INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY

PURPOSE AND ORGANIZATION

The Technical Consultation on the Allocation of Fishery Resources, held at Vichy, France, from 21 to 23 April 1980, was organized to study, at the international level, the allocation of fishery and related resources between commercial, recreational and other uses. While primarily focused on recreational fishery aspects, the basic approach was comprehensive and covered all uses. Specifically, the overall goal of the Consultation was to study and evaluate alternatives for the conservation and management of fishery resources so as to optimize the generation of overall benefits to society. The detailed objectives were to:

1. examine the ways in which fish stocks and the aquatic environment can be managed to provide maximum net benefit from fisheries where there are alternative uses for these resources;

2. explore ways whereby various uses of fishery resources and aquatic environments can be defined and quantified for decision-making;

3. examine the application of new socio-economic theories to the management of recreational fisheries and other related uses of aquatic resources;

4. consider the possibilities of and the problems associated with developing better basic national and international fishery statistics;

5. review ways in which the public can be best informed about the contribution of recreational fisheries to human welfare and national and international well-being, and

6. promote international cooperation in the understanding and management of recreational fisheries.

The Technical Consultation was organized and sponsored by: the European Inland Fisheries Advisory Commission (EIFAC), a regional subsidiary body of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) comprising 25 European countries; the Department of Fisheries and Oceans of Canada; and the Department of the Interior and Department of Commerce of the United States of America.

The Steering Committee which met five times was as follows:

Members

J.-L. Gaudet, Chairman
Secretary of EIFAC
Fisheries Department, FAO
00100 Rome, Italy

J. Brachet
Chef du Service de la Pêche et de l'Hydrobiologie
Direction de la Protection de la Nature
Ministère de la Culture et de l'Environnement
14 bd du Général Leclerc
Neuilly-sur-Seine, France

J. Choulet
Secrétaire Général, Conseil Supérieur de la Pêche
10 rue Péclet
Paris, France

P. Hooper
Department of the Interior
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Washington, D.C., USA

R. F. Hutton
Department of Commerce
National Marine Fisheries Service
Washington, D.C., USA

B. Steinmetz
Department of Fisheries
The Hague, The Netherlands

A. L. W. Tuomi
Senior Adviser, Recreational Fisheries
Department of Fisheries and Oceans
Ottawa, Canada K1A OE6

Secretariat

R. L. Welcomme and F. Henderson
Technical Secretaries of EIFAC
Fisheries Department, FAO
00100 Rome, Italy

The Consultation was organized in five consecutive panels:

In each case the Panel Chairman presented a review based on his knowledge of the topic and the papers relevant to his Panel. His initial review was supplemented by comments on specific subjects by other panel members. A general discussion followed.

OPENING OF THE CONSULTATION

The Consultation was opened by Mr. François Delmas, Secrétaire d'Etat to the Ministère de l'Environnement et du Cadre de Vie, who welcomed the participants to the thermal city of Vichy. He gave a brief review of the historical development of the inland fisheries of France from the time of the monarchy and reviewed the main problems and conflicts now facing recreational fisheries in France with particular reference to Atlantic salmon.

Mr. K. C. Lucas, Assistant Director-General of Fisheries of FAO, expressed on behalf of the Director-General of FAO, Mr. Edouard Saouma, his appreciation to the Government of France for hosting the Consultation and for their generous hospitality. He thanked in particular the Conseil Supérieur de la Pêche, the Fédération de Pêche de l'Allier, and the National Angling Club for the selection of Vichy as the site of the meeting and for their efficient arrangements. He noted that the participants included representatives of national and international fishermen organizations whose participation he felt was necessary to the success of the Consultation as they represent millions of anglers and fishermen. The Allier River, which flows through the city of Vichy, was a living example, he said, of the opportunities and problems besetting fisheries today. One hundred years ago the annual salmon runs in the Loire-Allier River system totalled 100 000 fish. Now the run is down to only 2 000 or 3 000 individuals. The reasons for the decline of this anadromous species, which ignores manmade boundaries and is sought after by many users in both inland and ocean waters, are complex and both national and international. Study of fishery allocation problems, the purpose of the Consultation, transcends traditional boundaries and adds importance to this international meeting which brings together Europe and America. What we want, he said, is to know how and when fishery managers can develop pragmatic policies for the understanding and integrated management and development of commercial and recreational fisheries.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Recreational fisheries have belatedly reached a threshold level for international recognition and for internationally coordinated action on basic data development that the commercial fisheries reached 30 years ago. This summarizes the priority area for immediate collective endeavour as based on the following conclusions which were reached:

