EIR/202600517325 · FOI/EIR · clarification
Breaches of fisheries regulations, sea fishing vessel inspections and fishing licences queries: EIR release
Information requested
Further information relating to the response you received to your previous request (reference: 202600513782) regarding inspections of commercial fishing vessels, breaches of fisheries regulations and enforcement actions taken by the Marine Directorate.
“Many thanks for your response to our information request and apologies for the delay in properly reacting to it so far! We have been reviewing the data provided and I now wanted to follow up with a couple of clarification requests to make sure that we correctly interpret what you have provided.
First of all, I would like to understand the extent of enforcement action by the Marine Directorate regarding breaches of fisheries regulations that might fall outside of the scope of your response. For clarity, any references to “breaches” throughout this email refer to breaches of fisheries regulations detected in relation to commercial sea fishing vessels. By “formal enforcement” we mean written warnings, FPNs, prosecutions and any other sanctions that go beyond a verbal rebrief or advisory letter.
1: Could you please confirm that indeed the two spreadsheets on coastal boardings (202600513782 - Coastal Inspections Boardings Data 2022-2025) and at-sea boardings (202600513782 - Boardings and Infringements at Sea 2022-2025) exclusively cover commercial sea fishing vessel inspections in port and at sea (and breaches detected through such inspections), i.e. do not include any information related to breaches detected through other means (e.g. REM, logbook checks separate to vessel inspections at sea or in port, other desk-based tools and trackers, etc.)?
2: Could you please confirm that the “202600513782 - Coastal Infringement Data 2022-2025” spreadsheet, however, does include both breaches detected through vessel inspections and those detected through other means?
3: If this is indeed the case, could you please re-submit this spreadsheet including an indication which entries relate to breaches detected via vessel inspection, and which relate to breaches detected via other means? Alternatively, can you please indicate if there is a simple way for us to filter out entries that do not relate to breaches detected through vessel inspections, e.g. based on the type of breach?Secondly, there are several entries in each of the spreadsheets you provided that share the same combination of date, location (either “PortName” or “Office”) and vessel flag and length category. This indicates that some such matching entries may relate to breaches detected as part of the same inspection. We would like to aggregate the number of inspections (or other checks through other means, as above) by different criteria such as type of breach or sanction and for this purpose need to avoid double-counting of multiple entries that refer to the same inspection or check.
Could you therefore please
4: If any of the entries do relate to the same inspection, re-submit to us the spreadsheets, but include an Inspection ID or Check ID (anonymised if necessary, such as “Check_1”, “Check_2” and so on) that allows us to understand which entries relate to the same inspection or the same check via other means?
5: Provide the number of commercial sea fishing vessel inspections for each of the years 2022- 2025, a: in total (if possible separately for those undertaken at sea versus in port), b: those that detected a breach (or more) that did not result in formal enforcement of any kind, c: those that detected a breach (or more) that resulted in formal enforcement of any kind (including prosecution), and d: those that detected a breach (or more) that resulted in prosecution?
6: Provide the number of checks (related to commercial sea fishing vessels) via means other than vessel inspections (e.g. REM, logbook checks separate to vessel inspections at sea or in port, other desk-based tools and trackers, etc.) for each of the years 2022-2025, a: in total, b: those that detected a breach (or more) that did not result in formal enforcement of any kind, c: those that detected a breach (or more) that resulted in formal enforcement of any kind (including prosecution), and d: those that detected a breach (or more) that resulted in prosecution?
Thirdly, we appreciate the inclusion of some information relating to prosecutions in the spreadsheets you provided, but we remain interested in further details about the vessels involved, as per our initial information request. Therefore, could you please:
7: Provide the following details for all breaches in the 2022-2025 period that led to a prosecution: date of breach detection, date of prosecution, vessel flag, vessel length or length category, vessel name and PLN, breach description, prosecution outcome including size of fine).
8: Indicate, as for all other entries, whether the breach(es) that led to the prosecution was/were detected a) through vessel inspection or b) other means (as above).
Finally, I have a few fishing-license related questions, regarding whether any fishing licenses were suspended, revoked other otherwise impacted (e.g. points on licenses) in response to breaches detected:
9: Were any such impacts on fishing licences associated with any of the data you shared in your response to our information request?
10: Could you provide the number of licenses (if any) that were a) suspended, b) revoked or c) received points in the timeframe 2005-2025?
11: Do fishing licenses get temporarily “frozen” while investigation of a suspected breach is ongoing? If so, can you provide the number of licenses that were frozen in the 2022-2025 period, and clarify what determines whether or for how long a license is frozen?”
Response
As the information you have requested is ‘environmental information’ for the purposes of the Environmental Information (Scotland) Regulations 2004 (EIRs), we are required to deal with your request under those Regulations. We are applying the exemption at section 39(2) of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (FOISA), so that we do not also have to deal with your request under FOISA.
This exemption is subject to the ‘public interest test’. Therefore, taking account of all the circumstances of this case, we have considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exemption, because there is no public interest in dealing with the same request under two different regimes. This is essentially a technical point and has no material effect on the outcome of your request.
