alongside other activities) on seafloor integrity and the state of benthic habitats, including contributing to the implementation and coordination of the Benthic Impact Working Group. This work will consider the issues at a strategic level, and within the context of ongoing changes in marine spatial use and environmental protection, to achieve the objective of GES under the UK Marine Strategy.

Moderate risk to marine mammals and seabirds from beam trawls, otter trawls and trammel nets

Based on current evidence, the SNCB risk assessment has highlighted the following:

  • trammel nets and demersal trawls pose a moderate risk to cetaceans, owing to the small spatial footprint of the fishery
  • there is a moderate risk to the biological diversity of seals from demersal trawls and static nets, based on current evidence
  • static nets and demersal trawls pose a moderate risk to seabirds, owing to the small spatial footprint of the fishery

However, this assessment has the caveat that substantial data gaps exist. The SNCB advice follows a precautionary stance, given the significant data gaps. As further evidence is collected and analysed, the perceived risk may change.

A better understanding of the actual risk posed by the fisheries will require closer examination of the bycatch associated with this activity. Any new management measures should contribute to achieving GES targets for D1 and D4. The following goals have been developed to address the issue of bycatch associated with skate and ray fisheries:

  • deliver effective management of skate and ray fisheries in the Southern North Sea and English Channel
  • contribute to improving biological and environmental sustainability by understanding and reducing the wider impacts of skate and ray fishing

These goals will also positively contribute to achieving GES for UK Marine Strategy descriptor 1 (biological diversity) and descriptor 4 (food webs) in English waters. 

Moderate risk to marine litter from all assessed gear types

There is a moderate risk to marine litter by beam trawls, otter trawls, trammel nets, gillnets and longlines. More robust estimates of abandoned, lost, discarded fishing gear (ALDFG) in the fishery are required.

Loss of gear, such as trawls and nets, will add to overall levels of fishing-related litter in the sea and can have unintended consequences such as ghost fishing, related to D10. The FMP management group will need to consider how best to avoid or minimise gear loss and achieve sustainable end-of-life disposal. The goal ‘Contribute to improving biological and environmental sustainability by understanding and reducing the wider impacts of skate and ray fishing’ has actions on understanding the impacts of fishing gear on the marine environment. These will encompass understanding the impact of marine litter through lost gears associated with the skate and ray fisheries. The goal will positively contribute to achieving GES for UK Marine Strategy descriptor 10 (marine litter) in English waters.

Climate change mitigation and adaption

The Climate Change Act 2008 establishes the target to reach net zero by 2050. The UK seafood sector will need to consider how they will reduce emissions to contribute to meeting the net zero target. This approach will also need to consider policies for:

  • improved seabed integrity
  • improving blue carbon
  • reducing carbon emissions

The future of climate impacts in the Southern North Sea and English Channel are not very well understood.

Further research on the impact of climate change on the fisheries covered under this FMP will be carried out. However, it is not currently perceived as within scope of this iteration of the FMP to directly deliver mitigation strategies against climate change but may be within its remit to support fisheries through national transition to low carbon fishing.

The climate change objective in the Act ensures that future fisheries management policy can, where appropriate, adapt to any future impacts of climate change on the UK fishing industry to support climate adaptive fisheries management. Evidence will be collected for modelling the potential movement of fish stocks and the impacts this will have on regional fisheries. As stocks move into and out of UK waters, assessments of stock levels will be conducted to adapt allocation of fishing opportunities.

Further research will be required to predict the scale of impacts to the environment and over what timeframe this will be applicable to the Southern North Sea and English Channel.

Secondary and dependent species (including bycatch)

The marine wildlife bycatch mitigation initiative sets out how the UK will achieve its ambitions to minimise and, where possible, eliminate the accidental capture and entanglement of sensitive marine species in UK fisheries.

