spc activitiescoastfish.spc.int/news/fish_news/78/fish_news_78.pdf · spc fisheries newsletter #78...

SPC Fisheries Newsletter #78 — July/September '96

1

NUMBER 78JULY — SEPTEMBER 1996

Newsletter

IN THIS ISSUE

SPC ACTIVITIES Page 2

NEWS FROM IN AND AROUND THE REGION 4

GILLNET FISHING IN MACUATA, FIJI Page 25by E. Ledua

South Pacific CommissionPrepared by the Fisheries Programme Information Section

Printed with financial assistance from the Government of France

The development of sustainable domestic tuna longliningoperations in Pacific Island countries and territories has become

an important component of the SPC Capture Section’s workprogramme. The photo, showing the unloading of the catchat the wharf onto a carpeted metal fork-lift pallet, was taken

during an SPC Masterfisherman assignment.


2

SPC ACTIVITIES

26TH REGIONAL TECHNICAL MEETING ON FISHERIES

The Twenty-sixth RegionalTechnical Meeting on Fisher-ies (RTMF) was held at theSouth Pacific Commission’sheadquarters in Noumea,New Caledonia from 5 to 9August 1996, bringing to-gether 58 participants from 22SPC member countries andterritories and 21 internationalor other organisations.

In accordance with the proce-dure of rotating the Chairman-ship alphabetically betweenmember countries and territo-ries, Mr Tukabu Teroroko ofKiribati was appointed Chair-man of the meeting, while MrDanny Jack of the Marshall Is-lands was appointed Vice-Chairman and Chairman of theDrafting Committee.

The SPC Regional TechnicalMeeting on Fisheries providesthe only opportunity for seniorfisheries officers from all SPCmember countries and territo-ries to meet and discuss com-mon aspects of fisheries devel-opment and, through the ex-change of ideas, experience andinformation, to identify mutualneeds and problems which canbest be addressed through aregional approach.

The meeting assists the workof the Commission’s FisheriesProgramme by reviewing andcommenting on existing orproposed activities, formulat-ing new initiatives where re-quired, and making recom-mendations for Secretariataction to the Committee ofRepresentatives of Govern-ments and Administrations(CRGA) and, ultimately, theSouth Pacific Conference.

As a result of this regular proc-ess of review and discussion,the work of the SPC Fisheries

Programme is able to retain itsrelevance to the evolving needsof Pacific Island countries andterritories.

The guidance provided overthe years by successive Re-gional Technical Meetings onFisheries has been an essentialelement in developing thewide range of activities thatare undertaken by the Fisher-ies Programme, which forsome time has been the SouthPacific Commission’s largestwork programme.

As usual, the morning sessionswere devoted to considerationof programme activities, andafternoons to technical discus-sions on such topics as the stockstatus of the Western Pacifictuna fishery, an overview of theSouth Pacific Regional Tuna Re-source Assessment and Monitor-ing Project (SPRTRAMP), re-gional implications of HazardAnalysis and Critical ControlPoint (HACCP), a progress re-port on the Integrated CoastalFisheries Management Project(ICFMaP), and the use of livemilkfish as longline fishing bait.

First on the agenda was anoverview of the SPC FisheriesProgramme by its Manager. Heoutlined the possibility of at-tachment training for PacificIsland fisheries officers, and feltthat these attachments wereextremely useful; he also men-tioned that SPC would endeav-our to maintain funding for thistype of on-the-job training.

Funding issues were thenraised, with the Fisheries Pro-gramme Manager stressing thatmulti-year project funding waspreferable to make the admin-istration of the work pro-gramme easier.


3

SPC ACTIVITIES

The Oceanic Fisheries Coordi-nator then summarised the re-cent work of the Oceanic Fish-eries Programme.

The main development sinceRTMF 25 had been the imple-mentation of SPRTRAMP,through which the Oceanic Fish-eries Programme had been ableto implement much more com-prehensive and continuousmonitoring of regional tunafisheries.

Through SPRTRAMP, informa-tion is now available for re-search and management, andconsiderable progress had beenmade since RTMF 25 towardsa better understanding of re-gional tuna stock structure anddynamics. Participants ex-pressed their full support forthe work of the Programme.

The activities of the CoastalFisheries Programme were thenreviewed and discussed, in par-ticular the Capture Section. The

Fisheries Development Ad-viser emphasised that therewas a clear growing interestand demand by Pacific Islandcountries and territories in de-veloping their own domesticcommercial offshore fisheries(tuna longlining, FAD deploy-ment and associated fishingtechniques, and deep-watersnapper fishing), as part oftheir overall fisheries develop-ment plans.

The meeting, as a matter of toppriority, strongly supported thecontinuation and the strength-ening of the Capture Section,and recommended that thenumber of Masterfishermen beincreased to ensure that thegrowing demands for the serv-ices of this Section by Islandcountries and territories are met.

During discussion of the Train-ing Section, participants stressedthe importance that national fish-eries training institutions playin the implementation of in-

country training programmes,and the Meeting recommendedthat the South Pacific Commis-sion further assist with thestrengthening of national train-ing capacities. This assistancecould include activities suchas tutor training and planningof staff development, the pro-duction of resource materialsand the development of newprogrammes.

The Meeting considered theactivities of the Resource As-sessment Section at somelength. The Integrated CoastalFisheries Management Project(ICFMaP) is the major focus ofactivity in the Section.

Although there are still threenational sub-projects to ac-complish, the project will ter-minate in August 1997. TheMeeting was very impressedby the range of work done bythe Section, and hoped stronglythat SPC would be able tocontinue its advisory and edu-

Some participants at the Twenty-sixth Regional Technical Meeting on Fisheries


4

SPC ACTIVITIES

cational role in this very im-portant and developing areafor Pacific Island governmentdecision-makers.

During the presentation of thework done by the Post-harvestSection, the Meeting recognisedthe importance of complyingwith the new health regulationsof major seafood importingcountries, such as the UnitedStates and the European Unioncountries, and the need to takeurgent action to upgrade qual-ity-assurance procedures forthe Pacific Island seafood ex-porters, based on the HACCP(Hazard Analysis and CriticalControl Point) quality-assur-ance system.

The Meeting recommendedthat the South Pacific Commis-sion take all necessary action tobring about these improve-ments to ensure that access tothese markets can continue, andto allow the smaller states theopportunity to develop exportindustries.

The Meeting felt that the Foodand Agriculture Organizationof the United nations (FAO)should be approached to pro-vide funding for a TechnicalCooperation Project to assistmember states to meet the re-quirements of major importingcountries.

The Women’s Fisheries Devel-opment Officer then made a

presentation to the Meetingdescribing both the situation ofwomen in fisheries in the regionand the work of the Section intrying to address some of theirproblems, including the lack ofbasic quantifiable informationabout the involvement ofwomen in fisheries in general.

The Meeting recognised the im-portant contribution of womenin fisheries development, andrecommended that the Secre-tariat pursue every avenue tosecure funding for the continu-ation of the Section.

Last but not the least, the activi-ties of the Information Sectionwere reviewed. The partici-pants were unanimous in rec-ognising the quality of workdone by the Section, particu-larly the integration with othersections of the Coastal FisheriesProgramme.

The participants also expressedtheir appreciation for the Spe-cial Interest Group InformationBulletins. As a result of this, theMeeting recommended that aSpecial Interest Group be set upon Women-in-Fisheries.

The Information Bulletin wouldserve as an information andcommunication network, cov-ering those activities of interestand concern to women in thefisheries sector.

Participants were also invited tohear the coordinator of the Pa-cific Islands Marine ResourcesInformation System (PIMRIS)presenting the deliberationsand the recommendations ofthe Eighth PIMRIS SteeringCommittee, which was held inSuva from 1 to 2 July 1996.

Several information and work-ing papers were then presented,including the Regional Institu-tional Review in the Marine

Sector, the future regional ar-rangements of the FAO SouthPacific Aquaculture Develop-ment Project, a report on theACIAR-sponsored Pacific Is-land pearl oyster resource de-velopment research project, anda report on the trochus markets.

Finally, the participants listenedto statements by other organi-sations involved in fisheriesdevelopment in the region: theSouth Pacific Aquaculture De-velopment Project, the FAOFishery Industry Division, theICLARM Coastal AquacultureCentre, Nelson Polytechnic,The Nature Conservancy, TheWorld Bank, and the Universityof the South Pacific.

The Meeting was interestingand productive, covered a widerange of topics and providedimportant guidance for SPC’sfuture work in fisheries. As al-ways, much business was con-ducted outside the meetingroom, and many delegates ben-efited from the opportunity toestablish personal contacts withrepresentatives of other coun-tries, territories, institutions andorganisations.


5

Training action programme for FSM’s tuna longline fishery

SPC ACTIVITIES

INFORMATION SECTION

The Information Section hasrecently published a bookletentitled Some acronyms usefulto Pacific Islands fisheries work-ers. Mainly intended for gov-ernment fishery officers inPacific Island countries andterritories, this booklet presentsmore than 500 acronyms, and

has been designed for use byboth anglophone and franco-phone readers. Each acronymappears with its full name andits translation.

Also, when the acronym refersto an organisation, some basicinformation (type of organisa-

tion, location of headquarters,etc.) is included. We hope thatthis publication will find itsplace alongside the well-knownFisheries Address Book on all fish-eries officers’ desks.

TRAINING SECTION

In June and July this year, SPC’sFisheries Training Officer workedtogether with fisheries managers inthe Federated States of Micronesiaand with the Head of Nelson Schoolof Fisheries to prepare a proposal fora manpower development actionprogramme for FSM’s tunalongline industry.

Since the later half of the 1980sseveral training programmes inmarine, maritime and fisheriessubjects have been imple-mented in FSM. Many of thosetrained in such programmes arenow employed in positions inthe government administration,in schools and in small enter-prises. In general it can be saidthat these training programmeshave increased awareness of thecomplexity of many of the is-sues in the fisheries sector.

Likewise, the efforts made overthe last seven years to train peo-ple in the operation of fishingvessels and onshore fisheriesinstallations of different kindshave contributed greatly to-wards creating an awareness ofthe opportunities in the FSMtuna fishery.

When the government decidedto support the creation of adomestic tuna fishing fleet, italso opened the MicronesianMaritime and Fisheries Acad-emy (MMFA).

Since then, MMFA has gradu-ated around 200 individuals inmainly three categories: fishingdeckhands, engineering andnavigation cadets. The goal ofthe training has been to producea pool of trained people to beavailable as and when the sec-tor needs them, in order for thesector to develop without anymanpower constraints.

Many of those trained have re-mained in the longline industry.Because of the shortage of well-experienced crews, they havehowever often been assignedtasks for which many were notsufficiently experienced.

They may have had the appro-priate theoretical education andin-school training on the issues,but because of a limited numberof apprentice jobs available withqualified supervision, somehave not had the right oppor-tunities to develop the skillsrequired to run a longline op-eration profitably.

Others have been attracted toimmediately-available jobs withbetter incomes outside of FSM,rather than trying to make acareer in the FSM fisheries. Inmany cases, they are gaininggood relevant commercialfisheries experience, and if theywere to come back to FSM, couldmake valuable contributions tothe fisheries operations there.

That said, a great amount ofcredit has to be given to NFC foravailing its vessels, providingjob opportunities for inexperi-enced crew members. That, toa large extent, is the reason whyFSM now has a group of vesselcrew with in-school trainingand some sea-going experience.

