Hélène Bours, INTERNATIONAL Fisheries expert
This article was written in collaboration with Hélène Bours, who has worked for over 30 years on fisheries issues at EU as well as international level. Hélène supported the creation of the Coalition for Fair Fisheries Arrangements and has collaborated with CFFA ever since. She is a member of the Board of CFFA.
Beginning of February, the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission (IOTC) Contracting Parties, meeting in Kenya, adopted Conservation and Management Measures on both anchored and drifting Fish Aggregating Devices (FADs).
The measures include a gradual reduction of the number of drifting FADs per vessel, - from 300 to 250 in the first year and to 200 in 2025-, a mandatory register of FADs that will help monitor their use and a 72 days period where the use of FADs is banned on the high seas.
The adoption of these measures has been welcomed by many Indian Ocean coastal nations, as, for them, FADs is one of the main reasons why tuna is overfished in the region, including the over-exploited, highly prized yellowfin tuna. Indeed, a high number of juveniles are often caught when the FAD is encircled by the tuna vessels purse seine nets. However, these measures on FADs should not distract from the need to address the tuna fishing fleets over-capacity in the region.
Why was the EU singled out at the IOTC meeting?
Prior to the IOTC meeting in Kenya, a letter was sent to the EU by 119 Civil Society Groups, including artisanal fishers’ organisations like CAOPA, FPAOI and SFBOA, calling the EU to support effective management measures on FADs, as “when tuna resources are well managed, they can provide food, support livelihoods, and drive local economies.”
Signatories called on the EU to support a reduction of the number of FADs to a maximum of 150 per vessel, a 3 months FAD closure, an efficient and transparent FADs monitoring system, the phasing out of supply vessels that deploy and service FADs, and the phasing out of FADs constructed from entangling and non-biodegradable materials.
In their letter, CSOs highlighted that the EU fleet, -in particular the purse seiners that are using FADs- is among the top three fleets fishing in the Indian Ocean for tropical tuna: “More than 60% of the overfished yellowfin tuna in the Indian Ocean is caught by EU vessels.” CSOs emphasized that the EU is not living to its Common Fisheries Policy, nor to its international obligations under Article 6 of the UN Fish Stocks Agreement (UNFSA), to adopt a precautionary approach.
Despite this call by CSOs, the EU opposed the proposals voted by IOTC parties in Kenya, in particular the 72 days FADs closure period. The EU threatened to object to the entire proposal and said, after the meeting, they were still “considering options,” that could include a formal objection before the measures adopted become binding on IOTC Members, beginning of June 2023. The EU emphasized that it shares the aims of the proper management of FADs, but that the IOTC had adopted without consensus, a measure that lacks scientific basis and that “could prove impossible to implement, in addition to having extremely harsh impacts on fishers and local communities.”
In a letter signed by almost 120 Civil Society Organisations, they denounced that 60% of overfished yellowfin tuna is caught by EU vessels, in particular purse seiners using Fish Aggregating Devices (FADs). Photo: A purse seiner in Port Louis, Mauritius, by Jo Anne McArthur/Unsplash.
In an earlier exchange with the EU Advisory Council on Long Distance Fisheries (LDAC), the EU summarises its intentions regarding the use of FADs: “In the long term, we should aim to establish science-based regional management strategies for FADs in the different oceans, integrating measures such as limits on number of FADs deployed, uses of specific materials, closures, restrictions on FADs sets, […] as appropriate.”
Mixed results for the Indian Ocean tuna small scale fishers, as FADs closure will not apply to EEZs
With their impacts on the resources and on the environment, FADs induce significant disturbances in the exploitation patterns of Indian Ocean artisanal fishers. Lost or discarded drifting FADs also cause environmental damage, particularly to sensitive coastal habitats such as coral reefs and seagrass beds, and also contribute to plastic pollution.
The results of the IOTC meeting have been generally welcomed by the signatories of the CSO letter. However, some aspects of the resolutions voted will have adverse impacts on the Indian Ocean artisanal tuna fishers. The resolution adopted on drifting FADs (para 29) stipulates that “to prevent a disproportionate burden on Small Island Developing States (SIDS) whose economy depends on purse seine fisheries on DFADs, the DFAD Closure Period shall apply exclusively to the high seas of the IOTC area of competence.” So the measure will not apply to SIDs EEZs, which means that, during the high seas closure, drifting FADs fishing may be concentrated within the EEZs of coastal States that authorize their use, where they would disrupt artisanal fishers’ operations.
To understand whether the high seas FADs closure will have a positive impact on tuna populations, it will be important to look at the proportion of tuna catches in the high seas areas. In comparison, there is such a FADs closure in the ICCAT area for a defined period of time but in a specific area that is not limited to the high seas. This closure had to be reviewed as it was not clear whether or not it served any purpose in terms of catches of immature tuna. To date, no study has clearly identified areas of concentration in ICCAT area that, with proper management could have a beneficial impact on tropical tuna populations, nor the positive effect of shifting the fishing effort following a partial time-area closure.