1. The size and basic social and economic dimensions of the recreational fisheries are no longer open to serious challenge: the recreational fishery is as big, if not bigger, than the commercial fishery in three of the largest and most industrialized countries represented at the Consultation. The country review papers revealed that the sport fishery is the dominant if not the only significant fishery in the inland waters of most of the countries represented at the Consultation. In conjunction with this, it was recognized that the recreational fisheries are comparably important in many other of the more advanced countries which could not provide for one reason or another similar holistic data on their fisheries.

2. Data comparability and relevance have supplanted data availability as the major problem with respect to recreational fisheries information. Many countries have carried out, have underway, or are planning major surveys. Unfortunately, the bulk of the resulting data can seldom be either compared or internationally aggregated because of an absence of common definitions and widely divergent differences in survey purposes, scope, time frames and methods. This however is a problem that can be resolved through international leadership and cooperation—as exemplified, for example, by the report that planners from the Canadian and the U.S. national survey are coordinating their respective 1980 surveys to develop a basic framework of common, comparable data for the Great Lakes area for the international Great Lake Fishery Commission.

3. The intransigence of the problems centering on economic evaluation of market-exempt fisheries has held back recognition of the role and importance of the reacreational fisheries long past the time that such recognition was warranted on the grounds of the size, value and potential of recreational fisheries both nationally and internationally. This dilemma was recognized in that the Consultation considered both fisheries best-use theory and economic evaluation methodology in conjunction with the two areas—data development and fishery conflicts—where realities have to be dealt with on an ongoing basis regardless of the adequacy of economic evaluation theory and methods. Progress with conflicts has been made notably in the recognition that the problem essentially exists only where fisheries are common property and that better cooperation between decision-makers and economists can progressively improve both the methods and results of such evaluations.

4. The Consultation provided the opportunity for key representatives of organized anglers from a number of countries to meet for the first time and to explore areas for possible future liaison and cooperation. Recognition of the importance of this development led to the recognition that other sectors of the recreational fishing industry should likewise open up channels of communication and be appropriately represented at future consultations.

5. It was recognized that the diversity of the fisheries endowments, interests and institutions represented at the Consultation provided an opportunity rather than a problem, and that all the countries could benefit if they could learn about and draw on each other's fishery management expertise and experience.

6. Conflicts involving both the use of fish and their habitat are becoming increasingly complex and acute. Many of these conflicts are international in scope and correspondingly require international recognition and consideration. In terms of fish use, in France for example as well as in a number of other Atlantic salmon-producing countries, the future of the salmon in both inland and ocean waters depends on both the funding and the public support for fishery conservation and enhancement that anglers can provide at both the national and international levels. Though the incidence of the problem varies, acid rain was likewise pointed out as a subject area where international understanding and cooperation are urgently required.

7. Two or three longer term fishery goal themes emerged. Ecological sensitivity was identified as a fundamental requirement for fishery management that would benefit not only the resource and its recreational and other users, but also society as a whole. The need for improved understanding of their respective roles, and dialogue between disciplinary professionals in the fishery management field was stressed. Finally, it was recognized that this Consultation should go one step beyond urging the development of a holistic fishery management approach, i.e., the formulation of the necessary economic theory for the integrated management of all use of fisheries, by advocating that FAO should take the lead in helping develop and start publishing statistics covering all uses of fisheries, including subsistence and recreational fisheries.

