The Convention on Fisheries Cooperation among African States Bordering the Atlantic Ocean was signed at Dakar, Senegal, on 5 July 1991. The institutional framework of the Convention comprises the Conference of Ministers, the Bureau and the Secretariat. The Convention entered into force on 12 July 1995.
Map 3 - FAO Statistical Areas 34 and 47 - Coincides with AAFC Area
Area of Competence
The area covered by the Convention is not defined in precise terms. Under Article I the convention applies to the African States bordering the Atlantic Ocean and then it defines “regions” as the area comprising those States. This area coincides with parts of the FAO Statistical Areas 34 and 47, as shown in Map 3.
Species Covered
The Convention applies to all fishery resources.
Membership
The Convention is open for ratification, approval or acceptance only by the following States: Angola, Benin, Cameroon, Cape-Verde, Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Gabon, Gambia, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Equatorial Guinea, Liberia, Morocco, Mauritania, Namibia, Nigeria, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Togo and Zaire.
Main Objectives and Activities
The main objectives of the Convention are to enable the Parties inter alia to (i) promote an active and organized cooperation in the area of fisheries management and development in the region, and (ii) take up the challenge of food self-sufficiency through the rational utilization of fishery resources, within the context of an integrated approach that would embrace all the components of the fishing sector. Under Article 3, Parties should combine their efforts to ensure the conservation and rational management of their fishery resources and take concerted action for the assessment of fish stocks occurring within the waters under the sovereignty or jurisdiction of more than one Party. In addition, contracting Parties should endeavour to adopt harmonized policies concerning the conservation, management and exploitation of fishery resources, in particular with regard to the determination of catch quotas and, as appropriate, the adoption of joint regulation of fishing seasons.
Established by Resolution 1/48 of the FAO Council at its Forty-eighth Session held in Rome in June 1967 under Article VI (2) of the FAO Constitution. Its Statutes were promulgated by the Director-General on 19 September 1967 and were amended by the FAO Council in November 1992.
Area of Competence
The area of competence of the Committee is defined as all the waters of the Atlantic bounded by a line drawn as follows: from a point on the high water mark on the African coast at Cape Spartel (lat. 35°47’N, long. 5°55’W) following the high water mark along the African coast to a point at Ponta da Moita Seca (lat. 6°07’S, long. 12°16’E) along a rhumb line in a northwesterly direction to a point on 6° south latitude and 12° west longitude, thence due north to the Equator, thence due west to 30° west longitude, thence due north to 5° north latitude, thence due west to 40° west longitude, thence due north to 36° north latitude, thence due east to 6° west longitude, thence along a rhumb line in a southeasterly direction to the original point at Cape Spartel. This area mostly coincides with FAO Statistical Area 34 (Map 4).
Species Covered
The Committee covers all living marine resources within its area of competence.
Membership
The members of the Committee are selected by the Director-General of FAO from Member Nations and Associate Members of FAO in Africa whose territory borders the Atlantic Ocean from Cape Spartel to the mouth of the Congo River as well as such other Member Nations and Associate Members fishing in the area, carrying out research, or having fisheries interest thereof whose contribution to the work of the Committee the Director-General deems to be essential or desirable. The present members of CECAF are: Benin, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, European Community, Equatorial Guinea, France, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Greece, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Italy, Japan, Korea (Rep. of), Liberia, Mauritania, Morocco, Netherlands, Nigeria, Norway, Poland, Romania, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Spain, Togo, USA and Zaire.
Main Objectives and Activities
The objectives of the Committee are to promote within its area of competence the sustainable utilization of the living marine resources by the proper management and development of the fisheries and fishing operations. The Committee does not have regulatory powers but can adopt recommendations on management issues. At its Sixteenth Session in October 2002, the Committee felt that the status quo of the Committee should be maintained and, in particular, that it could continue to operate as an advisory body set up under Article VI, paragraph 2 of the FAO Constitution.
Map 4 - FAO Statistical Area 34 - Coincides with CECAF Area
It agreed that the work of the Committee should be more focused and revised the Terms of Reference of CECAF. The Committee recommended that, without prejudice to the proposal that the current status quo of CECAF be maintained, the Director General should keep under review the issue of a possible framework for the high seas. To this effect, it requested the Director General to convene an Legal and Technical Consultation to address the matter before the Seventeenth Session of CECAF.
