SFP  Fisheries  Forum  Talking  Tuna  

 International  Seafood  Sustainability  Foundation  

1  

February  9,  2016  

IOTC  Indian  Ocean  Tuna  

Commission    Est:  1996  Area:  IO  

HQ:  Victoria,  Seychelles  Members:  30;  CNM:  2  

 IATTC  Inter-­‐American  Tropical  

Tuna  Commission  Est:  1950  Area:  EPO  

HQ:  La  Jolla,  CA  Members:  21;  CNM:  1  

     

WCPFC  Western  and  Central  

Pacific  Fisheries  Commission  

 Est:  2004  

Area:  WCPO  HQ:  Kolonia,  FSM  Members:  25;  

 CNM:  11    

Management  Regime  

2  

ICCAT  International  

Commission  for  the  Conservation  of  Atlantic  

Tunas  Est:  1969  

Area:  AO/Med  Sea  HQ:  Madrid,  Spain  

Members:  48;  CNM:  5  

CCSBT  Commission  for  the  Conservation  

of  Southern  Bluefin  Tuna  Est:  1994  

Area:  So.  Waters  of  AO/IO/PO  HQ:  Canberra,  AUS  Members:  6;  CNM:  3  

•  Tuna  stocks  are  managed  by  5  Regional  Fishery  Management  Organizations  (RFMOs).  

•  ISSF  works  with  these  RFMOs  who  are  responsible  for  management,  biomass  health  and  the  ecosystem.  

3  3  

A  team  of  strategic  policy  advisors  dedicated  to  each  RFMO  with  exper5se    

A1end  and  par3cipate  in  all  RFMO  annual  mee3ngs,  science  and  compliance  mee5ngs  and  working  groups    

Engage  in  targeted  outreach  to  RFMO  member  governments      

Develop  science-­‐based  Posi3on  Statements  for  each  RFMO  Annual  mee5ng      

Par3cipa3ng  Companies  Advocacy  –  Companies  send  leBers,  par5cipate  on  RFMO  delega5ons,  and  make  direct  contact  on  ISSF  advocacy  priori5es    

Serve  as  experts  in  working  groups,  panels,  and  host  side  events  (FADs,  MCS,  EMS,  e-­‐repor5ng)    

Provide  informa3on  resources  (technical  papers,  infographics,  blogs)  for  delegates  and  stakeholders  

     

   

ISSF  RFMO  advocacy  is  mul5-­‐faceted    

Harvest  Control  Rules  (HCRs)  

4  

CONSTANT  CATCH  RATES    CONSTANT  FISHING  MORTALITY    MAXIMUM  SUSTAINABLE  YIELD    

Definition:  A  model  that  predicts  acceptable  levels  of  fishing.  ü Set  of  tools  and  protocols  with  which  

management  has  some  direct  control  of  harvest  rules  and    strategies.  

ü Pre-­‐agreed  upon  above  or  below  reference  points  (target/limit)  that  trigger  a  plan  of  action  

ü What  happens  when  the  trigger  reference  point  is  achieved  =  limit  days  of  fishing.  

   

On  HCRs  WCPFC  has  adopted  measures  re:  ü Adopted  a  target  reference  point  on  SJ  tuna  ü Conservation  measure  setting  a  two  year          work  plan  ü Time  frames  for  harvest  strategies            SJ,  Bigeye,  Yellowfin,  and  Albacore  And  established:  ü FAD  working  group  –  ISSF  is              an  active  stakeholder  

   

5  

WCPFC  Outcomes    

STILL  NEED    •  Develop  harvest  control    rule  and  harvest  strategy    End  overfishing  of  bigeye  by  reducing  fishing  mortality      

 

On  FADs,  IATTC  has  adopted  measures  re:  ü FAD  data  reporting    ü FAD  marking  -­‐  makes  it  possible  to  link  FAD  specific  data  to  the  results  

for  individual  sets  on  FADs  

ü Non-­‐entangling  FADs  designs    And  established:  ü FAD  working  group  –  ISSF  is              an  active  stakeholder  

   

6  

IATTC  Outcomes    

STILL  NEED    •  Harvest  control  rules  +  permanent  reference  points    •  Meaningful  capacity  limits    •  Compliance  and  vessel  monitoring  system  (VMS)  reform    Additional  measures  adopted  for  which  ISSF  advocated  include:  ü  IMO  numbers  ü  Prohibiting  setting  on  whale  sharks  ü  Shark  and  ray  conservation  ü  Performance  Review  

ICCAT  Outcomes    

7  

STILL  NEED    •  100%  observer  coverage  on  purse  seine  vessels    •  Full  tuna  retention  •  VMS  reform    

On  harvest  control  rules  (HCRs),  ICCAT  has  adopted  measures  re:  ü Harvest  control  rules  for  northern  

albacore  ü Harvest  strategies  process    

On  FADs:  ü Non  entangling  FADs    ü FAD  management  working  group    -­‐  

ISSF  is  an  active  stakeholder  

ü FAD  data  collection    

Additional  measures  adopted  for  which  ISSF  advocated  include:  

ü IMO  numbers  

WCPFC  *  Further  progress  on  harvest  control  

rules  &  reference  points  for  all  covered  stocks  

*  Strengthen  compliance  assessment  process  (more  transparent;  adopting  scheme  of  responses  to  non-­‐compliance)    

*  Collect  Non-­‐entangling  FADs  and  FAD  data.    Adopt  a  measure  for  the  collection  of  FAD  data  by  vessel  operators  and  provisions  for  the  use  of  non-­‐entangling  FADs.    

IOTC  *  Adoption  of  harvest  control  rules  &  

reference  points  for  all  covered  stocks    *  Strengthen  monitoring,  control  and  

surveillance  tools  (developing  a  regional  observer  program  with  100%  coverage  of  purse  seine  vessels  and  a  regional  VMS  program  and  reforming  its  IUU  Vessel  List  process  in  line  with  best  practices)  

*  Collect  FAD  data,  provide  these  data  to  IOTC  and  ensure  that  analysis  of  these  data  support  the  development  of  science-­‐based  FAD  management  measures  

8  

ISSF  Priorities  

IATTC  *  Adoption  of  permanent  harvest  

control  rules  &  reference  points  for  all  covered  stocks  

*  Strengthen  compliance  assessment  process  (more  transparent;  adopting  scheme  of  responses  to  non-­‐compliance)  and  monitoring,  control  and  surveillance  tools  (IUU  Vessel  List  process  &  VMS  measure  in  line  with  best  practices)  

*  Collect  FAD  data,  provide  these  data  to  the  IATTC,  ensure  that  analysis  of  these  data  support  development  of  science  based  FAD  management  measures    

ICCAT  *  Adoption  of  harvest  control  rules  &  

reference  points  for  all  covered  stocks    *  Strengthen  monitoring,  control  and  

surveillance  tools  (developing  a  regional  observer  program  with  100%  coverage  of  purse  seine  vessels  and  a  regional  VMS  program  and  reforming  its  IUU  Vessel  List  process  in  line  with  best  practices)  

*  Adoption  of  full  tuna  retention  measure  

*  Collect  FAD  data,  provide  these  data  to  ICCAT  and  ensure  that  analysis  of  these  data  support  the  development  of  science-­‐based  FAD  management  measures  

9  

ISSF  Priorities  

ProActive  Vessel  Register  

10  

To  learn  more,  visit:          www.iss-­‐foundation.org/pvr      

•  Online  database  of  tuna  fishing  vessels  audited  by  3rd  party  (MRAG)  for  compliance  with  a  series  of  responsible  fishing  practices  

 

•  The  best  mechanism  to  identify  vessels  that  are  using  science-­‐based  responsible  practices  

•  Any  tuna  fishing  vessel  may  register  

•  Provides  tuna  purchasers  with  validated  information  to  support  their  responsible  purchasing  decisions  

•  ISSF  participating  companies  list  all  controlled  vessels…Committed  to  sourcing  100%  large  scale  PS  purchases  from  PVR  vessels  by  end  2015  

Currently,  489  boats  have  registered  -­‐-­‐-­‐  a  significant  slice  of  the  global  tuna  catch  

11  

•  The  ProActive  Vessel  Register  (PVR)  is  growing  rapidly.      

 

 

 

 

   

   

                                     All  gear  types  participating:                      432  Purse  Seine,  9  Pole  &  Line,  48  Longline  

 

 PVR  Participation  

87  109  

162  176  

193  211   210   216   223  

231  252  

286  303  309  

361  378  389  

396  416  427  

439  442  452  465  489  

0  

50  

100  

150  

200  

250  

300  

350  

400  

450  

500  

PVR  Re

gistered

 Ves

sels  

ProActive  Vessel  Register  (PVR)    Registration  Growth  to  September,  2015  

12  

A  collaborative  &  measured  approach