Recommendation 1—Data and Information

Managers of fisheries need comprehensive information and data on both the users and the resources of an aquatic ecosystem and on the effects that each group of users exert on the ecosystem, both with respect to quality and quantity of the use and output capacity of the aquatic resources. This information is essential to establish an adequate theoretical framework for determining ecologic, economic and social benefits from fisheries, to develop integrated models for use in long-term planning and policy analysis and to manage specific fisheries in the most efficient manner. To be meaningful the data should be based on common definitions and have a high degree of comparability.

The Consultation therefore recommended the establishment of an International Program for assembling, organizing, assessing, refining and communicating data and information. This program will include:

(A) Development of Data

• fishery data covering both supply and demand based on common definitions with an emphasis on basic data;

• social data on quality, motives, barriers, behavior, etc.

Mechanism suggested

1. That FAO/EIFAC established a small international working group to identify, define and specify the basic economic and social data involved.

2. That regional workshops be organized as required on specific topics, such as the collection of data through fishery surveys, sampling design, etc.; that data adapted to existing policy be checked for relevance before a survey starts and that methods be used to produce more reliable and valid data.

3. That fishermen organizations be kept informed and their input be solicited regarding the collection and quality of user data.

(B) Preparation of Synopses

• FAO species synopsis series should be reviewed to determine whether they adequately cover habitat aspects of “species niche;”

• a new series of “stress” synopses should be started that details how major users (or abusers) of aquatic ecosystems other than fisherman impact the fish production capabilities, how these stresses may be regulated or mitigated and how they may be reversed in rehabilitation and restoration programs.

Mechanism suggested

A major working group should be convened under the sponsorship of organizations such as EIFAC, American Fisheries Society, UNEP, etc., to recommend a standard conceptual framework, content criteria and format. Expert individuals or a small group of experts might be coopted to draft specific synopses, which, following the pattern used for species synopses, would be reviewed, published and regularly revised and up-dated.

(C) Development of Guidelines and Criteria

• additional criteria or guidelines should be prepared that deal with various aspects of ecosystems as they influence valued species such as water quantity, riverbed conformation, habitat, etc.

Mechanism suggested

The EIFAC working party on water quality criteria should continue its work and widen its series of water quality criteria publications to include water quantity guidelines, fish habitat suitability criteria, etc.

(D) Preparation of Country Status Papers and Case Studies

• countries should prepare and/or up-date country status papers on recreational fisheries following the pattern suggested by Panel 1. In addition it was suggested that information should be developed and distributed regarding such things as the organization and operational functioning of efficient and time-proven sport fishery organizations and administrations such as, for example, France's Conseil Supérieur de la Pêche.

• a compendium should be prepared of case histories both of successful and unsuccessful attempts at ecosystem maintenance (conservation) and of rehabilitation (restoration) with respect to fishery interests.

Mechanism suggested

The preparation of country papers on the status of recreational fisheries is a national responsibility which should be centered in the national fishery authority. Case histories of local programs in which fishery managers have been successful (or not) in assuming a legal role in the comprehensive management of aquatic ecosystems should be prepared by professional managers for publication or presentation to international gatherings. Compendia of such case histories should be made.

(E) Dissemination of Information

The dissemination of information is a critical aspect of the international program. The Consultation suggested a number of steps to ensure better communications:

Mechanism suggested

1. A network for recreational fishery information should be established. This network would be based on a nominative mailing list, beginning with a Management Information Clearing House Service (MICS). EIFAC would maintain the mailing list up-to-date and distribute it to no more than 50 focal points. Each person on the list will have the double responsibility of first, distributing to the addresses all relevant national publications and second, circulating in his country all reports and publications received from the other addresses. The “MICS” system should be started as soon as possible.

2. Better communication should be developed among the various members and cooperators, on a lateral basis, and on a vertical basis between the responsive scientific, administrative and legislative echelons and the public in each country.

3. The flow of information and the decision-making process within fishery management and policy-making should be studied.

4. FAO/EIFAC should take the lead in encouraging and publishing internationally comparable data covering the entire use and contribution of fisheries, i.e., landings by commercial and recreational fisheries in all categories of waters, aquacultural production, subsistence fisheries, etc.