Implementation of Post-UNCED Fishery Instruments
Members are encouraged at meetings to accept the 1993 FAO Compliance Agreement, and are sensitised to the importance of the 1995 UN Fish Stocks Agreement. Members are also encouraged to incorporate relevant parts of the 1995 FAO Code of Conduct in their legislation and policies. The Secretariat is working on national stakeholder sensitization programmes.
After an initial sub-regional workshop on sensitizing national authorities to the IPOA on the Management of Fishing Capacity, there are plans to organise more workshops for decision-makers and planners in the region.
CECAF is also sensitizing Members on the dangers of IUU fishing and consulting regional institutions on ways to strengthen MCS to curb illegal fishing.
There are no activities or plans regarding the IPOA on Reducing the Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries or the IPOA on the Conservation and Management of Sharks.
Addressing Specific Issues
Implementation of precautionary approach to fisheries management is recommended to Members by the CECAF Scientific Sub-Committee in its pelagic and demersal resources management recommendations.
Ecosystem-based fisheries management was introduced at the Second Session of the CECAF Scientific Sub-Committee and the 16th Session of CECAF.
CECAF has worked towards strengthening the organization’s capacity to deal more effectively with important conservation and management issues through developing revised Terms of Reference of the Committee at a Technical Consultation, which were endorsed by the 16th Session in October 2002.
Issues relating to fleet capacity were introduced in discussions of the Committee as a reminder to members.
To accommodate new entrants, the Netherlands was welcomed as a new member and Angola and Namibia have been encouraged to join CECAF after attending sessions as observer.
There have been no activities relating to the assessment of IUU fishing, or catch certification and documentation.
Established by the Agreement “Tratado del Río de la Plata y sus Frente Maritimo”, signed by Argentina and Uruguay in 1973.
Area of Competence
The area of competence of the Joint Technical Commission is referred to in the Agreement as the Common Fishing Zone of the Contracting Parties in the South Atlantic (Map 5).
Map 5 - COFREMAR Common Fishing Zone
Species Covered
All marine living resources of the Common Fishing Zone are covered by the Commission.
Membership
The membership of the Commission consists of Argentina and Uruguay.
Main Objectives and Activities
The main objectives of the Commission are to adopt and coordinate plans and measures relevant to conservation, preservation and the rational exploitation of living resources and to protect the maritime environment in the Common Fishing Zone. The Commission has regulatory powers setting quotas for each Party in the Common Fishery Zone.
Implementation of Post-UNCED Fishery Instruments
The COFREMAR follows the basic principles in the 1995 FAO Code of Conduct and applies the Code in its decisions as a precautionary measure.
The COFREMAR is at present initiating the study on chondrycthies (rays and sharks) in the Common Fishing Zone. In the future, due attention will be given to the IPOA on the Conservation and Management of Sharks. The COFREMAR adopts measures for the management of fisheries (main commercial species) in the Common Fishing Zone. Account will be taken of the IPOA on the Management of Fishing Capacity.
Although the IPOA on the Prevention, Deterrence and Elimination of IUU Fishing is under the responsibility of the respective Parties to the Treaty, the Commission is engaged in the research for the implementation of a satellite tracking system, which would be useful for attain the aims in the IPOA.
The 1993 FAO Compliance Agreement has been ratified by Argentina and Uruguay, and the 1995 UN Fish Stocks Agreement has been ratified by Uruguay, but neither instrument is applicable to the Common Fishing Zone. Similarly, in practice the IPOA on Reducing the Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries is not applicable to the Common Fishing Zone because the COFREMAR is currently targeting work on demersal species.
Addressing Specific Issues
When adopting management measures the COFREMAR takes into account the precautionary principles. Regarding ecosystem-based fisheries management, the Treaty provides that the COFREMAR shall establish norms and measures related to the rational exploitation of fisheries and the equilibrium of the bioecological systems.
As noted above, the Commission is engaged in the research for the implementation of a satellite tracking system, which would be useful to assess IUU fishing.
To strengthen the organization’s capacity to deal more effectively with important conservation and management issues, the COFREMAR has technical cooperation arrangements with Fishery Research Institutes of the two Parties.
The COFREMAR undertakes research on fishing capacity or effort, and has established a task group on catch reporting and processing. Another priority issue is being addressed in a GEF project, to which the COFREMAR is party, directed to the protection of the Common Fishing Zone marine environment.
The Treaty is a bilateral instrument, so accommodation of new entrants is not an issue.