Request for information regarding inspections of commercial fishing vessels, breaches, of fisheries regulations and enforcement actions taken by the Marine Directorate
Question 1
The two spreadsheets referred to in Question 1 of your request detail inspections carried out during boardings of commercial sea fishing vessels in port and at sea respectively, however, any suspected breaches recorded during boardings are usually subject to further checks e.g. desk-based, after a physical inspection has concluded. The spreadsheets also include inspections carried out on unlicenced/hobby fishing vessels – these are indicated as ‘unregistered’ in the length category column. The spreadsheets do not include other forms of inspection e.g. inspections of market/premises.
Question 2
The coastal infringement data spreadsheet referred to in Question 2 of your request includes breaches detected through inspections and through other means e.g. desk-based.
Questions 3, 6 & 8
While our aim is to provide information whenever possible, in this instance the Scottish Government does not have the information you have requested. Therefore we are refusing your request under the exception at regulation 10(4)(a) of the EIRs.
Under the terms of the exception at Regulation 10(4)(a) of the EIRs (information not held), the Scottish Government is not required to provide information which it does not have. The Scottish Government does not have the information you have requested because the Marine Directorate systems which record details of inspections and suspected breaches of fisheries legislation do not contain a field which records how breaches were detected, only the detection unit i.e. the office or marine vessel which detected an infringement.
This exception is subject to the ‘public interest test’. Therefore, taking account of all the circumstances of this case, we have considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exception. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exception. While we recognise that there may be some public interest in whether potential breaches of fishing legislation are detected by physical inspections or other means such as desk-based analysis, we cannot provide information which we do not hold.
The coastal infringement spreadsheet could, however, be filtered using the ‘PortName’ column to show breaches detected by UKFMC as these are detected by desk-based means only.
Question 4
I enclose a copy of the information you have requested. Inspections on the same vessel which resulted in more than one infringements being recorded have been highlighted on the attached ‘Boardings and Infringement at Sea’ and ‘Coastal Infringement Data’ spreadsheets.
The Coastal inspections spreadsheet previously released for your request 202600513782 records each boarding of a vessel. Very occasionally a vessel may be boarded more than once on the same day to undertake follow up action, e.g. to issue a letter, however, these are still counted as separate inspections in our published figures (please see our response to Question 5 below).
Question 5
As stated in our response to your EIR request of 4 February 2026 (reference: 202600504923), the information you have requested is published on the Scottish Government website at: https://www.gov.scot/collections/marine-scotland-reporting-statistics/
Under regulation 6(1)(b) of the EIRs, we do not have to give you information which is already publicly available and easily accessible to you in another form or format. If, however, you do not have internet access to obtain this information from the website(s) listed, then please contact me again and I will send you a paper copy.
Details of infringements detected during inspections and the subsequent outcomes, which correspond with our published statistics (at the link provided above) are provided in the spreadsheets attached.
Question 7
While our aim is to provide information whenever possible, in this instance the Scottish Government does not have the information you have requested. Therefore we are refusing your request under the exception at regulation 10(4)(a) of the EIRs.
Under the terms of the exception at Regulation 10(4)(a) of the EIRs (information not held), the Scottish Government is not required to provide information which it does not have. The Scottish Government does not have the information you have requested because the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service do not always notify the Scottish Government of the full details of prosecution outcomes. The information that we do hold has been detailed in the spreadsheets released to you for your previous request (reference: 202600513782).
This exception is subject to the ‘public interest test’. Therefore, taking account of all the circumstances of this case, we have considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exception. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exception. While we recognise that there may be some public interest in the outcome of prosecution cases relating to breaches of fishing legislation, we cannot provide information which we do not hold.
A further exception under regulation 11(2) of the EIRs (personal information) applies to vessel names and PLNs because the Scottish Government is of the view that these details, in conjunction with other publicly available sources, could be used to identify individuals and thus disclosing it would contravene the data protection principles in Article 5(1) of the General Data Protection Regulation and in section 34(1) of the Data Protection Act 2018. This exception is not subject to the 'public interest test', so we are not required to consider if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exception.
Questions 9 & 10
No Scottish administered domestic licences were suspended or revoked during the period 2005-2025. 11 vessels and 6 master/owners received points between 2005-2025 but none accumulated sufficient points to trigger the suspending or revoking of their licence.
Question 11
The Scottish Government does not freeze licences during the investigation of suspected breaches and only looks to apply a licence freeze at time a case is referred to the Crown Procurator and Fiscal Service (COPFS). The Scottish Government will consider adding points to a licence following prosecutions for cases where the suspect is referred directly to COPFS i.e. where Fixed Penalty Notice was not offered as an alternative.
About FOI
The Scottish Government is committed to publishing all information released in response to Freedom of Information requests. View all FOI responses at https://www.gov.scot/foi-responses.
Detected exemption language
We are applying the exemption at section 39(2) of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (FOISA), so that we do not also have to deal with your request under FOISA. This exemption is subject to the ‘public interest test’. Therefore, taking account of all the circumstances of this case, we have considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exemption, because there is no public interest in dealing with the same request under two different regimes. Therefore we are refusing your request under the exception at regulation 10(4)(a) of the EIRs.