5. Fishery scientists should package fishery information in such a manner that the general public, engineers and trained administrators can understand and see clearly the trade-offs involved with each proposed alternative. For this, an effective two-way flow of information between fishermen and scientists as well as between fishery interests and the general public is necessary.

Recommendation 2—International Consultations

The Consultation recognized that the international dialogue among scientists, managers and fishermen started in Vichy must continue. It was therefore recommended that:

1. Subject area meetings, workshops and symposia be convened as required to cover technical matters more fully, perhaps on a regional basis, and including specifically:

   1. The allocation problems concerning multiple use and conservation of large rivers particularly in developing countries;

   2. The specific allocation problems of coastal marine waters in both North America and Europe;

   3. Interdisciplinary team work in research and management including contacts with anglers' associations and other relevant groups;

   4. Meetings of heads of organized anglers' associations to develop liaison and cooperation in areas of common international interest and concern, e.g., in matters like the conservation of Atlantic salmon and bluefin tuna and acid rain.

2. FAO/EIFAC, in cooperation with all other interested organizations and countries, should convene another technical consultation on the allocation of fishery resources in 1985 or 1986 to evaluate findings and progress being made on how fishery resources can be conserved, managed and enhanced to optimize overall benefits to all users and to society.

Recommendation 3—Research and Planning

The need for further research to provide decision-makers with better tools to manage the resources was strongly underlined throughout the Consultation. A number of topics were specifically mentioned:

1. Applied research to gather specific data on fish species habitat requirements for the purpose of developing habitat suitability criteria;

2. Research and funding for verification and validation studies to establish the credibility of mathematical models used for projecting changes in stream ecosystems to facilitate the use of water allocation formulae in water planning;

3. Research for the development of contingency plans for drought conditions in arid or semi-arid regions and for the incorporation of such plans into water planning and the operating rules of dams and diversion projects;

4. Research and interdisciplinary studies of stream systems are required throughout the planning and design of water development schemes. One special purpose is the development of policies for the establishment of stream flow standards to lead to more rational development and control of pollutants and consumptive uses of water;

5. Theories and models suitable for integration and allocation should be developed;

6. Special attention in research and management should be given to special population groups, e.g., urban citizens and young people.

Recommendation 4—Protection of the Aquatic Ecosystem

(A) Acid Rains

The delegates from Nordic European countries specifically recommended that appropriate steps be taken to eliminate, to as large a degree as possible, the ongoing acidification of lakes and streams caused by acid precipitation originating from sources such as the burning of fossil fuels.

(B) Water Pollution

To minimize costs of pollution prevention and abatement measures that are designed to maintain and improve fisheries, studies carried out to date to this end, and other relevant initiatives, should be reviewed to identify the main reasons for success or failure. Areas of interest would include:

1. approaches to the development and implementation of realistic environmental standards, such as water quality criteria and criteria path analysis, and

2. public and institutional organization responsibilities, motivation influence and power.

(C) Radio-Active Waste

Following the increase in the disposal of radioactive waste in the aquatic environment fish populations are increasingly exposed to radio activity. The Consultation therefore recommended that the greatest care be taken in the disposal of radio-active waste (including tritium).

(D) Thermal Pollution

The effects of thermal changes on the aquatic ecosystem should be foreseen even before impact studies are terminated and preliminary measures taken to limit negative effects.

To avoid cumulative effects of various types of stream deterioration, even though each individual pollution may be considered moderate, it is desirable that thermal waste be subordinated to an effective reduction of the overall pollution, an increased protection and, if necessary, a restoration of the habitat.

A system of compensation can be foreseen in an overall plan of energy production. For instance, a reduction of micro power stations in an upper basin if a large thermal power station is allowed elsewhere.

Recommendation 5—Streamflow

(a) Hydrobiologists attending the Consultation agreed that the streamflow is as important for maintenance of fish populations as the physiochemical quality of the water. In many cases flow helps water quality.

(b) Fish can stand low flow levels for short periods in times of natural droughts. It is proven, however, that artificial reduction of river flow to similar levels but for long periods causes reduction of fish population in both quantity and quality. Abrupt flow reduction or increase is also damaging.