Established by the Convention Concerning the Regional Development of Fisheries in the Gulf of Guinea, signed at Libreville, Gabon, on 21 June 1984. The Convention has not yet entered into force.
Area of Competence
The area of competence of the Committee is defined as the Central and Southern Gulf of Guinea.
Species Covered
The species covered by the Committee are all living resources within its area of competence.
Membership
The Convention is open for signature and accession to States bordering the Gulf of Guinea. The present members of the Committee are as follows: Congo, Gabon, Sao Tome and Principe, and Zaire.
Main Objectives and Activities
The main objectives of the Convention inter alia are (i) to determine a concerted attitude towards the activities of foreign fishing vessels and give priority to the needs of fishing vessels originating from member countries; (ii) to harmonize the national regulations with a view to having a unified regulation fixing the conditions of fishing and the control of fishing operations in the area covered by the Convention, and (iii) to collect the maximum scientific, technical and economic data on fishing operations.
Established by an Agreement drawn up in Rome on 24 September 1949 under Article XIV of the FAO Constitution and approved by the FAO Conference at its Fifth Session in 1949. The Agreement entered into force on 20 February 1952. It was amended in 1963, 1976 and 1997.
Area of Competence
The area of competence of the Commission is the Mediterranean and the Black Sea and connecting waters. (Map 7). This area coincides with FAO Statistical Area 37.
Species Covered
The Agreement applies to all living marine resources in the area covered by the GFCM. At its Tenth Session in 1976 the Commission noted that since the establishment of the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) in 1966, this body had also had a mandate for the monitoring and management of tuna resources of the Mediterranean as an adjacent sea to the Atlantic. The Commission acknowledged the work done by ICCAT in connection with Mediterranean tuna resources and expressed willingness for increased collaboration with ICCAT. Since 1990 the two bodies have held regular Expert Consultations on Stocks of Large Pelagic Fishes in the Mediterranean.
Membership
Membership of GFCM is open to Member Nations and Associate Members of FAO. Other States that are Members of the United Nations, any of its Specialized Agencies or the International Atomic Energy Agency may be admitted as members by a two-thirds majority of the Commission’s membership. The present members of GFCM are: Albania, Algeria, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, the European Union, Egypt, France, Greece, Israel, Italy, Japan, Lebanon, Libya, Malta, Monaco, Morocco, Romania, Slovenia, Spain, Syria, Tunisia and Turkey.
Main Objectives and Activities
The main objectives of the Commission are to promote the development, conservation, rational management and best utilization of living marine resources in its area of competence. The Commission is empowered to formulate and recommend appropriate management measures including the regulation of fishing methods and fishing gears, the prescription of the minimum size for individuals of specified species, the establishment of open and closed seasons, and the regulation of the amount of total catch and fishing effort and their allocation among members. The management measures adopted by the Commission are subject to objection procedure. Currently, the countries bordering the Black Sea are negotiating a convention for the Black Sea fisheries.
Map 6 - FAO Statistical Area 37 - Correspond to the GFCM Area
Implementation of Post-UNCED Fishery Instruments
Pursuant to the 1993 FAO Compliance Agreement, two related Resolutions[100] were adopted in 1995 for the provision of data of fleets over 15m length overall. Three (3) member countries have ratified the 1995 UN Fish Stocks Agreement.
Reference to the 1995 FAO Code of Conduct was introduced in 1997 in the Preamble of the Agreement establishing the Commission. In addition, several member countries have translated the Code in their own language; and have organized information tools and related workshops. A Consultation on the application of Article 9 of the Code in the Mediterranean region has been organized leading to the adoption of a Plan of Action on Responsible Aquaculture.
Regarding the IPOA on the Conservation and Management of sharks, National and a Regional Action Plans are being formulated in collaboration with the UNEP Mediterranean Action Plan (RAC/SPA). The issue is monitored by the SAC Sub-committee on Marine Ecosystem and Environment. Three shark species have added to the list of priority species with regard to fisheries management.
Fleet segmentation and socio-economic indicators have been defined pursuant to the IPOA on the Management of Fishing Capacity. A first Seminar on the management of Fishing Capacity was organized in October, 2002. Methodologies to assess capacity are under review.
The issue of IUU fishing was tackled in 1998, but no reported practical follow-up is reported as of 2002.
Addressing Specific Issues
The implementation of the precautionary approach to fisheries management is included as Article III.2 of the 1997 amended Agreement, and the Scientific Advisory Committee (SAC) is working on defining reference points.