Graduates from MMFA havenow in many cases accumu-lated 1 to 4 years of work in theindustry. A review of wherethey have spent their time aftergraduation shows that in fact 65to 80 per cent of them havespent time in the FSM fisheriessector, in jobs where their train-ing could help them to betterperformance. In terms of sup-port to training, it is thereforevery clear that the objectives setin the beginning of the 1990shave been met.

However it also requires quali-fied, close and intensive super-vision on the job to train new


6

SPC ACTIVITIES

graduates in the work habitsnecessary to make a longlineoperation commercially viable.

Unfortunately, it was not al-ways anticipated how close thissupervision would actuallyhave to be. In fact, it is just notpossible to operate a longlinefishery successfully if everyoneis a newcomer. The same is truefor the shore-based segments ofthe sector.

The fact that there have beentoo few senior crew members tofoster the junior ones has beenpart of the problem, and hascost all vessel operators money.Given that there is now a groupof somewhat experienced crewavailable, it would be appropri-ate at this point in time to con-sider if the training strategy canbe changed.

A fisheries training action pro-gramme now seem to be thebest way of progressing themanpower development inclose collaboration between

training deliverers and fisheriesoperators. To this end, during1996 the Government of FSMhas taken up a dialogue withSPC and the Nelson School ofFisheries on how to best formu-late and embark on such anaction programme.

This resulted in joint work byFSM National Fisheries Corpo-ration, FSM Department ofR&D, SPC’s Fisheries TrainingSection, and Nelson School ofFisheries, in a five-week mis-sion in June/July to formulatean action programme proposalfor the training of manpowerfor the FSM domestic tuna in-dustry development.

The exercise started with dis-cussions with all training deliv-erers and all fisheries operatorsin FSM including vessel opera-tors, transhipment, shore serv-ices and exporters, to collectinformation and assess the situ-ation and difficulties, in termsof manpower qualities, experi-enced by the different entities.

The first phase of the work thenculminated in a workshop inPohnpei, where the differentoptions to resolve the presentsituation were discussed.

During the discussions in thisworkshop, it became clear thatmost people involved had ex-perienced very similar prob-lems, and in fact had quite simi-lar ideas or opinions on whatneeded to be done. Towards theend of the workshop it wasagreed that the actions requiredcould be put into nine to tengroupings.

Based on this, the SPC Fisher-ies Training Section is nowworking together with NelsonSchool of Fisheries to finalisea report on the issue and aproposal for a manpower train-ing action programme to as-sist in the FSM domestic tunafishery development. The pro-gramme proposal will be pre-sented to the FSM Govern-ment later this year.

Training courses for fisheries enterprise management and for fisheries officers nowannounced for early 1997

Two Savingrams have recentlybeen distributed by SPC con-cerning fisheries training pro-grammes; one being the annualNelson course for fisheries offic-ers, and the other a new coursein fisheries enterprise manage-ment. Here are some details:

The Nelson Polytechnic 1997course for Pacific Islands fisher-ies officers will start in Nelsonon 10 February 1997, and con-tinue there until 6 June 1997.The field module of five weeksat a Pacific Island venue willfollow directly after, during theperiod 9 June to 11 July.

As usual, the course intends togive fisheries officers compre-

hensive training in relevantskills at a very practical level,which they need to use in theday-to-day operation of an ex-tension station, and in turn maypass on to their staff and thelocal community.

Closing date for applications is15 November 1996.

Furthermore, a two-weekcourse will be held in manage-ment practices for operators ofmedium- to large-size fisheriesenterprises. It is designed tobuild on the participants’ exist-ing skills and assist with areaswhere individual participantsmay lack expertise.

The course will focus on theskills which can give the par-ticipants the most immediatebenefits, such as principles ofenterprise management, com-mercial ethics, accounting prac-tices, personnel management,and sales and marketing prin-ciples. Topics covered will alsoinclude book-keeping practices,time management and qualitymanagement.

The participants should have aposition of responsibility in-cluding some aspects of man-agement of a commercial fish-eries enterprise.

Closing date for applications is15 December 1996.


7

SPC ACTIVITIES

In-Country Workshops on Business Management for Small Boat Operators

As follow-up to the regional work-shop organised earlier this year bySPC on business management forsmall boat operators, several coun-tries are now arranging nationalworkshops on the same topic. Acouple of them have already beenheld, some are being implementedwhile this magazine is beingprinted, and others are at the plan-ning stage.

Two of the first ones that have re-ported on their results are Niue andSolomon Islands. In general thereports are very positive. Here aresome extracts:

In Niue, Course CoordinatorMr Charlie Tohovaka organ-ised a two-day workshop thatwas then held from 15 to 16August. In planning the work-shop, a review was made ofover 50 small fishing-boat op-erators, and a group of about 15

were identified as full-time,small-scale commercial fisher-men. Invitations to the work-shop were then sent out tothese, a select group of part-time fishermen and a few others.

The programme was designedto be similar to that of the SPCregional workshop. Of particu-lar interest to the 17 partici-pants, according to the report,were the feasibility studies thathelped in understanding therequirements for starting a busi-ness. Furthermore, the reportalso especially mentions the sig-nificance of understanding op-erating costs.

In Solomon Islands, the Fisher-ies Division held the first fol-low-up workshop from 17 to 19July this year. It was attendedby 11 Senior Fisheries Officersand two lecturers from the

School of Maritime Studies. Thepurpose of this workshop wasto provide skills for fisheriesofficers to run the provincialfisheries centers. It was con-ducted by Mr Nelson Kile, ChiefFisheries Officer for Extensionand Development, Solomon Is-lands Fisheries Division.

The first day of the workshophad lectures on business man-agement in general and theneed for it in commercial fish-ing. The second day involvedanalysing why a business mightfail, and also brought lectureson how to manage a fishingbusiness and control operationscosts. The third and last daydemonstrated record keepingand a case study. The partici-pants were also presented witha certificate.

CAPTURE SECTION

The development of sustainable and viable domestic tuna longlining operations in Pacific Island countries andterritories has become an important component of the Capture Section’s work programme. In line with thisfocus, a country assignment has commenced in New Caledonia, and the SPC Masterfisherman, Steve Beverly,has participated in a tuna longlining seminar held in the Solomon Islands.

Country assignment

Masterfisherman Steve Beverlycommenced fishing with theNew Caledonian tuna longlinecompany Navimon in August.Navimon has four 16-metretuna longliners, purpose-builtby the Chantiers Vergoz ship-yard in Concarneau, France.

The vessels have a beam of5.6 m, draft of 2.4 m, fish holdcapacity of 38 m3 (plus a baitfreezer of 6 m3), fuel capacity of10.2 t, and fresh water capacityof 1.3 t. Two of the vessels havebeen fishing in New Caledo-nian waters for several years,while the latest two have been

in operation for twelve months.Navimon has a fifth vessel fromAustralia, that has been in op-eration for several years.

The vessels are equipped withLindgren-Pittman hydrauli-cally-powered longline reels,with up to 40 nautical miles of4.0 mm monofilament main-line. The purpose of the currentassignment was for the Master-fisherman to work with theskippers of each vessel to assistthem in refining their fishingtechniques and gear, with thehope of increasing their catchrates.

On-board fish-handling tech-niques and quality of the catchwill also be focused on duringthe assignment.

A normal fishing trip startedwith the loading of 25 kg car-tons of frozen bait, and half atonne of fresh-water flake ice(Figure 1).

The vessels are equipped withsalt-water ice machines for pro-ducing ice for chilling and stor-age of the catch. Steve’s work sofar has been on board the F/VCa Pakhade, skippered byPatrick Fievet.


8

SPC ACTIVITIES

Steve has introduced the skip-per and five crew to the new 3.0mm tarred red polyester three-strand line being used in Ha-waii for making up branchlinesinstead of 1.8 to 2.5 mmmonofilament. The red polyes-ter line is much easier to gripwhen pulling in a fish, and doesnot twist and tangle as much asmonofilament when in use.

Setting of the gear usually com-menced around 04h00, andtook three hours to complete.The direction of set was basedon the weather and currentconditions, usually settingwith the wind.

A hydraulic mainline thrower(Figure 2) was used to increasethe depth that the gear fished.

All five crew were involved inthe setting, with two gettingbait, floats and floatlines ready,while three crew were neededfor attaching the branchlines tothe mainline.

The first person removed theclip and hook from the branch-line bin, handing the clip to oneperson and the hook to theother. The baiter then baited thehook and threw it to the portside on the beep of the timer,while the snapper snapped theclip onto the mainline.

The gear was generally allowedto soak for 6–8 hours, with haul-ing commencing around 14h30,starting at the end of the linethat was set last. Line haulingtook 8–11 hours, depending onthe amount of fish caught andthe number of tangles and linebreaks encountered.

Hauling was controlled fromthe outside control panel on thestarboard side of the vessel (Fig-ure 3). As each branchline cameup during the haul it was usu-ally obvious if a fish was on it.

If there was no fish, the branch-line was unsnapped by the op-erator, and passed to the crew

Figure 1: Loading bait and ice at the start of a fishing trip

member directly behind him.The branchline was then pulledinto the branchline bin, with theclip attached to the rail of the binand the hook placed through theclip for storage.

When a fish was on the branch-line, it was either left snappedto the mainline, or the clip re-moved and snapped to a ‘play-line’, while the fish was pulledto the side of the vessel.

The fish was then gaffed in thehead and lifted on-board ontoa piece of carpet (Figure 4) toavoid damage to the fish. Oncethe fish was on-board, haulingcontinued while the fish waskilled by spiking the brain, thehook removed from the fish,and the fish processed if re-quired, before it was placed inthe ice hold for storage.


9

SPC ACTIVITIES

Figure 2: Setting the gear using a line thrower to increase the fishing depth of the gear

Figure 3: Operator hauling the gear off the starboard side of the vessel

Fishing trips last for 7–12 daysdepending on the areas beingfished and the flight schedules

for exporting the catch. The catchis unloaded from the vessel atthe wharf onto a carpeted metal

fork lift pallet and transportedinto the factory for weighing andpacking into export cartons.


10

SPC ACTIVITIES

Figure 4: Landing a 20 kg albacore tuna onto the carpetfor killing before placing it on ice for storage

The Fisheries DevelopmentAdviser, Lindsay Chapman,also accompanied the F/V CaPakhade on one fishing trip. The

aim of this trip was to allowLindsay to familiarise himselfwith the Lindgren-Pittmanlonglining equipment, whilst in

the role of Observer for theSouth Pacific Tuna ResourceAssessment and MonitoringProject (SPRTRAMP).

Longlining seminar

The South Pacific Project Facil-ity of Sydney Australia, anagency devoted to promotingand financing fisheries projectsin the South Pacific, recentlysponsored a tuna longline semi-nar that was held at the ForumFisheries Agency in Honiara(15–18 September).

Participants included aboutthirty local entrepreneurs, inves-tors, and fishermen. The seminarbegan on Monday morning withan opening statement from theMinister for Agriculture andFisheries, the Hon. Rev. BrownBeu. Father Beu stated that thetuna long-line industry in Solo-mon Islands was still in its in-fancy but that there were op-portunities for development.

Further, he said that SolomonIslands could benefit from whatother Pacific Island countrieshave learned; that Solomon Is-lands’ goals should be to max-imise local participation in thedevelopment of the domestictuna industry, as tuna is an im-portant source of foreign ex-change earnings, employment,and protein; and that the re-source is healthy but should bedeveloped in a sustainablemanner.

There were a total of twelvepresentations given duringthe seminar, including thosegiven by SPC’s Oceanic Fish-eries Coordinator, Dr AntonyLewis, and SPC’s Masterfish-erman, Steve Beverly. The semi-

nar was chaired by Peter Cusack,former SPC Fisheries Devel-opment Adviser.

Dr Lewis started the proceed-ings off with a presentation on‘The Resource’. He told theparticipants that Solomon Is-lands has a good resource ofthe three main species of tu-nas fished by longline in theSouth Pacific (bigeye, yellow-fin and albacore) and thatthere was room for expansionin developing a tuna industry.

Other presentations included:‘Policy issues’ by Peter Tong,FFA Project Economist; ‘TheJapanese market’ by Hiro Mori,FFA Tuna Industry Adviser;‘FFA initiatives in support of


11

SPC ACTIVITIES

domestic tuna fisheries’ byTony Kingston, FFA ManagerEconomics and Marketing;‘Airfreighting fresh fish fromthe Solomon Islands’ by GaryClifford, Pacific Air ExpressManaging Director; ‘Licensing’by Kitchener Collinson, Minis-try of Agriculture and FisheriesChief Licensing Officer;‘Longline fishing and choosinga longline vessel’ by SteveBeverly; ‘The business of long-line fishing’ by Garry Preston,Fisheries Consultant withGillett, Preston & Associates;‘Foreign investment procedures’by John Maneniaru, DeputyDirector of Foreign InvestmentDivision, Ministry of Com-merce, Industry and Employ-ment; ‘Investment support’ byPeter Philipson, Fisheries Spe-cialist of the South PacificProject Facility (the sponsors ofthe seminar); and ‘Closing re-marks’ by Albert Wata, Minis-try of Agriculture and FisheriesUnder-Secretary.

The Masterfisherman’s presen-tation included a talk on ‘Long-line vessel parameters for Pa-cific Island countries’. Recom-

mended parameters for a gen-eralised longline vessel in-cluded: steel construction, dis-placement hull with a single(hard) chine, 20 m length over-all, 300–400 horsepower (singleengine), fuel capacity to give thevessel an operating range of6,000 nautical miles (7,000 USgallons or 25 t), freshwater ca-pacity for a crew of six for threeweeks (1,200 US gallons or fourtonnes), one large fish hold foricing fish with a capacity of atleast 15 t (40 to 50 m3) of prod-uct, and equipped with a com-pact monofilament longlinesystem using one large hydrau-lic reel and a hydraulic line set-ter. (The paper presented at theseminar by the Masterfisher-man will be revised and in-cluded in the next SPC FisheriesNewsletter [Number 79, October– December 1996].)

At tea breaks and after luncheach day of the seminar, theMasterfisherman did a briefworkshop on longline fishinggear with demonstrations onhow to make up branchlinesusing 3.0 mm tarred red poly-ester three-strand line.

SPC video productions includ-ing On-board handling of sashimi-grade tuna and air-freighting offresh chilled fish were also avail-able for participants to viewduring these times.

All presentations were well re-ceived by the very interestedaudience, but the presentationgiven by Mr Gary Clifford ofPacific Air Express was espe-cially important.

Pacific Air Express is a dedi-cated air freight service com-pany carrying fresh fish fromHoniara to Cairns and Brisbane,Australia, to be transshipped toJapan via Japan Airlines orQantas.

The nature and scope of PAE’sand Mr Clifford’s capabilitiesand understanding of the spe-cial problems involved in air-freighting chilled tuna gave allfuture longline fisherman andentrepreneurs a feeling of con-fidence that Solomon Islands iswell on the way to ‘getting onthe map’ of domestic longlinefishing in the Pacific.

The Technical Consultation onthe Collection and Exchange ofFisheries Data, Tuna Researchand Stock Assessment was heldat the headquarters of the SouthPacific Commission from 15 to19 July 1996.

The Consultation was held inresponse to a recommendationmade at the Multilateral High-level Conference on South Pa-cific Tuna Fisheries, held inHoniara, Solomon Islands, inDecember 1994.

Technical Consultation on the Collection and Exchange of Fisheries Data,Tuna Research and Stock Assessment

OCEANIC FISHERIES PROGRAMME

The Consultation was attendedby representatives of AmericanSamoa, Australia, ChineseTaipei, Cook Islands, FederatedStates of Micronesia, Fiji, FrenchPolynesia, Japan, Kiribati, Korea,Marshall Islands, New Caledo-nia, New Zealand, Niue, Palau,Papua New Guinea, SolomonIslands, Tonga, Tuvalu, UnitedStates of America, and WesternSamoa. Representatives fromthe Forum Fisheries Agency(FFA) and the South PacificCommission, and observersfrom the Food and Agriculture

Organization of the UnitedNations (FAO) and the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Com-mission (IATTC) also attended.

The agenda included state-ments by participants; a reviewof data requirements for stockassessment; a review of currentdata holdings; specification ofagreed minimum require-ments; a review of current ar-rangements; and future ar-rangements for data exchange,tuna research and stock assess-ment.


12

SPC ACTIVITIES

SPC presented a review ofmethods and data require-ments for stock assessment oftuna in the western and centralPacific Ocean (WCPO). Data forthe four main target species ofinterest, skipjack, yellowfin,bigeye and albacore, have beencompiled for use in assessmentswith reference to specific areas:east of 150°W longitude andbetween 40°N latitude and 40°Slatitude in the case of skipjackand yellowfin, throughout thewhole Pacific between 40°Nand 40°S for bigeye (althoughan alternative hypothesis is cur-rently being assessed), andthroughout the Pacific in thesouthern hemisphere for SouthPacific albacore.

The various stock assessmentmethods used can be catego-rised as indices of abundancebased on catch per unit effort(CPUE), surplus productionmodels, tag-recapture modelsand length-based age-struc-tured models.

Each of these methods requiresaccess to catch and effort statis-tics, and complete operationallevel (i.e. logbook) data wouldprovide the best and most flex-ible data resource to supportstock assessments using thesemethods.

The United Nations Imple-menting Agreement on Strad-dling and Highly MigratoryFish Stocks provisions with re-spect to the collection and pro-vision of information and coop-eration in scientific researchwere briefly reviewed.

The probable future data needsof WCPO tuna fisheries werethen reviewed. This reviewmade four conclusions regard-ing future data collection andprovision. These conclusions re-ferred to the collection and pro-vision of operational level data,

the establishment of a length-frequency data repository toconsolidate the collections ofsuch data that exist in variousfishery agencies, cooperation inthe development and implemen-tation of a scientific observer pro-gramme, and cooperation inother scientific research pro-grammes of relevance to stockassessment.

After a review of data holdings,a drafting group, consisting ofRepresentatives of Japan, Ko-rea, New Zealand, Papua NewGuinea and the United States,assisted by SPC and FFA staff,was appointed to draft recom-mendations for cooperation indata collection and exchangeand research cooperation undersome future regional fisheriesmanagement organisation orarrangement. The recommen-dations, as modified by theConsultation, follow:

In recognition of the need to progressthe development of scientific sup-port for future conservation andmanagement of highly migratoryspecies in the WCPO, the Consul-tation affirmed its support for:

• Collection by flag states ofcatch (target and non-targetspecies), effort and other dataat a vessel operation level, i.e.logbook data;

• Provision of such data for bothwaters under national juris-diction and the high seas at adegree of detail and at a levelof resolution to be agreed uponto enable effective stock assess-ment; and

• Cooperation in scientific pro-grammes to generate otherdata required for effective stockassessment.

Regarding the future data needs ofWCPO fisheries, the Consultationrecommended that any future co-

operative scientific data collectionin the WCPO be consistent withthe guidelines and requirements ofthe UN Implementing Agreement,especially as set out in Annex I ofthat agreement, and be establishedpursuant to a regional fisheriesmanagement organisation or ar-rangement, taking into account thenature of the stocks and the fisher-ies involved.

Regarding the specification ofagreed minimum requirements ofany future scientific data collectionprogramme, the Consultation alsorecommended that the followingelements be included in any suchfuture programme:

(1) Flag states should compileannual catch statistics by spe-cies, covering all fishing activi-ties for each fleet.

(2) Flag states fishing for tuna inthe WCPO should collectcatch, effort and other data atthe fishing operation level (i.e.logbook data in a format to beagreed upon) for all commer-cial tuna fishing activity, re-gardless of whether such activ-ity takes place in waters un-der flag state jurisdiction,other national jurisdiction oron the high seas. The logbookdata should be validated withlandings or other information.

(3) Annual catch statistics shouldbe made available as soon aspossible to all parties involvedin the arrangement. Agree-ment should be reached onhow to consolidate logbookand other data for all fleets ina confidential database. Accessto such data should be underconditions determined by in-ternational agreement.

(4) A data repository system forlength-frequency and associ-ated data should be estab-lished so that such data canbe used under agreed condi-


13

SPC ACTIVITIES

tions for stock assessmentand other tuna researchprojects. A coordinated sam-pling plan for all major spe-cies should be developed andimplemented through the co-operation of the parties in-volved in the arrangement.

(5) A scientific observer pro-gramme, based on a regionallycoordinated sampling design,should be developed and im-plemented through an agree-ment among the parties in-volved in the arrangement.Observers should collect dataon fishing operations, includ-ing by-catch and discards;they should also conduct bio-logical sampling of both thetarget and non-target catch,and collect other operationaldata as appropriate.

(6) All parties involved in thearrangement should cooperatein developing and implement-ing scientific research pro-grammes of relevance to stockassessment of target and non-target species caught by tunafisheries in the WCPO.

The Consultation recognisedthat the provision of assistanceto developing countries was animportant principle which isreflected in the text of the UNImplementing Agreement.

It was also recognised that thisprinciple is relevant to the is-sues which concern the Consul-tation, namely the collection oftuna fisheries data in the west-ern and central Pacific.

The Consultation therefore en-couraged that consideration begiven to providing assistance tothe developing countries in theregion, as appropriate, to enablethem to fulfil their responsibili-ties with regard to the collectionof tuna fisheries data.

The Consultation also recog-nised that for certain fleets, thecollection of tuna fisheries datacould be enhanced through thecooperation between the fish-ing nation and the coastal stateswith which the fishing nationhas an access agreement. In thisrespect, the Consultation en-couraged coastal states to pro-vide information, as appropri-ate, to enable fishing nations tofulfil their responsibilities withregard to the collection of tunafisheries data.

Following a review of currentarrangements for conductingtuna research and stock assess-ment, and after consideration ofa scientific structure proposedby SPC in support of a regionalfisheries management organisa-tion or arrangement, the Con-sultation identified a number ofissues of importance. These areas follows:

• The timing of the developmentof a scientific structure, in re-lation to the development of aregional fisheries managementorganisation or arrangement,was identified as an importantissue. There was a tendency inthe discussion to favour theconcurrent development of thescientific structure.

• A scientific secretariat modelthat involves a significant re-search, data collection anddata management role for thesecretariat, along with consid-

erable national scientist in-volvement, was seen as an ap-propriate model.

• The incorporation of the SPCOceanic Fisheries Programmeinto a proposed scientificstructure raises several is-sues. These issues includethe continued provision ofservices at the national andregional level to Pacific Is-land countries and territo-ries, and the administrativerelationship of the OFP andthe established SPC struc-ture to the future scientificstructure.

• The overall organisation of thescientific structure will re-quire the consideration of is-sues such as membership,functions, operation and therelationship to a regional fish-eries management organisa-tion or arrangement, andfunding, at some higher order.

• Involvement of scientistsfrom developing states in thescientific structure was seenas highly desirable, in par-ticular, to build much needednational capacity in stock as-sessment and fisheries re-search generally.

The report of the Consultationwill be considered at the SecondMultilateral High-level Confer-ence on South Pacific TunaFisheries, which may be held inJune 1997.


14

NEWS FROM IN & AROUND THE REGION

RESTORING CORAL REEFS IN AUSTRALIA

The results described in thisarticle are preliminary, and aretherefore not the final word onthe matter. The main techniqueused is to dig a hole for eachcoral fragment in the reef ma-trix about 2 cm in diameter x2 cm deep.

I then collect the fragments bytapping a colony branch at theright length with a chisel. I haveused fragments in the range of8–18 cm, which allows for rea-sonable survivorship and easeof transplantation. Large frag-ments are difficult to work withbut increase survivorship andinitial growth rate. I transportthe fragments in plastic bins fullof water to the transplant site.

Corals can survive quite wellout of water for up to two hours,but they get stressed if they gettoo hot, so they should be keptin water. I place the corals inbaskets and place these on thesite. I then mix up a two-partunderwater epoxy on the boat.

I take this down in an ice-creamcontainer. It takes 70 minutes toset. I select a fragment andcheck that it will fit in the holethat I dug earlier. It is best if the

fragment will stand in the holewithout support, as placing rocksaround each fragment to sup-port it just wastes time. I presssome epoxy in the hole and wrapsome more about the base of thefragment, place the coral in thehole and press more epoxyaround the base if necessary.

With this technique, a team oftwo divers can transplant about200 fragments per day. Theprocess could be accelerated forcommercial purposes if you usea pneumatic drill for makingthe holes. The questions that Iam attempting to answer are:

What species are most suitable fortransplantation?

Generally, most species aresuitable, but have differentcharacteristics. Depending onwhat you are after in restoringa reef you would choose dif-ferent species.

The branching acroporids arevery fast growing (about 5 cma year) and have quite goodsurvivorship, and most authorsagree that these are the best spe-cies to transplant. Corymboseacroporids are slower growing

and have slightly poorer survi-vorship, but add diversity to asystem.

Plating corals (A. hyacinthus, A.cytherea) also transplant wellusing the above technique. Poci-loporids (Pocilopora damicornis,Stylophora pistillata) had the poor-est survivorship. They also hadpoor growth rates.

Branching Porites, Poritescylindrica, had the best survivor-ship but an extremely slowgrowth rate. Porites has the ad-vantage that it is not prone toattacks of crown of thorns star-fish, while acroporid fragmentsseem to attract them from overfive metres away. Averagesurvivorship is about 85 percent after 12 months on LizardIsland. There is generally littlepartial mortality of fragments.

What colonies are best to collectfragments from?

Fragments were collected froma number of colonies of A.millepora, and I found that therewas little variation in the suc-cess of fragment transplanta-tion from one colony to the next.

I also recorded many physicalvariables of each colony—size,colour, branching, partial mor-tality, etc.—and early resultssuggest that these variables arenot very important. Large onesweren’t better than small ones,pink ones weren’t better thangreen ones. Conclusion: onecolony is as good as any other.

What is the effect of damaging acolony while collecting fragments?

There is little use in transplant-ing to a site if you are only go-ing to destroy the site you arecollecting from. I monitoredcolonies damaged from collect-


15


ing fragments in the above twoexperiments, and found that ithad little impact on the mortal-ity of these colonies when com-pared to undamaged controls.I usually removed about 30 percent of each colony.

What time of the year is best?

I have transplanted fragmentsevery three months and foundlittle variation in the time ofyear on Lizard Island. Otherauthors have found that sum-mer is unsuitable for transplan-

tation, possibly due to heat orlight increases. Also, it may bethat time of year doesn’t matterat Lizard Island, but may mat-ter closer to the equator.

(Source: Sea Wind 10 (1) — OceanVoice International)

FIRST LARGE-SCALE TRANSPLANTOF LIVE CORALS TAKES PLACE IN HAWAII

In the first large-scale coraltransplant ever conducted,nearly fourteen tonnes of livecoral transplant have been suc-cessfully transplanted from onelocation to another in KawaihaeBay, Hawaii. The project wasrecommended by NOAA’sNational Marine Fisheries Serv-ice and funded by the US ArmyCorps of Engineers to mitigatecoral loss during proposed har-bour construction and to restorenearby reefs.

‘The Kawaihae project has beenan unprecedented success, with99 per cent of the coral surviv-ing relocation,’ said Hilda DiazSoltero, Director of NMFS’Southwest Region. ‘This studyproves that large quantities ofthese animals can survive thetrauma of transplant.’ The coralwas transplanted from areasthat will be disrupted by har-bour construction that beginsnext week, and will be movedfrom holding areas to reefsdamaged during past harbourconstruction in the bay.

Since September 1995, live cor-als have been taken from the‘footprints’ of three proposednew breakwaters and relocatedto a large stockpile site andseven experimental sites rang-ing from 10 to 50 feet of water,all within a half mile of the pro-posed small boat harbour atKawaihae.

‘Volunteer divers from the Sci-ence Department of Hawaii Pre-paratory Academy have beeninstrumental in the transplanteffort,’ said John Naughton,Pacific Island EnvironmentalCoordinator for NMFS’ South-west Region. Coral heads werecarefully detached by diversand gently placed in large wiretrays which were then lifted upoff the bottom and transportedwhile still submerged to trans-plant sites by boat.

‘We will continue to monitorcoral transplant sites duringand after the nearby harbourconstruction to see how theyfare,’ said Naughton. Students

and staff from University ofHawaii Institute of Marine Bi-ology are under contract tomonitor the transplant sites forthree years to obtain data on thegrowth rate and mortality of thecoral. Restored coral reefs shouldprovide new habitat for manyspecies of fish and sea turtles.

(Source: Sea Wind 10 (1) — OceanVoice International)

BIOLOGISTS HOPE TO RESEED REEFS

‘Homegrown’ colonies — by grow-ing colonies in lab, biologists canuse them in experiments withoutdamaging reefs.

Armed with new information,scientists hope to help Guam’sreefs recover from the effectsof human activity and natural

disasters. University of Guammarine biologist Dr Bob Rich-mond said that informationabout the young coral larvae’ssettlement preferences couldprove particularly useful inreef restoration and reseedingprogrammes. When free-float-ing coral larvae are ready to

settle down permanently, find-ing the right spot can meanthe difference between sur-vival and doom.

‘There is a very active selectiongoing on,’ Richmond said, andresearch has shown that the lar-vae settle on just one type of


16


algae. By placing the larvae ina holding container over theright kind of algae, he said, sci-entists can get up to 70 per centof the larvae to attach. Larvaethen could be used in reseedingefforts, such as projects inTumon Bay and the Facpi Pointarea [Editor’s note: Tumon Bayand Facpi Point are situated respec-tively on the northwest and south-west coast of Guam]. Scientiststried out a device to help the

larvae settle at the two sitesabout one year ago [this articlewas written in August 1996]. ‘Af-ter seedings, we can actually seebeautiful little corals,’ Rich-mond said.

The Tumon Bay and FacpiPoint sites were last checkedabout eight months ago, hesaid, and they will be checkedsoon to determine how many ofthe corals survived their first

year. The settlement process isalso important for larvae beingraised in the laboratory. Bygrowing coral in the lab, Rich-mond said, biologists can usethe ‘homegrown’ colonies inexperiments, allowing them toconduct experiments on livecoral without damaging the reef.

(Source: Pacific Daily News)

AUSTRALIA AND JAPAN SIGN A NEW AGREEMENT

Australia and Japan recentlysigned a new bilateral fishing agree-ment which will allow limited tunafishing by Japanese longliners inthe Australian fishing zone (AFZ).

Federal Minister for Resourcesand Energy Senator WarwickParer said the agreement wouldbenefit both countries andwould ensure that tuna fishingin Australian waters by Japa-nese vessels is conducted understrict management controls. ‘Itreinforces the close and impor-tant relationship between Aus-tralia and Japan in the fisheriesarea,’ Senator Parer said.

‘The agreement is great newsfor ports like Hobart and Fre-mantle that supply the Japanesefishing fleet. In 1994–95, therewere 417 visits by Japanese ves-sels to Australian ports, pump-ing A$ 40 million into their lo-cal economies.’ The main fea-tures of the new agreement are:

☞ The Australian Govern-ment will be paid an accessfee of A$ 3,450,000, whichwill mainly be spent onfisheries management andresearch. This is a verygood result for Australia,given that the agreementwill only be in force until 31October;

☞ Japanese longlining offthe east coast will be lim-ited to a maximum of 2,100fishing days, compared to2,575 days last year. Only55 Japanese vessels willbe licensed to operate offthe east coast, the same aslast year;

☞ Only 20 Japanese vesselswill be allowed to operateoff the west coast, also thesame as last year;

☞ Japanese vessels will be al-lowed to catch a maximumof 400 t of southern bluefintuna (SBT) in the waters offTasmania. Japan has re-tained its voluntary quotaof 200 t of SBT in the eastcoast area. These tonnageswill be acquitted againstJapan’s global SBT quota of6,065 t;

☞ All Japanese vessels oper-ating south of latitude 30°Swill be required to use toripoles to reduce the inciden-tal catch of albatross. Tori

pole devices have beenmandatory on Australianlongline vessels operatingsouth of this line since 1995;

☞ All Japanese vessels will berequired for the first time tohave satellite data trans-mission and monitoringequipment fitted. This willhelp ensure Australia hasthe necessary informationto manage and conservethe marine resources in asustainable and responsi-ble manner; and

☞ Japanese vessels will bebanned from fishing in thearea off the north coastknown as ‘Area E’. Japa-nese vessels have previ-ously handlined in Area Efor bigeye and yellowfintuna. The Government is ofthe view that the area isnow fully exploited by do-mestic longliners and bythe gamefishing industry.

(Source: Professional Fisherman, July1996)


17


NOTES ON THE DRIED FISH TRADE IN FIJI

This article is written by Bob Gillettand presents some aspects of thedried fish trade in Fiji.

During the week beginning 31June, I spoke to a number ofindividuals and visited severalcommercial establishments tolearn more about the trade ofdried fish in Fiji.

This included the Fisheries Di-vision (S. Tuilaucala, M. Tuiloa,K. Swami, S. Sharma, F. Koroi),two visits to the main Suvamarket, a sampling of the ma-jor bulk food stores in centralSuva, and a trip to a store out-side Suva where dried fish wasreported to be sold.

In addition, I had a meetingwith one of the major Chinesefood importer/exporters (YonTong), and discussions withtwo Fijian housewives, a nutri-tionist, an owner of a chain ofIndian restaurants, and an In-dian businessman who hadexpressed interest to SCP Con-sultants in distributing driedfish from Tuvalu (B. K. Reddy).

The most informative of theseactivities was the discussionwith K. Swami and that withYon Tong. These two tended toreinforce each other, whereasthe information obtained fromB. K. Reddy was both differentand more optimistic.

The present trade in dried fishin Fiji appears oriented to theIndian community, especiallysouth Indians. Historically, theIndian cane farmers had limitedaccess to fresh fish (distance tothe sea) and frozen fish (lack ofelectrification), and thereforeconsumed dried fish. Althoughpopular in western Viti Levu,the main area of productionand consumption appears to beVanua Levu.

This was probably because ofproductive mangrove areas inthe east for capturing the de-sired species, ample sunshinefor drying the fish, and a largepopulation of cane farmers.

Although dried fish sold inSuva may originate from vari-ous locations, the vast majorityappears to come in from Labasaon Vanua Levu. An inspectionof retail outlets in Suva indi-cated that very few stores carrythe product.

The central market was oftencited as a retailing location, butvisits during the week and onSaturday morning, and discus-sions with fish vendors, indicatethat only smoked fish is regu-larly sold.

Several large bulk-type foodstores in the vicinity of the mar-ket were visited (MH MarketStore, J. Santa Ram, Bulk Store,Rajendra Prasad, Food for Less)but none carried dried fish. Thesemerchants felt that in Suva onlythe Chinese food stores carrythe product. Accordingly, allthose stores in central Suvawere visited (Yon Tong, YuenSing, Fong Yuen, Peter Fong).

Yon Tong was the only store tohave a stock of dried fish, althoughthe Peter Fong store occasion-ally carried the product (lastsupply was sold in December1995). Because B. K. Reddy hadindicated that he sells dried fishto B. Kumar supermarkets, I vis-ited a B. Kumar store in Raiwasaoutside Suva. They did not haveany in stock, but stated theysometimes sell dried fish and thatit comes from Labasa. Reddyalso indicated that ‘Nausorimarket’ sells the product.

The owner of a chain of Indianrestaurants indicated that, al-

though Indians eat dried fish incurries at home, he has neversold dried fish in curry, nor hashe ever heard of other restau-rants using dried fish in anydish. Two Fijian housewivessaid they have never purchasedor consumed dried fish, al-though they occasionally eatsmoked fish. The Fisheries Di-vision also confirmed limited orno demand for dried fish amongethnic Fijians.

The product carried by YonTong is a single split and driedmullet sold in a clear plastic bagwhich is closed by a knot (onesample obtained). Prices rangedfrom F$ 2.30 to F$ 5.00 per bag.This appears to correspond toabout F$ 12 per kg.

The B. Kumar store in Raiwasasaid they sell dried mullet forabout F$ 16 per kg. The PeterFong store on Renwick street inSuva last sold dried mullet forF$ 12 per kg (December 1995).B. K. Reddy assured me that thenormal price is about F$ 9 per kgand that the high prices I notedwere due to the poor weather.

Reddy also stated that his nor-mal wholesale buying price isF$ 5 to F$ 6 per kg. N. Yuen ofYon Tong (who I know fromprevious work to be a reliablesource of information) indi-cated he buys dried mullet fromLabasa at F$ 6 to F$ 7 per kg.

The Fisheries Division annualreports give information on driedfish imports and exports. Driedfish could conceivably fall intoone of two categories: (l) ‘driedfish salted but not smoked’ or(2) ‘fish fillets dried, salted or inbrine but not smoked’.

Recent imports in these twocategories combined in 1992,1993, and 1994 are 17.6, 9.6, and


18


0.6 t respectively. Recent ex-ports in these two categoriescombined in 1992, 1993, and1994 are 25.9, 15.5, and 9.3 t re-spectively. These figures may,however, be misleading.

Shark fin, a major export of Fiji,probably represents most of the‘dried fish’ exports. An exami-nation of a detailed listing of the1995 export-permit database re-vealed that there were no permitsissued for exports of non-sharkfin dried fish during the entireyear. Products other than con-ventional dried fish (e.g. saltedanchovies for pizza) may dis-tort the imported quantities.

The species involved in the Fijidried-fish trade is quite impor-tant to the Tuvalu project. Thetrade in Fiji is largely orientedto mullet and, according toK. Swami, three large speciesbelonging to the genus Mugilaccount for the majority of sales.

The opinion was expressed thatthese fish, being oily, dry well.Two Indians interviewed indi-cated that mullets are the pre-ferred species in the area ofsouth India where the consum-ers’ families came from, and fortraditional reasons there waspreference for mullets.

Although other species maybe occasionally dried and soldin Fiji (e.g. Rastrelliger), theyare definitely not preferred,and the price would be sub-stantially lower.

The one buyer who has ex-pressed any interest in the pur-chase of Tuvalu dried fish, B. K.Reddy, has indicated a willing-ness to consider other species,but is unable to give even anindication of the price until hedoes some market testing.

With respect to species compo-sition and the Tuvalu project,

work done by the Fiji FisheriesDivision on two islands in Lauin the mid-80s is especially rel-evant. As part of a cyclone re-lief effort, the Fisheries Divisionencouraged the production ofdried mullet on Ogea andFulanga islands.

One major problem encoun-tered was a marked decrease inthe abundance of mullet, andone biologist concluded thatfailure to realise the limited pro-duction potential of mullet fromsmall islands was a major faultof the project.

There are two processes forpreparing dried mullet in Fiji,both of which involve salting.

Wet drying consists of dip-ping the fish in a brine solu-tion and then sun drying, atechnique being promoted bythe Fisheries Division.

Dry drying involves smearingsalt into the flesh, and this ap-pears to be the technique mostappreciated by consumers. Driedmullet with a slight reddishcolour and an oily-like shinereceives the highest price. Also,larger fish receive a greaterprice. A white powdery coatingon the fish is considered unde-sirable, and is caused by excessmoisture inside the plastic bag.It was mentioned that re-hydra-tion of fish is sometimes a prob-lem in Suva’s wet climate.

Other dried fish products be-sides mullet are sometimes soldin Fiji. ‘Whitebait’ are small baitfish-type species (e.g. Spratelloides,Amblygaster, which, according toK. Swami, are often sold indried form.

The Fisheries Division annualreports for 1992, 1993, and 1994report 9.2, 15.8, and 2.36 t ofwhitebait respectively weresold in non-municipal markets,mostly on the roadsides in theWestern Division. Biologists ofthe Fisheries Division say thatmuch of these fish are caught onViti Levu from Ba to Momi Bay.Some Chinese shops sell pack-ets of small dried fish importedfrom mainland China.

Yon Tong store sells a 60 g packof what appears to be driedStolephorus anchovies for F$ 2.50.The owner stated they sellabout 40 kg of this per year.Some Indians, especially theGujarat, enjoy eating ‘Bombayduck’ which actually is madefrom dried fish ‘about the sizeof a toothbrush’. The owner ofa chain of restaurants in Suvasays that this product is im-ported from India.


19


K. Swami of the Fisheries Divi-sion and H. Yuen of Yon Tongfeel that the there is a decliningmarket for dried fish. They basethis opinion on sales records,high cost of dried fish relativeto fresh fish, and the fact that thetraditional consumers (canefarmers) now have access to freshfish, freezers, and canned fish.

They refer to dried fish as a‘nostalgia food’ of the oldergeneration. H. Yuen, an ownerof apparently the only store inSuva that now has dried fish,indicated he sells perhaps200 kg of dried mullet per year.

B. K. Reddy, however, feelsthat all Fiji Indians (even thosefrom the north of India) nowhave acquired a taste for driedfish in their curry. He (and hisaccountant) indicated thatthere are eight towns in VitiLevu with a substantial Indianpopulation.

The 200 small shops of thesetowns would (after an introduc-tory period) sell about 50 kg permonth or a total of 10 t. The 32supermarkets of these townswould probably only sell theproduct if the smell could becontained, and then maybe 3.2 tcould eventually be sold.

In mid-March, letters of enquirywere sent by SCP Consultantsto seven importers of fish prod-ucts in Fiji. These letters were toascertain the interest of thefirms for importing dried fishfrom Tuvalu. To date, only oneimporter has replied, Continen-tal Marketing Pty. Ltd. I madenine attempts to contact B. K.Reddy, the ‘Fiji Director’. Fi-nally on the morning of 7 JuneI managed to speak to him andan appointment was arrangedfor that afternoon in the officeof N. Mudliar Accountants. Itwas explained that N. Mudliarwas the company secretary and

provides advice for all newbusiness endeavours to Reddy.

I explained the Tuvalu projectand asked for information onthe type of product and quanti-ties they would be willing topurchase.

They explained that Reddypurchases dried mullet fromLabasa, but that productioncannot fulfil demand. He statedthat he normally purchases inlots of 200 to 500 kg but he hasnot made a major effort to de-velop the market due to lack ofsupply.

He also stated he has exportedsubstantial quantities to the In-dian community in Australiaand New Zealand. He con-firmed to me that he had ex-ported dried mullet in 1995, butretracked a bit when I told himI had access to the 1995 exportdatabase which showed nodried fish exports in 1995.

As indicated above, Reddyfeels that he could eventuallydistribute about 13 t of qual-ity dried large mullet eachmonth to the eight towns inViti Levu with large numbersof Indian residents.

He was uncertain as to the pros-pects of marketing non-mulletspecies, and indicated that mar-keting work would be required.He would want the dried mul-let individually packed in aplastic bag, and also some in10 kg and 20 kg loose packs. Hewould pay F$ 5 to F$ 6 per kgfor quality large dried mullet,but would only consider doingbusiness with the Tuvaluproject if he is to be the exclu-sive Fiji distributor.

My impression of the meetingwith Reddy is that he probablyhas been in the dried fish busi-ness for a considerable length of

time. Because he uses the officesof other firms and apparentlytravels much around Fiji, theremay be problems in contactinghim, especially from Tuvalu.

I was concerned over hisclaim to have exported sub-stantial amounts of dried fishin 1995, as I know there wereno legal exports of dried fishthat year. The supposed largedemand for dried mullet doesnot entirely accord with thetotal absence of the product inthe restaurant trade.

This also contradicts the opin-ion of a reliable Chinese dis-tributor of the product. Hisstated buying price for mullet isprobably low. I also feel thatReddy has nothing to loose (butpossibly something to gain) ifhe exaggerates the demand fordried fish. A critical but as yetunanswered question is whatprice, if any, Reddy would payfor non-mullet species.

I also attempted to ascertain aircargo rates on Air Marshall Is-lands (AMI). I spoke to Vili inthe AMI Suva office, Liti in theAMI Nadi office, and thenRudolf of another section of theNadi AMI office (telephone 722-192). The impression I received isthat air cargo is not a priority ofthe airline and, especially fromFunafuti, cargo (and even pas-senger baggage) is often off-loaded due to insufficient ca-pacity on the Saab aircraft.

I was quoted a price of A$ 1.70per kg and a minimum of A$ 20per shipment. I was told that themain AMI cargo man fromMajuro would call me to nego-tiate a concessionary rate, but hefailed to do so.

(by Bob Gillett of Gillett, Preston &Associates)


20


THE FISHERIES OF THE EUROPEAN UNION:CAN FISHERMEN LEAD US OUT OF THE CRISIS?

Over the last 20 years, it is dif-ficult to recall even one occasionwhen the fisheries of the Euro-pean Union (EU) have capturedthe headlines conveying a mes-sage other than crisis or conflict,or, more often than not, both.

The major fish stocks uponwhich the EU depends haveslipped beyond the brink ofserious overfishing to the pointwhere they are no longer sus-tainable. Despite intense regu-lation, unofficial sources sug-gest that maybe the equivalentagain of the tonnage of fishcaught in the ‘common pond’ ofthe EU is thrown away at seaand that a substantial propor-tion of illegally-caught fish (50per cent of that landed?) findsits way into the supply network.

Concomitantly, the fisher-men, the food industries thatuse fish and the maritimecommunities dependent uponfishing as a source of incomeand employment have all suf-fered. This is manifested in asharp decline in the numbersof full-time fishermen, short-ages of certain prime fish spe-cies and the depression or evendisappearance of fishing as anoccupation in some communi-ties in our coastal waters. Whatwe are witnessing is an insti-tutional crisis in which theresource users (the fishermen)and regulator (government)relationship has broken down.

Despite the relatively small sizeof fishing as an industry in theEU (especially in relation to theagriculture sector), the Euro-pean Commission has madeserious efforts to address thecrisis, and a variety of regula-tory schemes have been tried inan effort to rescue the fish

stocks. Unfortunately, despiteoften determined, and some-times original, approaches tothe problems of over-exploita-tion, it is not possible to pointto the introduction of any oneregulatory measure and statethat it has been even a qualifiedsuccess, stemming the tide ofdecline.

Indeed, more often than not theimplementation of regulatorymeasures has exacerbated theproblems; the stock crisis con-tinues and associated ‘socialfall-out’ has had adverse effectsupon the resource users and thecommunities dependent uponfishing for their livelihood.

Clearly there are problems inthe structure of the EU’s fisher-ies that are deep rooted and noteasily remedied. The structureof the Common Fisheries Policy(CFP), established on the prin-ciples of the Treaty of Rome, hasbeen much criticised and sin-gled out as the main source ofdifficulties.

Indeed, to date, the CFP hasfailed to achieve its objectives:there has been little reduction infishing effort, no evidence ofstabilisation—let alone recov-ery—of major food fish stocks,and as a result, no improve-ment in the economic returns tothe fishing industry.

The fundamental assumptionsand basis of the CFP are in ques-tion, and many within the fish-ing industry call for the policyto be scrapped. Which raises anumber of questions. Is it reallypossible to manage the fisheriessector using strategies basedupon bio-economic theory? Bio-economic theory fails to modelin an appropriate way the true,

unpredictable behaviour offisheries in an uncontrollable, ifnot chaotic, ecological system.Instead, it substitutes a falsenotion of predictability for stockbehaviour (and economic re-turns) upon which basic work-ing principles of the CFP, totalallowable catch (TAC) and quo-tas, are predicated.

The problems are compoundedby the underlying politicalprinciples of the EU: non-dis-crimination between memberstates, political neutrality andthe application of policy meas-ures which inevitably tendtowards stalemate.

The Treaty of Rome calls fornon-discrimination betweenmember states, but how canfish stocks be managed in thefree-for-all of equal access?The deployment of regulations(and yet more regulations) isnot having any significantpositive impact, furthermorethe fishermen seem to feel jus-tified in ignoring them, point-ing out that their livelihoodsare threatened and, conten-tiously, that they were notadequately consulted beforethe laws were introduced.


21


All in all it appears that the CFPis a policy designed only tomaintain the status quo in a sec-tor beset by intractable prob-lems, and seemingly foreverthreatened by adverse economicand environmental conditions.

So where do we go from here?There is a growing recognition,at least among social scientists,that we must look beyond bio-economic theory to lay thefoundations of a workable man-agement policy.

They argue that the support ofthe fishermen (and their fish or-ganisations) is essential if weare to make progression inmanagement. Put another way,any policy dedicated to the ‘so-lution’ of fisheries problemswill fail if it does not embracethe aspirations of the fishermenand their dependants.

There are many examples ofthis in EU fisheries; we haveonly to look at the failure toconserve fish stocks, despite thedeployment of a complex bodyof licensing, quota and techni-cal measures, to appreciate thevalidity of this statement.

Evidence from other fisheries inthe world, and even from thepast history of some of the EUmember states, has shown thatwhere legitimate and recog-nised fishermen’s institutionsexist, then their involvement inthe policy and decision-makingprocesses can lead to the adop-tion of more successful re-source-exploitation strategies.

The examples are character-ised by institutional structuresin which management is de-volved from government tothe resource user groups. Inreturn for the greater au-tonomy provided by govern-ment, the fishing communi-ties have, in most instances,

demonstrated a more respon-sible attitude towards re-source utilisation and self-regulation, and have shownthe ability to rationalise inter-nal conflicts.

More specifically, there aresome interesting examplesfrom the oceanic island states ofthe Pacific, where the coastalcommunities have for centuriespresided over well-organisedfisheries exploitation systemsthat have achieved, at least un-til recent times, the elusive goalof sustainability.

This has been due, in no smallmeasure, to the existence of aresource exploitation policythat conferred responsibility forfisheries planning, developmentand management to the localfishermen, usually through theallocation of property rights,often on a territorial basis.

The system is ancient, and re-flects a culture and customarylegal system quite different tothat associated with Europeaninstitutions. It is interesting tonote also that the territorialrights system has, in some loca-tions of Oceania, been de-stroyed, apparently as a resultof contact with modern exploi-tation strategies and resourcemanagement regimes.

The many positive features ofthe resource management sys-tems of the Pacific Island statesare not confined to Oceania.

There are examples from thecoastal states of the EuropeanUnion in which fishermen’sorganisations have in the pastplayed a key role in resourcemanagement; although most ofthem seem to have been neu-tered by a combination of overregulation and contact withadverse economic and environ-mental forces.

Are there lessons then thatmight be applied to the futuredevelopment and managementof EU fisheries? Is it not the timefor the policy makers to recog-nise the fisheries dependentregions of the EU and empowerthe coastal communities to helpfind a way out of the crisis inwhich we are in?

The indications are that theCommission is leaning towardsthe development of a social di-mension to the CFP, and thatthe devolution of managementresponsibility to fishermen’s or-ganisations is being taken seri-ously. There are elementswithin the current structure ofthe EU that might be enlisted tosupport this shift of emphasis.

The recognition of the conceptof subsidiarity and the identifi-cation of fisheries dependent re-gions indicate that the conceptof devolved management re-sponsibility is not out of place.

If the positive elements of thecurrent policy were to be har-nessed to the appropriatepolicy instruments, such as thestructural and regional funds(e.g. the PESCA programme),then the pieces would be inplace to begin a policy shift totake account of the needs ofthe fisheries dependent coastalcommunities.

However, time is short, and itis up to all parties concerned toforce the pace of change withregards to the radical policy andinstitutional restructuring thathas to take place.

(Source: Fish: 43, July 1996)


22


FISHING INTO THE FUTURE

With its 80 islands stretchingacross 800 miles of the WesternPacific, Vanuatu has abundantcoastal fishery resources withsignificant economic potential.Current estimates set the totalcatch of inshore fin fish at a mere2,000 t, however the importanceof fishing is probably not fullyrecognised. Fishing is alreadyan important subsistence—andin some cases commercial—ac-tivity for many coastal villageson the outer islands.

Many village chiefs have real-ised the detrimental effects ofthe over-use of monofilamentgillnets and other gears on theirfishery resources, and are nowclosing the village grounds inorder that the resources cannaturally generate.

With the population of Vanuatuset to double in the next 25 yearsthe demands on marine re-sources, both for subsistenceand for commercial purposes,will increase.

Although there are large areasof coastline with little or no fish-ing pressure, the majority of ni-Vanuatu fishermen do not pos-sess the expensive boats andengine necessary to exploit themore remote fishing grounds.This highlights the importanceof the sustainable managementof fishing grounds close tocoastal communities.

However, the costs and practi-cal difficulties involved inmonitoring the status of inshoreresources are enormous, whilefishermen often resent beingtold what to do by a centralgovernment. One approach toreducing the costs and makingmanagement work for the com-munity’s benefit is to develop‘co-management’, whereby theresponsibility for managementis shared by the resource custo-dians and the Government.

The Vanuatu Fisheries Depart-ment are already actively in-volved in assisting fishing com-munities in the management oftheir resources, particularly oftrochus and green snails.

The Marine Resources Assess-ment Group (MRAG) based inLondon has recently com-menced a project to investigatethe role of customary owner-ship in the conservation offinfish resources in Fiji andVanuatu. The two-year projectis funded by the British Govern-ment’s Overseas DevelopmentAdministration (ODA).

MRAG, in cooperation with theFisheries Department, will un-dertake field-work with locally-recruited staff to see how com-munity management is work-ing here. A number of villageswill be asked to cooperate in theproject, and assessments of theirfinfish resources will be under-taken to provide customaryowners with additional infor-mation to assist them in theirmanagement.

The project also has wider im-plications. In many countries inthe region, traditional custom-ary ownership has been unsuc-cessfully replaced by central-ised management. The researchundertaken here and in Fiji willbe used to contribute to thedevelopment of community-based co-management in theregion as a whole.

(Source: Vanuatu Weekly, 24/8/96)

EIGHTH PACIFIC SCIENCE INTER-CONGRESS

The Eighth Pacific Science In-ter-Congress will take place atthe University of the SouthPacific, Suva, Fiji from 13 to 19July 1997.

The theme of the 1997 Inter-Congress, ‘Islands in the PacificCentury’, has been chosen to

focus attention on islands andtheir development in the 21stcentury. The Inter-Congresswill provide an interdiscipli-nary forum to address specificissues relating to the role of sci-ence and technology in the de-velopment of islands; reviewprogress and share research

findings in key areas in naturaland social sciences relevant toislands; and review develop-ment, achievements, problemsand prospects of Pacific Islands.

One symposium will be dedi-cated to fisheries and marineresources. Fisheries and marine


23


resources development presentfor most Pacific Island statestheir most promising opportu-nity for sustainable economicdevelopment. To achieve thisgoal there is a need to under-stand the current state of ma-rine resources and factors thataffect their use. There is also aneed for scientific research andsocio-cultural understanding ifmarine resources are to be de-veloped in a sustainable way.

The symposium will examinethe state of fisheries and ma-rine resources in the SouthPacific, including the role ofregional organisations and

institutions in the develop-ment of sustainable fisheries.Trans-boundary issues in sus-tainable marine resources de-velopment will be discussed.

Other topics will include: theimportance of the developmentof sustainable managementstrategies for inshore resources,the need to develop an appro-priate trading and marketingenvironment, and social consid-erations in the sustainable de-velopment of marine resources.

The symposium will concludewith an overview of the roles,opportunities and responsi-

bilities of the State in the sus-tainable management of ma-rine resources.

For further information on thissymposium, please contact:Professor Robin South, Directorand Professor of Marine Stud-ies, The University of the SouthPacific, Suva, Fiji. [Tel: 679313900 ext 2386, Fax: 679 301490,E-mail: [email protected] or MrPeniasi Kunatuba, Deputy Per-manent Secretary, Ministry ofAgriculture, Fisheries and For-ests, P.O. Box 358, Suva, Fiji.[Tel: (679) 315109; Fax: (679)302478].

CTSA PUBLISHES A MANUAL ON GIANT CLAM SHELL CRAFT

The Center for Tropical and Sub-tropical Aquaculture (CTSA) hasrecently published ‘Clams tocash—how to make and sellgiant clam shell products’. This88-page manual, produced as acomponent of the CTSA-fundedproject entitled ‘Aquaculture ex-tension and training support inthe US-affiliated Pacific Is-lands—year six’, was written byGerald Heslinga [Heslinga man-aged the Micronesian MaricultureDemonstration Center in Palaufrom 1984 to 1994].

The manual contains the fol-lowing sections:

• Shell storage;

• Where ‘value-added’ be-gins;

• Post-harvest processing;

• Shell craft;

• Setting up your first giftshop: a case study;

• In conclusion;

• Sources of supplies andequipment for giant clamshell crafting; and

• A transcript of the compan-ion videotape.

The manual includes 40 photo-graphs, and describes in detailhow to craft shells as orna-ments, serving bowls, soap andsponge dishes, wasabi dishes,ash trays, two types of nightlights, candlestick holders,planters and garden ornaments,shirt pins, two types of earrings,several possible styles of neck-laces, magnetic memo holdersand key rings, aquarium orna-ments and base substrate. It alsoprovides a discussion of pricingconsiderations and hints ongetting started in the giant clamshell marketing business.

The book is available free ofcharge to individuals within theCTSA region. Other US resi-dents may obtain a copy forUS$ 5 to cover shipping andhandling.

Those outside the United Statescan obtain a copy for US$ 18 tocover shipping and handling.The book will be available fordownloading from AquaNIC’sWorldwide Web by early fall.AquaNIC’s URL is http://www.ansc.purdue.edu/aquanic.

For more details, please contact:

Center for Tropical andSubtropical Aquaculture

The Oceanic Institute41-202 Kalanianaole Highway

WaimanaloHawaii 96795

Ph: (808) 2597951Fax: (808) 2598395

(Source: CTSA Regional Notes)


24


THE AUSTRALIAN GIANT CRAB HAS

A BRIGHT FUTURE ON ASIAN TABLES

The Tasmanian giant crab,which till now has not beenvery popular with Australians,could take a lion’s share of theexport market to South-EastAsia, according to a researcherat the University of Tasmania.

This crab has an impressive size,frequently growing as large asthe width of a man’s chest andweighing up to 20 kg. The ex-port market for Tasmanian crab

(Pseudocarcinus gigas or

Tasmanian king crab) hasbeen estimated over the past

year at about A$ 4 million .

Since 1995, this market has be-come a very tangible realitywith initial exports going toSouth-East Asia, especially Tai-wan. The idea of sending a fewcrabs to Taiwan as samplescame from an Australian busi-ness leader in Tasmania. Theresponse was immediate; incontrast to Australia, where thisdish has never found a follow-ing, it already appears verypopular in Asia. For that rea-son, the relative peace fromhuman interference which thecrab has enjoyed for thousandsof years is now definitely ended.

For the past few years, CalebGardner, a research assistant atthe University of Tasmania, hasbeen specialising in the study of

the Tasmanian giant crab aspart of a joint project betweenhis university and the Austral-ian Department of Primary In-dustries. One bright spot for thefuture of this crab is that now,thanks to Caleb Gardner’s re-search, the Tasmanian King canbe raised in captivity, somethingwhich was not before possible.

‘While barely a metric tonnewas harvested in 1990, over thepast five years, production hasreally taken off. It is now one ofthe most sought-after seafoodsin South-East Asia, where itsdelicate flesh is a sign of wealthat banquets,’ he explained.

In order to satisfy demand inAsia, Australian farmers cannow begin large-scale exploi-tation, which could prove tobe a veritable gold mine: Whilethe current price for the larg-est specimens is about AU$ 100,crabs can bring double thatprice at their final destinationin an Asian restaurant.

(Adapted from Les Nouvelles Calé-doniennes, May 1996)


25

GILLNET FISHING INMACUATA, FIJI

by Esaroma Ledua,Integrated Fisheries

Management Associate,South Pacific CommissionNoumea, New Caledonia

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this trip to Fijiwas to review the effectivenessof the banning of commercialgillnet fishing in Macuata Prov-ince on Vanua Levu. We werealso asked to make recommen-dations on whether the banshould be maintained, and toadvise on any other manage-ment measures relating to com-mercial and subsistence fisheryin Macuata Province.

The gillnet fishing ban was im-posed by the Macuata chiefs in1990. Unfortunately, there wasno survey conducted at thistime, so no estimates of stockabundance were available forfuture assessment and com-parative analysis.

In 1995, the chiefs of Macuatarequested Fiji Fisheries (throughthe Macuata Provincial Office)for an assessment of the effec-tiveness of the ban. Fiji Fish-eries then requested technicalsupport from the South Pa-cific Commission through theICFMaP project. The Commis-sion agreed to this request,and the ICFMaP team left forFiji in February 1996 to con-duct this work.

The ICFMaP personnel thattook part in this survey includeTim Adams, Paul Dalzell, SioneMatoto and Esaroma Ledua.Paul, Sione and Esaroma leftNoumea for Fiji on the 6th ofFebruary, and were joined byTim two weeks later.

After meeting senior FisheriesOfficials in Suva on the 7th and8th of February, the team trav-elled to Labasa, Macuata on the

9th of February for the start ofthe survey work. Three Fiji Fish-eries Research Officers were as-signed as full-time counterpartsto this project. They wereApisai Sesewa (team leader),Saiyasi Yabakivou and JovesaKorovulavula.

Considerable support was re-ceived from the Fisheries Divi-sion, especially the provision ofsupport staff, fishing gear andvessels. Apart from the threeresearch staff, Extension OfficerMatai Kolinisau spent two fullweeks with the ICFMaP team.

The Research Officer based atLabasa, Mr Indar Dev Raj, wasalso assigned to the team to as-sist in collecting information oncommercial landings. The Fish-eries vessel Gonedau, with ninecrews, was assigned to this projectfor a full four-week period.

The commercial fishery opera-tion in the Macuata Province hasa lot of things to offer to othercountries in the region. It is or-ganised in a simple professionalway, which has the potential tobe successfully duplicated byother neighbouring countries.

This includes the marketingsystem, the storage system,the contract system of catch-ing fish and the system ofpaying wages. All these as-pects of the fishery should beof interest to neighbouringcountries in the region.

BACKGROUND OF MACUATA

The land and coastal bounda-ries of the Macuata Province liebetween latitude 16°5’S to16°35’S and longitude 178°50’Wto 179°45’W, on the second larg-est island of Fiji, called VanuaLevu. The island of Vanua Levuis composed of three large prov-inces: Macuata, Bua andCakaudrove. Macuata is madeup of the northern portion ofVanua Levu and five othersmall islands to the north.Labasa Town is the capital ofMacuata Province.

Since Macuata is a dry area (av-erage rainfall of 4,050 mm/year), it has a climate favourablefor growing sugar cane, andMacuata is one of the leadingsugar producers in Fiji. Theprovince of Macuata is alsoknown for its timber and fish-ery resources. Sugar is the mainsource of income, followed bytimber and fish respectively.

Fish resources in Macuatacoastal waters appear to bemore in abundance comparedto other areas in Fiji, especiallyViti Levu. This may be attrib-uted to the establishment ofgood traditional managementsystems, the presence of largeareas of mangroves, an exten-sive shallow lagoon and theGreat Sea Reef that providesshelter to the whole of Macuata’scoastal zone (important as asource of nutrients, refuge andspawning grounds for manyfish species).


26

GILLNET FISHING IN MACUATA, FIJI

Management of fishery re-sources in Macuata is jointlycontrolled by the Fisheries Di-vision office in Labasa, as wellas the chiefs in the various dis-tricts. The Labasa Fisheries Of-fice is the headquarters for theNorthern Division of the wholeof Vanua Levu.

A total of twelve officers arecurrently serving the provinceof Macuata. The Fisheries Offic-ers provide resource manage-ment and development adviceto provincial councils, districtcouncils and village councils.

They also provide fishermenwith services such as sales ofgear and ice, vessel licensing,hull and engine repairs, prepa-ration of bank loan applica-tions and law enforcement.The chiefs, through traditionalmanagement systems, maydeclare and enforce bans ortaboos, in most cases throughprior consultations with theFisheries Division.

GILLNET BAN

The chiefs of the Macuata areaimposed the ban on gillnet fish-ing in 1990. Although this istechnically illegal due to gov-ernment ownership of all re-sources and the seabed, thechiefs used their traditionalpowers to impose the ban. Thegovernment recognises the tra-ditional systems in Fiji, andtherefore endorsed the ban ongillnet fishing.

Among the reasons why thegovernment endorsed thegillnet ban were the numerouscomplaints about the negativeeffects of commercial gillnettingon subsistence-fishery catch re-quirements. Subsistence fisher-men were experiencing difficul-ties meeting their subsistencerequirements.

Though the chiefs were receiv-ing and benefiting from sub-stantial amounts of money asgoodwill payments from com-mercial fishermen, strong op-position from the people forcedthe chiefs to declare the ban ongillnet fishing.

MACUATA SUBSISTENCE

FISHERY

Villages along the Macuatacoast rely on fish as their mainsource of protein. Handlinefishing is the most commonmethod of catching fish. Freediving, using rubber-propelledspears, seems to be the secondmost popular method of catch-ing fish in Macuata.

Reef gleaning is also common,combined with the use of handnets. This type of fishingmethod is practised mainly bywomen. Some fishers use handspears or knives to fish on reefflats at low tide.

Spear fishers and reef glean-ers prefer to go out at low tide.They try to reach selected orfavourite spots before the flowof the incoming tide. Theywait for fish which come inschools with the tide to feed inshallow water.

Fishermen prefer early morn-ing tides or late afternoon tides.Our observations while visitingvillages in Macuata showedthat invertebrates, mainly mol-luscs, constitute about 17 percent of the subsistence landings.

Groupers and coral trout ac-counted for about 30 per cent ofthe total catch, with other sig-nificant contributions from

surgeonfish (18 per cent),trevallies (10 per cent), emper-ors (6 per cent) and parrot fish(5 per cent).

Subsistence fishers fish harderwhen there are village functionssuch as church gatherings, dis-trict meetings, weddings, thebirth of a first-born baby, deathsin the village, or other festivals.Subsistence fishers in Macuataprefer to do handline fishing atnight, especially when the tideis turning on the ebb tide.

Handline fishing is mostly con-ducted in deep areas of the la-goon or reef channels duringdark nights, targeting rock cods,snappers and other bottomfishes. When the moon is full,subsistence fishers prefer to usehandlines in the shallow sandyareas of the barrier reef, target-ing Lutjanids and Lethrinids.

Subsistence fishing trips inMacuata usually last for 8 to 12hours at sea. On special occa-sions, fishing trips may last morethan 12 hours. In such cases, fishare smoked or cooked in earthenovens on uninhabited isletsnearest to the fishing grounds.

This is done to preserve fish inorder to allow fishers to staylonger at sea. Ice is rarely usedin Macuata for subsistenceneeds. This is due mainly to theunavailability of proper iceboxes and the problem of acces-sibility to ice plants.

Although gillnet fishing hasbeen banned in Macuata since1990, the chiefs continue togrant exemptions to subsist-ence fishermen whenever thereis a big village function, par-ticularly when large volumesof fish are required.

It is estimated that gillnets aredeployed in each village on an


27


average of about 10 times peryear only. Subsistence gillnetfishing in the Macuata areadoes not, therefore, appear to beexcessive.

Gillnets used by these subsist-ence fishermen are usuallyaround less than 300 m in length,and therefore much shorter inlength than those used by com-mercial fishermen, who deploynets of more than a kilometre inlength. It was also noted thatnets used for subsistence pur-poses were much shallower indepth compared to the onesused by commercial fishermen.

The frequency of subsistencefishing is variable and depend-ant on the weather conditions,social occasions in the villagesand seasonality of targeted spe-cies. For example, people fishharder for their subsistence needswhen mackerel (R. brachysoma)aggregate in coastal zones to

prepare for spawning. At thistime it is not unusual for fish tobe served for all three meals inmost village homes.

COMMERCIAL FISHERY

Since gillnetting is banned inMacuata, commercial fishermenhave shifted to handline fishingfor demersal reef stocks on theGreat Sea Reef. There were atotal of 289 commercial fisher-men licensed in 1995 and a simi-lar number is expected for 1996.

Most of the commercial fisher-men use the FAO-designed 28-foot (8.5 m) wooden launchesfor fishing. These boats werebuilt by the Fisheries Divisionwhen their boat yard was op-erational. Fishing periods usu-ally last 4–7 days for this typeof boat.

The commercial fishermen inMacuata are quite satisfied with

handline fishing and are gener-ally not in favour of lifting theban on commercial gillnet fish-ing. This is due mainly to eco-nomic reasons, as the commer-cial fishermen have convertedtheir operations to handlinefishing.

It would be costly to convertback to net fishing, and theybelieve that if commercial gill-netting was permitted again,it is most likely that it wouldagain be banned in a fewyears’ time.

The average catch rate of com-mercial handline fishermen us-ing FAO launches was about342 kg/trip during the monthof February. Overall, all vesselslanded an average of 260 kg/trip with landings ranging from12 to 500 kg/trip. It was ob-served during the survey thatthe commercial handline fish-ery is usually dominated by

Figure 1: The above picture shows three subsistence fisherwomen catching fish using handlinesin Nukunuku lagoon, Macuata. Handline fishing is the most common

subsistence fishing method in the Macuata Province.


28


barracuda, trevallies, spanishmackerel, groupers and coraltrout, snappers and emperors.Current trends in the fisherysuggest that there is no resourcelimitation at the current level offishing.

The commercial fishery opera-tion and set-up in Macuata issimple but effective. The fishcatching systems are based oncontracts that require boat cap-tains of the FAO-designed ves-sels to catch a minimum of300 kg/trip.

Therefore, the boats only returnto port after exceeding this tar-get. Fishermen catch sardines atnight using lights placed on theside of the boat to attract them,and fish are then hauled into theboat using small mesh nets.This idea of catching bait origi-nated from the tuna pole-and-line baiting techniques.

The wages given to the captainsand crews by boat owners dif-fer between boats, and are dic-tated by the fishing skills of thecaptains. Boat captains selecttheir own crews, and every fifthtrip is the captain’s trip: that is,the profits from the trip belongto the captain and crew. Ra-tions, fuel and kava are paid forby the boat owners, except forthe fifth trip which the captainhimself provides, but market-ing of fish is conducted by theboat owners. The majority ofboat owners sell their catch tofish buyers or middlemen.

In 1995, a total of 21 middlemenwere licensed by the FisheriesDivision for Macuata. The samenumber is expected again for1996. Of interest was the organi-sation of the fish marketing sys-tem. When the boats come intoport, boat owners inform themiddlemen who send in a truckto collect fish.

The fish are then graded,weighed, cleaned and iced atthe storage facility of the mid-dlemen. The boat owner is thenpaid after the fish are weighed.Of the 21 middlemen inMacuata, four were selling mostof their fish to Suva, whereasthe rest retailed their fish inLabasa Town.

Middlemen selling fish to Suvaare very well organised. Theyhave trucks loaded with iceboxes, as well as freezers andice bunkers for storage. Ice isnormally purchased from theFisheries Division Ice Plant,but one of the middlemen alsohas his own ice plant. Fishtransported fresh to Suva arepreserved in ice.

The trucks travel from Nabouwalulanding to Suva by ferry once aweek with 2 to 5 tonnes of fish.The volume of fish sold to Suvamarkets constitutes approxi-

Figure 2: Picture of Mr Ali’s storage facility at Labasa. Bags of fish are being offloaded from thesmall truck on the right. The big truck loaded with the ice box is for transporting fish to Suva.

The ice bunker on the left, with bags of ice on top, is for storage purpose.


29


Figure 3: Three FAO-designed vessels offloading fish at Mr Khalil’s storage facility. On the leftis his storage house and ice plant. Further back is his bouser, which supplies fuel to the boats.

Figure 4: Mr Khalil (centre) holding a bundle of fish at his storage facility and helping in sortingfish landed by fishermen. On the right are the ice bunkers and at the back is his house


30


mately 91 per cent of the totallanded catch in Macuata.

Markets in Suva are fixed, andtherefore Macuata fish dealersmerely offload, get paid andtravel back to Labasa. Fish buy-ers in Suva include restaurants,butcher shops, supermarkets,and other middlemen.

The middlemen in Suva maythen sell their fish at road-sidestalls, or sell it to hotels and res-taurants or the Nabukaloucreek, whereas butchers and su-permarkets have set up facilitiesto retail their fish.

MACUATA GILLNET SURVEY

FIELD ACTIVITIES

It was not an easy task for theICFMaP team to review the ef-fectiveness of the banning ofcommercial gillnet fishing inMacuata Province from 1990–1996. This was mainly due tothe absence of information on

the fish stocks prior to the im-position of the ban.

Field activities during this sur-vey involved trial gillnet fishingbetween 16 February and 6March 1996 to obtain accurateestimates of catch rates and se-lectivity of gillnets used in theformer commercial fishery.Collection of catch-and-effortdata from commercial and sub-sistence fisheries in MacuataProvince was also conducted.

We held discussions with fish-ermen and villagers on the ef-fectiveness of the commercialgillnet ban to try and gauge opin-ions about lifting or keeping theban in place.

The ICFMaP team also tried tofind whatever historical datawas available on gillnet fishingin Macuata Province prior tothe ban, for comparison withtrial fishing conducted duringthe survey.

The Fisheries vessel Gonedauwas used as the base for thegillnet fishing during this sur-vey. Gillnets of mesh sizes 2, 3,and 4 inches were used (dimen-sions of each mesh size were360 m x 50 mesh x 75% hang-ing ratio) to investigate catchrates, selectivity and species com-position. Three fishing teamswere formed and each teamwas briefed on netting proce-dures. The nets were deployedat high tides during both nightsand days and soaked for sixhours, and when nets werehauled in, the fish were sepa-rated in buckets according tomesh sizes. As soon as fish ar-rived on-board the Gonedau,they were sorted into species,identified, lengths measuredand then weighed.

We were blessed with goodweather in the first two weeksof the survey, but the third andfourth weeks were very wetand windy.

Figure 5: Fisheries staff helping the ICFMaP team in sorting,weighing and measuring fish onboard the Gonedau.


31


Though the wet conditionsmade life miserable on boardGonedau, the field activities con-tinued as planned.

The Gonedau has only 9 bunks,but unfortunately there were 14of us on-board the vessel. Sleep-ing was not so bad in the firsttwo weeks because peoplewithout bunks were able tosleep outside on deck, but in thethird and fourth weeks, life wasdifficult at night because of thewind and rain.

The team was no longer ableto sleep outside but was forcedto crowd into the small wheelhouse. I managed to secure agood spot between the sound-ing machine and the boat com-pass. Fisheries Officer ApisaiSesewa grabbed the chart tableto sleep on, but unfortunatelythe table was only half thelength of his height. SioneMatoto and two others sharedthe floor of the wheel housewhich is only about 9 x 3 feetin size.

OUTCOME OF THE SURVEY

Information from villagers inthe Macuata area obtainedfrom interviews conductedduring this survey supportsthe conclusion that coastal fishstocks have improved mark-edly since the imposition ofthe ban on commercial gillnetfishing in 1990. Villagers donot need to travel far or fish forvery long to obtain goodcatches. They also noted an in-crease in abundance of mulletsand mackerels, which had pre-viously been seriously depletedby commercial fishermen.

Though we managed to re-trieve some catch data collectedbetween 1982 and 1983 by theFisheries Division, it was diffi-cult to compare the catch datafrom this survey with previous

information on catch rates fromcommercial fishing. However,these records from the early1980s show that average dailycatch rate per vessel rangedbetween 53 and 97 kg, with anaverage of 73.1 kg/day. Theaverage catch from this surveyduring February 1996 was75.6 kg/day.

In terms of weight of fishcaught, the principal compo-nents of gillnet catches weresharks and rays which collec-tively formed about 34 per centof the catch. This may be indica-tive of low fishing pressure, aspredatory species such as sharksare usually among the firstgroup of fishes to be depletedwhen fishing pressure is high.Snappers and travellies eachconstituted about 9 per cent ofthe catch, while mullets andmackerels each contributed about8 per cent of the total weight.

The current ban on gillnet fish-ing has had very little effect onthe people of Macuata. The peo-ple most affected by the banwere commercial fishermenfrom outside the Macuata area,particularly those from VitiLevu. Commercial and subsist-ence fishermen in Macuata arenot in favour of relaxing the banon commercial gillnetting.

On selectivity tests, it was ob-served during the fishing trialthat 2-inch-mesh-sized netswere catching a large number ofjuvenile fish.

This would, therefore, meanthat the use of 2-inch mesh sizeshould be restricted. It was alsoobserved in this survey that 3-inch mesh size was the mostappropriate minimum mesh tobe used by subsistence fisher-men with a hanging ratio of noless than 75 per cent.

RECOMMENDATIONS

In summary, it was recom-mended to Fiji Fisheries that theban on gillnet fishing be ex-tended, because of the markedimprovements in subsistencecatches and because commer-cial fishermen in Macuata haveadopted handline fishing on theGreat Sea Reef. Since subsist-ence gillnet fishing in Macuatadoes not seem to be excessive,there was no reason to seek anylimitation on subsistence fish-ing, apart from discouragingthe use of 2-inch mesh.

Concerning handline fishing,the Fisheries Division was ad-vised to continue collectinginformation on fishing effort,notably catch composition,trip length, days spent fishing,hours fished per day and crewsize.

FISHERIES DIVISION RESPONSE

TO SURVEY OUTCOME AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

The Fiji Fisheries Division wasvery pleased with the success ofthis survey. The recommenda-tions were well received by theFisheries officials, especially keypeople like Mr ApolosiTuraganivalu (Senior FisheriesOfficer – Northern), Mr KrishnaSwamy (Acting Principal Fish-eries Officer – Resource Assess-ment & Development) and MrMaciu Lagibalavu (Acting Di-rector of Fisheries).

The report will be used to ad-vise the Provincial Council


32


© Copyright South Pacific Commission 1996

The South Pacific Commission authorises the reproduction of this material, whole or in part, in any form,

provided appropriate acknowledgement is given.

Original text: English

South Pacific Commission, Fisheries Information Section, B.P. D5, 98848 Noumea Cedex, New CaledoniaTelephone: (687) 262000 – Fax: (687) 263818 – E-mail: [email protected]

and Tikina Councils in theMacuata area.

CONCLUSION

The support given to us by theFiji Fisheries Division greatlycontributed to the success of

Figure 6: Happy faces of Sione Matoto and Esaroma Ledua during the first field trip on theGonedau deck, with little expectation of what is coming in the next two weeks.

the field activities during thefour weeks in Macuata. Wewere pleased with the profes-sionalism of Fiji Fisheries staffwho were involved in the sur-vey, including boat crews andResource Assessment & De-velopment staff, especially the

leadership of Mr ApisaiSesewa. The support from theLabasa Fisheries office interms of provision of rations,boat preparations, net repair,vehicle provision for fieldtrips and many other activitieswere similarly excellent.

spc activitiescoastfish.spc.int/news/fish_news/78/fish_news_78.pdf · spc fisheries newsletter #78...

Documents