(c) In view of the biological degradation resulting from modifications of streamflow it is recommended that at the planning and implementation stages of projects creating a flow change consideration should be given to the principles of ecology which make it possible to arrive at a comprehensive view of advantages and disadvantages of these projects. New projects should be implemented keeping in mind the biological facts stated in paragraphs (a) and (b) above.

In arid regions precautions are absolutely necessary if the biological value of the streams is to be maintained.

(d) Intensification of research and data-gathering on the needs of various fish species at different stages of growth and types of rivers are necessary to evaluate if it is possible, and up to what point, to modify the flow of rivers without dangerously disturbing the fish population and fishery potential.

Recommendation 6—Streambed

(a) It is recommended that hydraulic works such as canalization of rivers (straightening, recalibration, modification) which often have negative effects on fish fauna for many decades be subject to strict control. Where necessary, it is suggested that hydro-ecologic arrangements (e.g., restoration, cleaning-up, maintenance) which are less expensive and better suited to the various users of the river be undertaken.

(b) It is now evident that gravel extraction in the lower riverbed of rivers results in important lasting damages which often are irreversible for (i) the stability of the riverbed and public works, (ii) the water table, (iii) water quality, and (iv) the fish fauna, particularly migrating species. Such extractions should be made only in extreme cases on a temporary basis and, in a quantity always less than the solid flow of the river. Gravel extractions in the higher riverbed can have, in addition to repercussions on the water table, negative ecologic effects particularly on trout streams. It is in the common interest to reduce gravel extraction or even avoid it completely in cases where negative effects are foreseen.

The construction of sills cannot be considered a remedy to the disadvantages resulting from the deepening of the riverbed. Sills became an additional obstacle to fish migration.

(c) It is evident that essential notions of ecology, hydrobiology and hydrology should be included where not already done so in the study curriculum of hydraulic, civil and rural engineers.

Recommendation 7—Conflicts with Other Recreational Uses

Recreational fishermen search for calm and natural conditions. Because of this sport fisheries are often in direct conflict with other recreational uses of water. To help solve these conflicts it is recommended that regulations be made aiming at:

1. Recreational uses of water other than fishing (such as motorized boating) be limited particularly in cases where effects on the environment, e.g., river banks and spawning grounds, are negative;

2. Giving priority to recreational uses of water which are not mutually exclusive except in a few restrictive zones.

It is evident that education will improve human behavior in the natural environment and bring better understanding between various users of water. In this respect it was recommended that the philosophy and values of wildlife use and wildlife education (including fisheries) be the subject of studies and the connection with fishery management clarified.

Recommendation 8—Salmon

The Consultation recommended:

1. To promote immediately the signature of an international convention that would establish an international commission to (i) set up regulations on salmon fishing in the Atlantic, except for a coastal zone, aiming at suppressing abusive or unbalanced exploitation, (ii) to encourage research and conservation of Atlantic salmon;

2. That, while waiting for the establishment of the international commission mentioned above and keeping in mind the precarious situation of certain salmon stocks, countries concerned need to take urgent and efficient measures to restore stocks: such as free circulation of salmons (removal of obstacles blocking migrations, minimum flow), limitation of catches (also at sea) with sufficient escapement of brood stock, control of all types of pollution including gravel extraction.

Recommendation 9—Allocation Policy

In concluding its work the Consultation felt that the interested users of the aquatic ecosystem would be remiss in their efforts if they did not endeavour to have a fishery resources allocation statement incorporated into their national fishery policy. Such a statement could be phrased as follows:

“Recognizing the diversity of fishermen and their interests, it is policy to allocate a sustainable segment of the aquatic resources to each user group and, in recognition of both the dynamic and changing nature of the resource and the environment that produces it, continually review the propriety of the allocations and of the value systems on which they are based. Further, in implementing this policy, to engage vigorously in the generation, exchange and evaluation of information required for equitable allocation and perpetuation of fishery resources and their multiple values.”

Jean-Louis Gaudet, Secretary

European Inland Fisheries Advisory Commission (EIFAC) of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations