Foreign Fishery Developments

The Mexican Fishery forNorthern Anchovy, Engraulis mordax

UNITED STATES

'. PACIFIC OCEAN·

are based in Guaymas, where they aredeployed for sardine fishing in the Gulfof California.

Mexican fishermen have sharply in­creased their anchovy catch in recent

Catch

Almost all of Mexico's anchovy catchis taken off the Pacific Coast of the BajaPeninsula (see mapl. About 80 percentof that catch is landed in Ensenada. Thefishery was originally conducted within5 miles, but recent reports from the portof Ensenada indicate that the fishermenhave now moved further offshore. Thehighly seasonal catch is mostly takenbetween May and December (Table 1)when Mexico's entire anchovy/sardinefleet is based in Ensenada. During therest of the year, many of these vessels

January Negl. 1.1 1.1February Negl. 3.1 3.1March 0.1 0.7 0.8April Negl. 7.1 7.1May 02 35.8 36.0June 0.1 21.7 218July 0.4 29.6 30.1August 0.1 16.2 16.3September 0.4 10.7 11.1October 0.6 223 22.9November 1.2 25.7 26.9December 0.3 23.0 23.3

- -- --Total' 3.4 197.0 200.4

Month Edible Fish meal Total'

Table 1.-Mexico's anchovy catch by monthand type 01 processing, 1979. in 1,000 t'.

Utilization

The northern anchovy, Engraulismordax , is the most abundant speciesfound in the California Current whichdominates the coastal waters off the BajaPeninsula in Mexico and off SouthernCalifornia in the United States. Untilrecently, the species was relatively un­utilized by either Mexican or U.S. fish­ermen.

In the early 1970's, however, Mexicoinitiated a massive fishing effort for thisspecies which has now become the larg­est single component of the country'sfisheries catch. The increased anchovycatch has enabled the current MexicanAdministration to claim that the massive$1.4 billion fisheries development pro­gram has been a great success. Someobservers, however, are concerned thatanchovy stocks may not be able to sup­port the intensive fishing effort over asustained period.

'Discrepancy with Table 2 is unexplained.Source: Departamento de Pesca. '"AnuarioEstadistico Pesquero, 1979:' p. 134-135.'Totals may not agree due to rounding. The northern anchovy, Engraulis mordax.

64 Marine Fisheries Review

years. Preliminary statistics suggest thatthe catch totaled nearly 340,000 metrictons (t) in 1980, a 20 percent increaseover the 250,000 t taken in 1979 (Table2). Preliminary 1981 reports indicate thatthe 1981 catch will exceed the 1980catch, but much will depend on theNovember- December results, whichwere not yet available. Mexican officialseventually hope to increase the annualcatch to 500,000 t.

Fish Meal Production

The development of the Baja anchovyfishery has enabled Mexico to increaseits fish meal production to about 80,000t (Table 3). The anchovy catch is beingused primarily for reduction to fish meal.Fish meal is used as a dietary supplementby Mexico's important poultry and live-

Table 2. - Mexico's North Pacific Anchovycatch, 1975-80'.

Quantity QuantityYear (1,000 t) Year (1,000 t)

1975 59.6 1978 180.11976 79.4 1979 249.61977 1788 1980 339.0

'The Baja California Norte catch throughJune 1981 was 95,500 t. Sources: FAO"Yearbook of Fishery Statistics," 1979(1975-79 data) and NMFS Southeast Fish­eries Center (1980 data).

Table 3. - Mexico's fish meal production, imports,exports, and consumption, 1975-81, in 1,000 t'.