The definition of bycatch included within this section deals with the risk of bycatch of unwanted and sensitive marine species which may be caught alongside the targeted FMP species. Currently there is a known evidence gap in relation to bycatch of unwanted and sensitive marine species (elasmobranchs, cetaceans, seals, seabirds) in the fisheries targeting skates and rays. Therefore, deliberate actions have been incorporated into the goals for the FMP which focus on identifying interactions between the FMP stocks and bycatch of sensitive marine species. This includes undertaking research to identify and address key bycatch issues.

The FMP’s key recommendations, given the current lack of data on bycatch associated with skate and ray fisheries, are to:

  • collect additional evidence to understand levels of bycatch associated with static and towed gear use on birds, mammals, and fish, as well as benthic habitat integrity
  • use this evidence to develop robust mitigation strategies, and to support the national bycatch mitigation programme

Implementation, monitoring and review

Implementation

This FMP sets out the roadmap to achieve the long-term sustainable management of FMP species in ICES areas 4b, 4c, 7d and 7e, in line with the objectives of the Act. The ‘FMP policy goals’ section sets out the FMP goals and policies, which have been described in terms of the key actions that should be taken and the timeframes needed to deliver them.

The policy goals, actions and measures in this FMP will undergo a subsequent implementation phase, where appropriate mechanisms will be required to deliver them. Such mechanisms could include voluntary measures, licence conditions, national and regional byelaws, and statutory instruments. This implementation phase will build on:

  • the existing evidence base
  • any action taken throughout the FMP’s development
  • the options discussed with stakeholders

These will be reviewed and taken forward by Defra and the MMO once the FMP is published.

Subsequent implementation roadmaps will be subject to regular monitoring and review to ensure progress. The Southern North Sea and Channel skates and rays FMP is subject to a statutory review process at a maximum of 6 years after publication. After this point it will be necessary to provide evidence for what has been achieved through the implementation of those actions and measures.

This review process will also build in monitoring for potential environmental effects, to help establish whether any changes are needed in the management of the Southern North Sea and Channel skates and rays fisheries.

Monitoring

This is the first version of this FMP. It sets out the first steps and longer-term vision necessary for sustainable management of this fishery. These plans will take time to develop and implement. They are intended to allow an adaptive approach and will be reviewed and improved over time as we collect more evidence and collaborate with the fishing sector and wider interests on the sustainable management of these fisheries.

Delivery of the actions and measures for this Southern North Sea and Channel skates and rays FMP will be monitored.

For some skate and ray stocks there is insufficient evidence to determine MSY or a proxy for MSY. This FMP sets out the proposed steps to build the evidence base for these stocks, to support progress towards defining and measuring stock status and reporting on stock sustainability. A prioritisation exercise will be carried out to focus research efforts across all FMP stocks and plans, to increase data collection, and will be reviewed over time. An increase in the available evidence to define and measure stock status, including improvement in the longer-term of the data category of the stocks ICES assessment, will be an indicator of the effectiveness of this FMP for these stocks. To maintain or increase the stock levels at or to sustainable levels, the FMP sets out policies such as exploring alternatives to the current group TAC management to improve the management of the stocks. It also introduces voluntary measures to improve identification, handling and so survivability of the stocks.

For other skate and ray stocks, there is sufficient evidence to determine MSY or a proxy for MSY and to assess the sustainability of the stock. An increase to, or maintenance of, the number of stocks fished at sustainable levels will indicate the effectiveness of this FMP for these stocks. This FMP sets out the proposed steps to build the evidence base to improve stock assessment calculations. An increase in the available evidence with improved stock assessments will be an indicator of the effectiveness of this FMP for these stocks.

Other indicators to measure the effectiveness of the management measures are:

  • handling, compliance and education guidelines have been produced for all fishers
  • a sentinel fishery is in place to inform state of the stock for small-eyed ray in 7e, and data is fed into the ICES process
  • evidence has been gathered to support the SCF skates and rays’ indicative roadmap for alternative approaches to the current group TAC

This FMP is primarily focused on improving evidence and data to inform any future management. If new evidence supports the implementation of any of the management measure detailed in the FMP, they could be added as indicators in future iterations of the FMP to determine their effectiveness.

Review

Monitoring data, as outlined above, will be collected on a yearly basis where possible and reported on every 3 years. This data will be important to inform the setting of any future management measures and to assess whether the FMP is on target to achieve its goals.

As set out in the Fisheries Act 2020, this FMP will be reviewed at least every 6 years. This formal review will assess how the FMP has performed in terms of delivering against Fisheries Act 2020 objectives. However, further reviews of the FMP could be carried out within the 6-year period if the responsible authority feels there is a need to do so based on the evidence and monitoring of the effectiveness of the plan. The findings of this review will also inform the development of any subsequent iterations of the FMP. The FMP will also be reported on as part of the report on the JFS every 3 years.

References

Ahrens RN and others, 2020. ‘Saving large fish through harvest slots outperforms the classical minimum‐length limit when the aim is to achieve multiple harvest and catch‐related fisheries objectives’ in Fish and Fisheries issue 21(3), pages 483 to 510. Other authors Allen MS, Walters C and Arlinghaus R

Bradbury G and others, 2017. ‘Risk assessment of seabird bycatch in UK waters’. Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust. Other authors Shackshaft M, Scott-Hayward L, Rexstad E, Miller D, and Edwards D

Catchpole T and others, 2007. ‘Programme 21: Bristol Channel ray survival’ in Fisheries Science 8. Other authors Enever R, Doran S

Ellis JR and others, 2008a. ‘Thames ray tagging and survival’ in Cefas Fisheries Science Partnership 2007 to 2008, programme 19, final report, page 54. Other authors Burt GJ and Cox LPN

Ellis JR and others, 2008b. ‘The status and management of thornback ray Raja clavata in the south-western North Sea’ in ICES CM 2008/K:13, page 45. Other authors Burt GJ, Cox LPN, Kulka DW and Payne AIL

Ellis JR and others, 2018. ‘At-vessel mortality of skates (Rajidae) taken in coastal fisheries and evidence of longer-term survival’ in Journal of fish biology issue 92, pages 1702 to 1719. Other authors Burt GJ, Grilli G, McCully Phillips SR, Catchpole TL, Maxwell DL

Ellis JR and others, 2005. ‘Assessing the status of demersal elasmobranchs in UK waters: a review’ in Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, issue 85, pages 1025 to 1047. Other authors Dulvy NK, Jennings S, Parker-Humphreys M and Rogers SI

Ellis JR and others, 2011. ‘Preliminary observations on the life history and movements of skates (Rajidae) around the Island of Jersey, western English Channel’ in Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, issue 91(6), pages 1185 to 1192. Other authors Morel G, Burt G and Bossy S

Enever R and others, 2009. ‘The survival of skates (Rajidae) caught by demersal trawlers fishing in UK waters’ in Fisheries Research issue 97, pages 72 to 76. Other authors Catchpole TL, Ellis JR, Grant A

Enever R and others, 2010. ‘Discard mitigation increases skate survival in the Bristol Channel in Fisheries Research issue 102, pages 9 to 15. Other authors Revill AS, Caslake R, Grant A

French N and others, 2022. ‘Risk based approach to remote electronic monitoring for English inshore fisheries. Natural England Commissioned Reports, Number 437. Other authors Pearce J, Howarth P, Whitley C, Mackey K, Nugent P

Gwinn DC and others, 2015. ‘Rethinking length‐based fisheries regulations: the value of protecting old and large fish with harvest slots’ in Fish and Fisheries, issue 16(2), pages 259 to 281. Other authors Allen MS, Johnston FD, Brown P, Todd CR and Arlinghaus R

ICES, 2014. ‘Report of the working group on bycatch of protected species (WGBYC)’ 4 to 7 February 2014, Copenhagen, Denmark. In ICES CM 2014/ACOM:28, page 96

Kasper JM and others, 2020. ‘Using harvest slot limits to promote stock recovery and broaden age structure in marine recreational fisheries: a case study’ in North American Journal of Fisheries Management, issue 40(6), pages 1451 to 1471. Other authors Brust J, Caskenette A, McNamee J, Vokoun JC and Schultz ET

Kingston A and others, 2021. ‘UK bycatch monitoring programme report for 2019’. United Kingdom. Other authors Thomas L and Northridge S

LeBlanc N and others, 2014. ‘Raimouest: the French fishery of rays in the western English Channel (VIIe), 2014 update’. Other authors Tetard A, Legrand V, Stephan E, Hegron Macé

Løkkeborg S, 2008. ‘Review and assessment of mitigation measures to reduce incidental catch of seabirds in longline, trawl and gillnet fisheries’ in Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) Fisheries and Aquaculture Circular number 1040, Rome: FAO

McCully SR and others, 2012. ‘Lengths at maturity and conversion factors for skates (Rajidae) around the British Isles, with an analysis of data in the literature’ in ICES Journal of Marine Science issue 69, pages 1812 to 1822. Other authors Scott F, Ellis JR

McCully SR and others, 2013. ‘Monitoring thornback ray movements and assessing stock levels’ in Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (Lowestoft) Fishery Science Partnership Programme, issue 35, page 33. Other authors Burt GJ, Silva JF and Ellis JR

Melvin EF, 2001. ‘Solutions to seabird bycatch in Alaska’s demersal longline fisheries’ in Washington Sea Grant Program, University of Washington report

Nicolaus E and others, 2017. ‘Concentrations of mercury and other trace elements in 2 offshore skates: sandy ray (Leucoraja circularis) and shagreen ray (L. fullonica)’ in Marine Pollution Bulletin, volume 123, issues 1 to 2, pages 387 to 394, ISSN 0025-326X. Other authors Barry J, Bolam T, Lorance P, Marandel F, McCully S, Neville S and Ellis J

Northridge S and others, 2020. ‘Preliminary estimates of seabird bycatch by UK vessels in UK and adjacent waters’ report prepared for Defra (project code ME6024). Other authors Kingston A and Coram A

Simpson SJ, 2018. ‘Spatial ecology and fisheries interactions of Rajidae in the UK’ PhD thesis, University of Southampton, Southampton

Thorburn J and others, 2021. ‘Seasonal and ontogenetic variation in depth use by a critically endangered benthic elasmobranch and its implications for spatial management’ in Frontiers in Marine Science issue 8, 656368. Other authors Wright PJ, Lavender E, Dodd J, Neat F, Martin JG, Lynam C, James M

Thys KJM and others, 2023. ‘Blondes do it better? A comparative study on the morphometry and life-history traits of commercially important skates blonde ray Raja brachyura, thornback ray Raja clavata, and spotted ray Raja montagui, with management implications’ in Fisheries Research issue 263, 106679. Other authors Lemey L, Van Bogaert N

Trancart T and others, 2014. ‘Modelling marine shad distribution using data from French bycatch fishery surveys’ in Marine Ecology Progress Series, issue 511, pages 181 to 192. Other authors Rochette S, Acou A, Lasne E and Feunteun E

Van Bogaert N and others, 2020. ‘Discard survival estimates of commercially caught skates of the North Sea and English Channel’ in Flanders Research Institute for Agriculture Fisheries and Food Research Report Output Deliverable for Work Package 2 of the Interreg SUMARiS project, page 42. Other authors Ampe B, Uhlmann SS, Torreele E

Whitley C, 2019. ‘The Lyme Bay Reserve Ray Project: focussing on the local mixed fishery in the Lyme Bay Conservation and Fisheries Reserve’, a report for the Blue Marine Foundation

Back to top