The issue of ecosystem-based fisheries management is dealt with in the SAC Sub-committee on Marine Environment and Ecosystem. Pilot implementation is being organized in the Sicily Channel through one of the supporting GFCM Regional projects (MEDSUDMED). The issue is on the agenda of the 27th Session of the Commission in November 2002.
Although IUU fishing was considered in 1998, practical action is still pending.
The Commission’s endorsement of sustainable fisheries principles entailed adapting, in 1997, the Agreement establishing GFCM. Amendments to the Agreement, which would strengthen the organization’s capacity to deal more effectively with important conservation and management measures, included:
change of name, from Council to Commission;
allowing membership of regional economic integration organization;
institutional restructuring: establishment of a Scientific Advisory Committee backed by four sub-committees (stock assessments; economics and social sciences; information and statistics; ecosystem and environment); and establishment of a Committee on Aquaculture backed with subsidiaries;
establishment of an autonomous budget;
yearly meetings of the Commission (instead of biannual);
endorsement of precautionary approach; and
an enhanced decision making process to formulate binding management measures.
To address capacity, the Commission’s task to implement fishing effort control for multi-species, multi-scale; multi-gear shared fisheries entails, on an ongoing basis:
defining indicators of sustainability (economic and social indicators; biological reference points; environmental benchmarks).
consolidating a statistical base;
defining management units; and
agreeing upon fleet segmentation to monitor fishing capacity.
To accommodate new entrants, the Agreement was amended in 1997 to allow membership of economic organizations and to open membership to “States or Associate Members whose vessels engage in fishing in the Region for stocks covered by the Agreement” (new article I.2 (ii)). As a consequence, Japan (1997) and the EU (1998) became members.
In relation to catch certification, initiatives include the consolidation of the database, and discussion of the issue of labelling aquaculture products.
A priority issue for GFCM is to ensure that there is necessary funding to fulfil its mandate.
Established by the Convention on Fishing and Conservation of the Living Resources in the Baltic Sea and Belt, signed at Gdansk on 13 September 1973 and entered into force on 28 July 1974.
Area of Competence
The area covered by the Convention, “the Convention Area”, is all the waters of the Baltic Sea and the Belts, excluding internal waters bounded in the west by a line from Hasenore Head to Gniben Point, and from Korshagae to Spodsbierg and from Gilbierg Head to the Kullen (Map 6).
Species Covered
The Convention applies to all fish species and other living marine resources in the Convention Area.
Membership
The Convention is open for accession to any State interested in preservation and rational exploitation of living resources in the Baltic Sea and the Belts, provided that such a State is invited by the Contracting States. The present membership consists of Estonia, the European Community, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and the Russian Federation.
Main Objectives and Activities
The main objectives of the Convention are to preserve and increase the living resources of the Baltic Sea and the Belts and to obtain the optimum yield, in particular, to expand and coordinate studies towards these ends and to put into effect organizational and technical projects on conservation and growth of the living resources on a just and equitable basis as well as take other steps towards rational and effective exploitation of the living resources. The Commission has the duty to keep under review the living resources and the fisheries in the Convention Area and to prepare and submit recommendations concerning inter alia the regulation of fishing gear, closed seasons, closed areas, and the total allowable catch and its allocation among Contracting Parties. The decisions of the Commission are subject to an objection procedure. The total allowable catches for herring, sprat, cod and salmon as well as their allocations among member States are set annually by the Commission.
Implementation of Post-UNCED Fishery Instruments
The following plans and strategies adopted by IBSFC implement the 1995 FAO Code of Conduct:
Salmon Action Plan 1997 - 2010 to restore the wild salmon stocks in the Baltic Sea region (February 1997);
Long Term Management Strategy for the cod stocks in the Baltic Sea (September 1999);
Long Term Management Strategy for the sprat stock in the Baltic Sea (September 2000); and
Cod Recovery Plan (September 2001).
The IBSFC Fishery Rules on Control and Enforcement, adopted in 1994, address the following issues in the IPOA-IUU Fishing:
monthly reporting to the Commission of catch/rate of utilisation of available catch allocation;
monthly reporting of landings from other Parties in the ports of the Contracting Parties;
yearly reporting of the number and name of vessels authorized to fish cod in the Baltic sea.
In addition, there are Joint Inspection Programmes with the participation of all coastal States, involving an exchange of inspectors. They have been carried out for the first half of 2001 and 2002, and are planned for the entire year of 2003.