TotalYear Production Imports Exports consumption

1975 35.0 475 Negl. 82.51976 '47.0 30.6 Negl. 77.61977 537 143 Negl. 6801978 59.4 24.0 Negl. 83.41979 75.2 '42.1 Negl. 117.31980 "'79.0 '20.0 Negl. '99.01981' '80.0 '25.0 Negl. '105.0

'Sources: FAa "Yearbook of Fishery Statisfics," 1979(1975-79 import data) and Oil World, various issues\1975-81 production data and 1980-81 import data).Estimate

'Different sources on Mexican fish meal are in roughagreement, with the exception of 1979. The publicafionOil World estimated that only 26,000 t was importedthat year while FAa and the International Associationof Fish Meal Manufacturers reported that 42,100 twasimported.'Oil World estimate may be low. Based on the 1979anchovy catch, fish meal production could have reached90,000 t.'Projection based on Oil World January to September1981 forecast of 60,000 t produced and 14,000 t im­ported, compared with 59,000 t produced and 9,000 fimported from January to September 1980. Again theOil World projection may be low based on the projected1981 anchovy catch.'Projection.

June-July 1982, 44(6-7)

stock industry. Before 1976, Mexicoimported most of its fish meal. Theincreased domestic production based onthe anchovy has enabled the country tokeep imports below 30,000 t. 1

Government officials eventually hopeto use the anchovy as an important partof its program to increase domestic foodproduction. The Departamento de Pesca(DEPES) wants anchovies to be used toproduce edible products and has metwith fish meal companies to plan fortheir reduced use for fish meal. Instead,DEPES wants the fish meal plants to useoffal from canneries and freezing plantsand species which cannot be used toproduce edible products: It is likely tobe several years, however, before such ashift is actually implemented. As part ofits fish meal policy, DEPES had plannedto restrict the construction of additionalfish meal plants. Unconfirmed reportsfrom Mexico, however, suggest thatDEPES may have reevaluated its an­chovy policy, at least for the immediatefuture, and now plans to authorize theconstruction of additional fIsh mealplants. The Bank of Mexico has beenconsidering loans to fInance the con­struction of additional fIsh meal plantsin 1982.

Companies

Several Mexican companies, based inEnsenada, fIsh for anchovies. In 1979,there were eight fIsh meal plants in theEnsenada area, less than 10 percent ofthe country's 86 fIsh meal plants, Thoseeight plants, however, produced morethan half of Mexico's entire fIsh mealproduction in that year.

The most important fish meal com­pany is Pesquera Zapata, S.A.~ a Mexi­can- United States joint venture formedin 1974. Pesquera Zapata catches andreduces about 80 percent of the ancho-

'Mexican statistics report fIsh meal imports of42,000 t in 1979. Some observers believe thatofficial statistics are in error and that actualimports did not exceed more than 26,000 tons.'Details on Mexican Government plans for theflsh meal industry can be obtained by requesting"Mexican Fish Meal Industry" (lFR-RIIIII)from your local NMFS Statistics and MarketNews office.'Mention of trade names or commercial fIrmsdoes not imply endorsement by the NationalMarine Fisheries Service, NOAA,

vies landed in Ensenada. The companybegan operations in 1976 with six U,S,­built 33 m long purse seiners and lateradded additional Mexican- built purseseiners. In 1980, Pesquera Zapata pur­chased three new seiners from a Norwe­gian shipyard. These new vessels willincrease the company's fleet to 13 vessels.

At the height of the season, the com­pany employs 450- 500 workers proces­sing anchovies and sardines into fish mealand oil. It operates a totally integratedplant with the most modern facilities inMexico. It is the only fIsh meal plant inMexico, for example, with offshore land­ing facilities, The catch is fed into a 36cm pipe which runs underwater to theplant. The company claims that air andwater pollution is thus avoided, althoughsome local observers believe that thesystem has not entirely solved the pollu­tion problem. Unconftrmed reports fromEnsenada suggest that because of variousproblems with the pump, much of thecatch during 1981 was landed manuallyin Ensenada and trucked to the Zapataplant.

Once in the plant, the fish are pressed,crushed, and cooked; the product is thendried and the meal milled while the liquidis treated and separated into variouscomponents. Continuous analysis of thecatch is conducted at the plant to studythe size, age, and sex of fish. The planthas the capacity to produce 100 t of fishmeal per hour. The plant's entire pro­duction is marketed domestically. It isshipped to the Mexican rail center ofMexicali and from there it is distributedthroughout Mexico.

