“Tide Must Be Turned On Pacific Tuna”ff

Pacific Island countries are slowly turning the tide in respect of the control of the region’s lucrative tuna fisheries. It has taken them a long time, and there is still some way to go. The omens that the tide is turning is evident in the recognition by the powerful nations of the world whose fishing vessels have exploited the region’s lucrative tuna resources that Pacific Island countries are strategically positioned to manage and conserve the world’s last remaining healthy tuna stocks. After all, their waters account for about half of the tuna stocks taken from the region. In 2006, 1,078,864 tons of tuna was taken from the exclusive economic zones (EEZs) of the FFA members. 718,342 tons was taken from the other members of the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC) and 389,613 tons was taken from international waters. The total catch in 2006 was 2,186,819 tons.

Having said that, there is still some way to go before Pacific Island Countries can truly be in control and secure rights to the tuna fisheries. Recently, there has been criticism of the Pacific Island Countries’ management of tuna stocks especially in respect of yellowfin and bigeye tuna. Consequently, this has been used as justification to assimilate the Pacific Islands Forum Fisheries Agency (FFA) with the Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC). The arguments for rationalization are well documented. What is less publicized is the perception that the decline in yellowfin and bigeye stocks is evident of the inability of the Pacific Island countries to manage tuna stocks effectively. These criticisms however are misguided. The Scientific Committee of the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC) has stated that the decline is attributable to the distant water longline fleets.

Some commentators have used the decline of bigeye and yellowfin stocks to argue that fisheries must be brought under the auspices of bigger organization. This view is symptomatic of the belief that bigger is better; that Regional Fisheries Management Organizations (RFMO) which is typically how international fisheries are managed should be enhanced. This is consistent with the global view that RFMOs should be given responsibility to manage and conserve fish stocks. The problem is that RFMOs have not been successful at what they do. After the 2006 annual meeting of the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC), a concerned Eastern Pacific tuna fisherman scathingly attacked the inability of the IATTC to adopt effective conservation measures. He said that “it is time to end the hypocrisy and deceit that has prevailed during the last years in the running of the IATTC-AIDCP and truly protect tuna stocks as well as other marine life”.

In our region, the WCPFC has made some important strides in the development of mechanisms that would allow for the effective long-term management and conservation of the region’s tuna resources. These have largely been attributed to the effort and role the Pacific Island Countries have played in pushing for strong conservation measures. Compared to other RFMOs, the WCPFC is light years ahead, and decisions at least with respect to the skipjack surface fishery is already playing a part in optimizing benefits to the Pacific Island Countries from that fishery.

The Tuna Conference held in Port Moresby in September underscored the importance that tuna fishers and industries throughout the world attach to the tuna fishery of the region. Vessel operators and fleets now recognize the importance and power the Pacific Island Countries have with regards to the tuna resources. Without access to the EEZs of the Pacific Island Countries, many of the fleets will not be able to remain economically viable. The pendulum is slowly swinging in favor of the Pacific Island Countries. The Vessel Day Scheme (VDS) which comes into effect on 1 December 2007 ensures that the Pacific Island Countries control the surface skipjack fisheries. This has been the largest fishery for the past 10 years. What the scheme does is impose limits on the total number of days that may be fished by the purse seine vessels. The total days are allocated amongst the Pacific island Countries who are Parties to the Nauru Agreement (these are Federated States of Micronesia, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, and Tuvalu). Vessel operators will have to approach respective Parties for days if they are to fish in their EEZs. The cursory attention given in this short article to the VDS does not do justice to the enormous potential that it represents for the Pacific Island Countries. The tide has certainly changed, and vessel operators are sparing no effort to maintain access to the region. In some cases, telephone calls are being made to the highest political levels of government in the region by distant water fishers not to implement the VDS.

The significance of the tuna fisheries has also not been lost on Forum Leaders. The Pacific Plan Action Committee (PPAC) recommended to Forum Leaders that fisheries should be number one priority for the Forum. In this regard, they recommended that Leaders, inter alia, recognize the importance of fisheries to the economies of the Pacific Island Countries, and the need to promote domestic fisheries, in particular the development of national tuna industries in the context of a phased introduction of rights based management arrangements.

Effective fisheries management however cannot be achieved without enforcement. To address this, the annual meeting of the Forum Fisheries Committee (FFC), agreed to develop a monitoring. Control and surveillance (MCS) strategy. This will involve the enhancement of current MCS tools and harmonization of the various databases held by the FFA with those of its members. The Strategy will involve undertaking an Illegal, Unregulated and Unreported (IUU) Risk assessment which should provide information on resource robustness, loss of earnings, ecological and sustainability of the resource. The Strategy hopefully will eventually lead to the establishment of a Regional MCS Coordination Centre (RMCC) to facilitate operational support to members and possibly the establishment of a dedicated regional patrol vessel (RPV) fleet.

The tide is turning but the challenge is by no means over. As the Chair of the FFC said in his letter to the Forum Chair, “complicating this is the current “race to fish” underway within the western Pacific as WCPFC members, including FFA members, seek to maximize their catches and their access rights in advance of allocation decisions within the WCPFC. Competition between WCPFC members is being waged on a number of fronts. Pacific Island Countries are asserting their sovereign rights to exploit, manage and develop tuna fisheries within their EEZs and on the high seas, while distant water fishing nations argue the right to ongoing access to these resources based on historical catch – including rights to fish within the waters of Pacific Island Countries. Linked to this is an ongoing debate about the extent to which Pacific Island Countries should be constrained relative to industrialized fishing nations as they move to develop their fishing industries, and how these development aspirations can be accommodated in an already oversubscribed fisheries”.

Pacific Island Countries have never had any qualms about who owns the tuna stocks in their EEZs. Since 1998, they have also had an unequivocal view about allocations and the role of the WCPFC in the allocation process. As to the tide turning, the Pacific Island Countries (members of the PNA) will be meeting in Honiara in February 2008. The subject matter of their meeting will be “Fleet restructuring of the distant water fleets, chartering arrangements and aspirations of Small Island developing States”.

The tide is certainly turning, and the currents are being influenced by the Pacific Island Countries. They will no longer be bystanders to the fisheries.

Source: Written by Transform Aqorau