The problem of overcapacity still needs to be tackled
Looking at the IOTC record of fishing vessels [Ed. The record was consulted on 21 February 2023, for vessels that are a) larger than 24 metres in length overall, or b) in case of vessels less than 24m, those operating in waters outside the EEZ of the flag state, and that are authorised to fish for tuna and tuna-like species in the IOTC Area], there are currently more than 6200 authorised tuna fishing vessels, all nationalities and all gears/capacities combined. EU purse seiners, - Spain (15), France (12), Italy (1)-, are the biggest and most efficient vessels. Other countries have mostly smaller purse seiners, many of which are also using FADs: Indonesia (202), Philippines (48), Seychelles (12 - mainly of European origin), Japan (10), Australia (9), Iran (8), South Korea (7), Mauritius (4), Oman (1), Tanzania (1).
Many longliners are also active in the area: 2007 vessels in total, of which 900 are flagged to Sri Lanka and 426 to Indonesia. Longliners have their own issues when it comes to environmental impact, with important catches of sharks as well as seabirds and sea turtles. They also depend more on transhipments at sea, an operation through which laundering of IUU-caught fish is known to occur (129 carrier vessels are authorised in the IOTC area).
There are more than 6200 vessels, including purse seines, many of which use Fish Aggregating Devices (FADs) and longliners of more than 24 m, fishing for tuna in the Indian Ocean. Even though the overcapacity phenomenon is not new, no measure has adequately addressed it. Photo by Alex Hofford.
Overcapacity is not a new phenomenon in Indian Ocean tuna fisheries. In the past, several resolutions calling for countries to limit fishing capacity led to the convening of a Working Group on Fishing Capacity in 2009. The work of IOTC on fishing capacity highlighted the many data gaps, whether in terms of number/size of vessels fishing (gillnetters, longliners), incomplete information on catches, on area of operation, on vessel ownership, etc.
So far, no progress was made to adequately address the issue of overcapacity, because of these many uncertainties, coupled with conflicting interests of, on the one side, developing States who want to exercise their rights to participate in tuna fisheries and receive an equitable share of the benefits generated, and, on the other side, States that have historically exploited tuna resources and want to maintain their access to resources.
Squaring the circle: eliminating overcapacity whilst ensuring the rights of developing states
Addressing overcapacity in Indian Ocean tuna fisheries means difficult choices will have to be made in terms of access allocation. Which vessels should have priority access?
Currently, most of mechanisms for the allocation of access are largely based on historically reported catches declared by States that have had the capacity to exploit fish resources, including on the high seas. Such mechanisms do not recognise the aspirations of developing countries to benefit more from tuna fisheries, including for providing access to their local artisanal fishing communities.
In order to evolve towards an allocation system that addresses overcapacity whilst ensuring the rights of developing states, particularly their small scale fisheries, to exploit tuna and benefit from it, CFFA and its partner CAOPA have suggested that a system be devised where developing States from the region in whose areas of national jurisdiction the stocks also occur are granted an increased share of fishing opportunities (per stock/fishery), subject to increasingly strict conservation and management rules, including efficient monitoring, control and enforcement and compliance with precautionary management advice. Costal states, SIDs in particular, should be granted support to abide by such rules, implement obligations and/or new mechanisms for fisheries management to reflect economic and capacity disparities for those developing countries.
We also suggest that allocation of access should be based on a set of transparent environmental and social criteria, that respects the rights of developing coastal States and small-scale fishing communities to participate in and benefit from tuna fisheries, and that would lead to positive competition to improve the standards and practices in the fishery.
The current allocation mechanisms based on historical catches fail to recognise the aspirations of developing countries to exploit tuna resources, including the development of artisanal tuna fisheries. Photo: A fisher carrying a yellowfin tuna, Wikimedia commons.
Allocation should be reviewed periodically taking into account the socio-economic gains achieved in developing coastal States, particularly benefits accruing to fisheries dependent communities, and the extent to which these gains may be captured by foreign fishing interests. Indeed, beneficial owners from distant water fishing nations or other Indian Ocean coastal States may use the development potential of some developing coastal CPCs to transfer their fishing capacity under various arrangements, including by reflagging, thereby getting access to new fishing opportunities while contributing very little to local development, and even harming development prospects for small scale fishing communities.
There are still too many boats chasing too few tuna
Given the current situation of the tuna resources over-exploitation in the Indian Ocean, like yellowfin and bigeye tuna, it is more than ever necessary that the IOTC tackles the problem of fishing overcapacity. The current focus on FADs, particularly the reduction of their number and better monitoring, may help address issues raised by Indian Ocean artisanal fishers, including the impact on resources and on the fragile coastal eco-system they depend on for their livelihoods.
However, this focus should not distract from the need for IOTC and its Contracting Parties to adopt other management measures on fleet capacity to adjust the fishing effort to the sustainable use of the resources, in a way that ensures those fishing most sustainably get priority access.
There are too many boats chasing too few tuna in the Indian Ocean.
Banner photo: Illustrative photo of a Fish Aggregating Device in Solomon Islands, by Wade Fairey.
SWIOTUNA and FPAOI organised a parallel event to the 27th session of the IOTC which was held in Mauritius early May. They shed light on the challenges small-scale tuna fishers face in the region and issued a joint statement.