Mexico's state-owned company, In­dustries Pesqueras Paraestatales delNoroeste (IPPN), is also interested inprocessing anchovies. In 1980, however,IPPN only canned about 5,000 t of an­chovies at its Ensenada plant. The com­pany hopes to increase substantially itsanchovy utilization in the future. IPPNis primarily responsible for supplying thedomestic market with edible fIsheryproducts.

IPPN not only hopes to can moreanchovies, but is also planning to useanchovies and other species such as haketo produce fIsh protein concentrate(FPC). IPPN has ordered an FPC plantfrom a company in the United States

65

Canada-EC Sign 6-Year Fisheries Agreement

'The EC requires a certificate of Canadian origin tor all North Atlantic cod, Gadus morhua. imports.'The reduced tariffs apply only to Canadian fishery exports that will be processed in the EC. Priorminor handling such as cleaning, sorting, packing, etc" will not qualify Canadian exports for thereduced duty. The reduction is also not allowed if the processing is to be carried out at the retaillevel. In addition, only fishery products for human consumption qualify.3 NA Not available.

Table 2.-European Community annual import quotas and reduced import duties for Canadianfishery exports, 1 January 1982 to 31 December 1986.

Duty lYo) Quantity

Commodity EC Import Reduced 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986

FrozenCod whOle' 139 '3.7 5,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000Redfish, whole 150 '4.0 8,000 8,000 9,000 9,000 9,000Cod fillets' 150 '6.0 10,000 11,000 12,000 13.000 15,000

-- -- -- -- --Total, frozen 23,000 25,000 27,000 28,000 30,000

SailedCod fillets' 200 NA3 NA 2,500 3,500 4,000Cod whole' 130 NA NA 4,000 5,000 6,000Pickled herring 200 10.0 4,000 4,500 6,000 6,500 7,000

-- -- -- -- --Total, salted NA NA 39,000 43,000 47,000

Grand total NA NA 66,000 71,000 77,000

and hopes to begin production in 1983.The recent installation of an unloadingpump has increased the plant's unloadingcapacity to 80 t of anchovies or sardinesper hour. More importantly, the pumphas improved the quality of the unloadedfish. Before the pump was installed, 40percent or more of the landings wereunfit for processing into edible products.IPPN officials now claim that almost allof the fish landed with the new pumpcan be canned.

DEPES announced plans in Septem­ber 1981 for the construction of a new$3.2 million cannery in Ensenada. It isnot known at this time who will build thecannery, but it will probably be operatedby IPPN. The cannery will eventually beable to process 10,000 t of anchoviesannually. DEPES estimated that it willtake about 2 years to build the plant.

Prospects

Stock assessment surveys conductedby the National Marine Fisheries Service(NMFS) suggest that in an average year,about 70 percent of the anchovy stock isfound in the U.S. 200-mile FisheriesConservation and Management Zoneand about 30 percent within the 200-mileExclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) claimedby Mexico. U.S. anchovy fishermen,however, are strictly regulated. The U.S.anchovy catch in 1980, for example, wasonly about 50,000 tons. U.S. and Cali­fornia officials, as a result, are becomingincreasingly concerned by the rapidlyincreasing Mexican catch.

Many U.S. officials are convinced thatanchovy stocks can probably not toleratea sustained annual catch in excess of500,000 t, which is the Mexican goal.U.S. officials maintain that anchovystocks, like the stocks of other smallpelagic species, are subject to extremeannual fluctuations. Estimates for 1980,for example, suggest an anchovy biomassof 2.8 million t, which probably couldhave supported a 0.5 million t catch inthat year. As recently as 1978, however,a biomass of only 1.3 million t was esti­mated by the NMFS. A Mexican catchapproaching the 0.5 million t level duringthat year could have had a disastrousimpact on the anchovy stock. U.S. offi­cials point out that fisheries, much largerthan the northern anchovy fishery, have

been decimated by combinations of ad­verse environmental conditions andoverfishing.

Most Mexican officials and privateconsultants, however. are convinced thatthe anchovy stock can withstand theincreasing fishing effort and cite FAOstudies suggesting a possible maximumsustainable yield of from 1.5 to 2.0 mil­lion t. Some Mexicans are concerned,however, about the future of the fishery.Especially disturbing have been reports

The Canadian Government and theEuropean Community (EC) have signeda 6- year fisheries agreement. Draftedand initialed by both countries in No­vember 1980, it was finally signed by

Table 1.-Canada's annual catch quotas allo­cated to the European Economic Community.by species and area. 1982-86.

NAFO QuantitySpecies zones! It)

Cod 2J, 3K, and 3L 9,500Cod 2G and 2H 6,500

--Total 16,000

Squid 3 and 4 7,000--

Grand total 2,3, and 4 23,000

'Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organizationzones.

from the fishermen who say that theyhave had to search for anchovy furtherand further off the coast, and that therange of the stock appears to be con­tracting. In addition, an increasing per­centage of juvenile anchovy was takenduring 1981. Some observers believe thatthese developments, especially the in­creasing proportion of juveniles, is anindication that the intensive Mexicaneffort on anchovy is adversely affectingthe stocks. (Source: IFR-8217.)

Canadian and European Communityofficials in Brussels on 30 December1981. The agreement was originally tohave covered the 6-year period from1981 to 1986; Canada and the EC, how­ever, held up implementation for morethan 1 year. Consequently, it will be inforce from 1982 through 1986, althoughnegotiations for a possible 1- year exten­sion are being considered.

The final agreement, which does notdiffer substantially from the 1980 draft,guarantees EC vessels fishing rights forcod and squid taken from Canadian­claimed waters. The cod allocation toEC fishern1en will be 16,000 metric tons(t) annually through 1986; the squid al­location will be 7.000 t per year (Tablell. In exchange, the Canadians will be

66 Marine Fisheries Review

allowed to export specific quantities offish to the EC at lower than regular tar­iffs; this quantity will be increased an­nually (Table 2). The Canadians willexport partially processed productswhich will be produced in final form byEuropean companies.

Background

Canada is aggressively attempting todevelop its fishing industry, primarily byexpanding export markets for its increas­ing catch. Much progress has been madein recent years and, in 1980, Canada wasthe world's leading exporter of fisheryproducts (US$1 billion). As part of theGovernment's fisheries developmentpolicy, Canada has tied catch alloca­tions in its 200-mile fishing zone to for­eign cooperation in lowering tariff andnon tariff barriers on Canadian fisheryexports. Several EC countries have beeninterested in access to Canadian­claimed fishery resources because re­strictions by other coastal countrieshave closed many traditional fishinggrounds to distant-water fleets.

The Federal Republic of Germany(FRG) is the most important of these. In1980, the FRG's 2,000 deep- sea fisher­men caught 175,000 t of fish, of which60,000 t was cod. Nearly 15,000 t of thecod catch (about a quarter of the total)was obtained from Canadian-claimedwaters and it is evident that the modernand profitable German distant-waterfleet needs access to Canadian-claimedwaters. Furthermore, the FRG distant­water fleet operates from two principalGerman ports, Cuxhaven and Bremer­haven, both of which have suffered se­vere economic problems, especially inthe steel and auto industries. The FRGGovernment consequently feels it desir­able to support the distant-water fishingindustry (which employs 15,000 fishprocessors in addition to the 2,000 fish­ermen). The FRG, in its role as the pri­mary economic power of the EC, wasone of the major proponents of a fIsh­eries agreement with Canada.

Agreement Negotiated

With these mutual benefIts in mind, afisheries agreement was negotiated bythe EC and Canada during 1980 andinitialed in November of that year. It

June-July 1982, 44(6-7)

immediately became a point of contro­versy within the fIshing industries ofboth Canada and the Ee. Disagreementabout the benefIts and drawbacks of theproposed treaty became a source ofcontinual debate in both the Canadianand the EC fIshing communities formore than a year.

Canadian Objections

Canadian Atlantic coast fishermenand processors immediately criticizedthe draft agreement. The Canadianshad two principal objections: many feltthat it would not be in Canada's interestto give up part of its catch to the Euro­peans in exchange for reduced tariffs onCanadian fIsh, which they believed theEuropeans would probably buy anywayto support their fIsh processing industry.This proved not to be the case, however,and a weakening market for Canadianfishery exports in 1981 changed theminds of many Canadians, especially inthe processing sector.

Secondly, many Canadians also ob­jected to a clause permitting GreenlandfIshermen to catch salmon along Green­land's western coast.' A significantpercentage of the salmon fished byGreenland fishermen spawn in Canadi­an rivers. The agreement allotted ECfishermen a quota of 1,190 t of salmonwest of long. 44° W, but both sidesagreed the quota might be increasedslightly if the season were begun laterand if the fishermen used a larger meshsize. The EC subsequently set a laterstarting date for the season and raisedthe salmon catch quota to 1,270 t. Can­ada objected that the EC failed to im­plement the mesh size change and thatthe quota was too high. The highercatch limit and the dispute over themesh size caused considerable opposi­tion to the agreement with the EC inCanada.

European Objections

Opposition to the proposed agree­ment within the EC came mainly from

'Greenland is part of the Danish realm andconsequently is included as an EC memberstate in EC lisheries agreements with nonmem­ber countries. Greenland's catch quotas are setby the EC.

the United Kingdom. British fishermenwould not benefit from the agreementbecause Britain no longer has a distant­water fleet. Much of the cheaper Cana­dian fishery exports would be sold onthe already depressed British marketsand compete with the catch of Britishfishermen. The U.K. Government with­held approval of the agreement to pressits demand within the EC Fisheries Com­mission for a Common Fisheries Policy(CFP). U.K. fIshermen, especially theScots, have protested the importation oflow-priced fIsh for their market. TheCFP has long been a special problem forthe United Kingdom whose fIshermenclaim that, because two- thirds of the ECfisheries catch is taken in British coastalwaters, they should receive specialrights within the EC-claimed 200-milezone.

Most other EC member states haverejected these demands as a violation ofthe basic right of all EC member statesto equal access to EC-claimed fIsheryresources. Successive British Govern­ments have used EC fIshery negotiationswith non- EC members to press the U.K.views of the CFP. As a result, in Febru­ary 1981, the British repeated their long­standing position (at a meeting of ECforeign ministers in Brussels) that therecould be no agreements with outsidecountries until the EC member- stateshad settled their dispute over the Com­munity's internal fisheries policy.

EC Approves Treaty

The United Kingdom fInally accept­ed the Canada- EC fIsheries agreementafter assurances were given guarantee­ing the protection of EC markets froman excess of low- priced foreign fisheryimports. Under this arrangement, whenfIsh are imported into an EC member­state at prices below the established ref­erence price; that state will notify theEC Commission which must take cor­rective action within 3 days. British fish­ermen had complained for some timethat the EC reference price system was

'Reference prices are minimum import pricesestablished by the EC to protect domestic lish­ermen from foreign competition.

67

too slow and cumbersome to protectthem from cheap foreign imports. Thenew assurance of swift EC action wasaccepted by the British Government, al­though some fishermen were still skep­tical that the problem had been solved.With British acquiescence, the EC fmal­Iy approved the agreement on 29 Sep­tember 1981.

Canada Approves Treaty

After the EC approved the agree­ment, the Canadian Government feltthat further study was needed beforemaking the agreement final. The fullimpact of the new reference price sys­tem adopted by the EC was of particularconcern to the Canadians. They be­lieved that a thorough examination ofthis policy was required to verify thatCanadian fishery products, especiallyfrozen cod filets, would not be penal­ized. After a reexamination of the agree­ment, the EC reference price system,and the fishing industry's attitudetoward the agreement, the CanadianGovernment finally decided to approvethe treaty.

Agreement Signed

The formal signing of the agreementby Canadian and EC authorities tookplace in Brussels on 30 December 1981.The EC members were especially inter­ested in enacting the agreement beforethe end of the year so that EC fishermencould begin operations in Canadian wa­ters as soon as possible in 1982.

Remaining Problems Resolved

Canadian and EC officials remainedin Brussels after 30 December 1981 todiscuss a few remaining "minor" detailsconcerning the implementation of theagreement. The Canadians were, how­ever, not satisfied with the outcome ofthese informal talks and were con­cerned over which EC-member coun·tries would import what quantities 01Canadian fishery products. Canadianand EC officials subsequently met on 25January 1982 and resolved their differ­ences.

The NMFS Foreign Fisheries Analy­sis Division has learned that the Cana­dians have begun to issue permits to ECfishing vessels. Still unresolved, howev-

68

er. is a possible I-year extension of theagreement to 31 December 1987.(Source: IFR-82125.)

Canada Okays Over-SideSales to Foreign Firms

The Canadian Government has de­scribed two new over-the-side. directsales contracts with foreign companies.Fishermen from the Maritime provinces(Nova Scotia, Newfoundland, and PrinceEdward Island) and Quebec will be per­mitted to sell mackerel and river herring(gaspereau) directly to foreign buyers.

One contract is between the MaritimeFishermen's Union and the Joint Trawl­crs (Canada) Company' of St. Johns.Newfoundland, a subsidiary of JointTrawlers of Helsinglorg, Sweden. Thesecond contract is between the EasternFishermen's Federation, J. Marr Seafoodscompany of Hull, United Kingdom, andthe AMFALGroup of Dartmouth, NovaScotia.

The first of seven foreign freezer ves­sels was scheduled to arrive on 15 May1982 to begin receiving the mackerelcatch off eastern Nova Scotia. Anothervessel was to begin receiving river herringon 19 May at Chatham, New Brunswick.

Foreign vessels are required to remainat their purchasing stations for a specifiednumber of days. If the vessel arrives late,or leaves early, and does not fulfill itsminimum number of purchasing days,the foreign partner would lose a signifi­cant portion of the catch allocation towhich it would have been entitled. Inthe past, some Canadian fishermen didnot have enough time to reach the foreignpurchasing vessels. The new minimumpurchasing days rule will give Canadianvessels more time to sell their catch.

The price Canadian fishermen willreceive was established at 13 cents/pound (28.7 cents/kg) for mackerel and8.5 cents/pound (18.8 cents/kg) for ale­wives.

Canadian Department of Fisheries andOceans officials are monitoring the im­plementation of the two over-the-side

'Mention of trade names or commercial firmsdoes not imply endorsement by the NationalMarine Fisheries Service. NOAA.

sales agreements. If a partner to thecontract encounters difficulties, the Min­ister of Fisheries has reserved the rightto intervene to resolve the problem.

The contracts will give the Europeanpartners direct access to a limitedamount of offshore species which havenot been traditionally fished by Canadi­ans and in which Canadian fishermenhave shown little interest. Foreign vesselsdeployed under the contracts will besubject to the Canadian access and fish­ing fees for foreign flag vessels.

Sales of fish by Canadian fishermendirectly to foreign buyers have beenauthorized by the Government of Cana­da intermittently since 1976. The pro­gr(lm has provided an opportunity forinshore Canadian flshermen to sell thatportion of their catch for which no Ca­nadian market exists at economicallyacceptable returns to fishermen. TotalAtlantic coast over-the-side sales in 1981represented less than one percent of totalfishery landings in Atlantic provinces.(Source: Department of Fisheries andOceans.)

Canadian Scallop Catch,and Culture Potential

The Ministry of the Environment ofthe Province of British Columbia hasissued a report on the potential for scal­lop mariculture on the Canadian Pacificcoast. The report concludes that whilethe technology is available, the economicfeasibility and the availability of foreignand domestic markets is by no meanssure and that more study is needed.

During January- August 1981, Cana­dian fishermen landed 60,600 metric tons(t) of scallops (round weight) or 29 per­cent more than during the comparableperiod in 1980 when 47,000 t werelanded. The value of the 1981 catch wasabout $45 million. Canada exported7,400 t of scallops (product weight) worth$73.5 million during January-September1981 according to the latest Canadianstatistics. During the same 9 months of1981, scallop exports were valued at$52.2 million, 40 percent less than in1981. Virtually all Canadian scallop ex­ports went to the United States in 1981.

Marine Fisheries Review