Addressing Specific Issues
The precautionary approach is implemented by IBSFC through its implementation of the 1995 FAO Code of Conduct, including its long term management strategies noted above.
Regarding ecosystem based management, UNEP (2001)[101] considered IBSFC as a Pioneer in applying the eco-system approach in Fishery Management. IBSFC has cooperated since 1992 with HELCOM - the Environment Commission for the Baltic Sea Region. A joint meeting of IBSFC and HELCOM was held in February 2002 on Fishery and Environment, which resulted in conclusions relating to joint actions. This was the first meeting between an international fishery organization and an environment commission. Since 2002 there has been cooperation with ASCOBANS (Agreement on Conservation of Small Cetaceans of the Baltic and North Sea to protect the Harbour Porpoises in the Baltic Sea).
IBSFC has taken measures to implement the IPOA-IUU fishing, as noted above, and the organization’s capacity has been strengthend to deal more effectively with conservation and management issues under the “Agenda 21 for the Baltic Sea Region”. Adopted at ministerial level in June 1998 by all coastal States of the Baltic Sea and the EU (effective until 2030), IBSFC was appointed Lead Party for the “Fisheries” sector (covering the Baltic Sea proper, the coastal waters, the inland waters and aquaculture). In this capacity IBSFC, in 1998, elaborated biological, economic and social indicators for the “Fisheries” sector.
Regarding catch certification and documentation, all Contracting Parties of IBSFC have established licences for all fishing vessels operating in the Baltic Sea.
Established by the International Convention for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas, signed in Rio de Janeiro, on 14 May 1966 and entered into force on 21 March 1969. The Convention was amended in 1984 and 1992[102].
Area of Competence
The area of competence of the Commission is defined as “all waters of the Atlantic Ocean, including the adjacent seas”. There is no precise delimitation of this area by lines of longitude and latitude. This rather broad definition was established in order to encompass all waters of the Atlantic Ocean in which tunas were likely to be found. This area corresponds in most part to FAO Statistical Areas 41, 47, 48 (part of it), 31, 34, 37, 21 and 27 (See Map 2).
Species Covered
The species covered by the Commission are the tuna and tuna-like fishes (the Scombrioformes with the exception of the families Trichiuridae and Gempylidae and the genus Scomber) and such other species of fishes exploited in tuna fishing in the Convention Area as are not under investigation by another international organization.
Membership
The membership of ICCAT is open to any State which is a member of the United Nations or of any Specialized Agency of the United Nations. The Paris Protocol of 1984 amending Article XIV on membership also allows intergovernmental economic integration organization constituted by States that have transferred to its competence over the matters governed by the convention to become a member. The present members of ICCAT are: Algeria, Angola, Barbados, Brazil, Canada, Cape Verde, China, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Equatorial Guinea, European Community, France (St. Pierre and Miquelon), Gabon, Ghana, Guinea Conakry, Honduras, Japan, Korea (Rep. of), Libya, Mexico, Morocco, Namibia, Panama, Russia, Sao Tomé and Principe, South Africa, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, United Kingdom (Overseas Territories), United States, Uruguay, and Venezuela.
Main Objectives and Activities
The main objective of the Convention is to maintain the populations of tuna and tuna-like species found in the Atlantic at levels which permit the maximum sustainable catch for food and other purposes. The Commission’s functions inter alia include: (i) to study the populations of tuna and tuna-like fishes, (ii) to collect and analyse statistical information relating to the current conditions and trends of the tuna fishery resources of the Convention Area, and (iii) recommend studies and investigations to the Contracting Parties.
The Commission has no regulatory powers, but makes regulatory recommendations to be implemented by Contracting Parties. ICCAT has recommended a number of measures on catch quotas, minimum weight of fish and limitation of incidental catches, as well as IUU fishing. The regulatory recommendations adopted by ICCAT are subject to an objection procedure.
Implementation of Post-UNCED Fishery Instruments
ICCAT indicates its implementation of the post-UNCED fishery instruments by including post-UNCED fishery agreements on its website, to which reference is made in accompanying text.
The number of resolutions and recommendations adopted annually by ICCAT has increased dramatically over the past decade. Many of these support the post-UNCED Fishery Instruments. One example is the Resolution adopted at its Ninth Special Meeting (Madrid, November-December, 1994), Regarding the Agreement to Promote Compliance with International Conservation and Management Measures by Fishing Vessels on the High Seas, which states that the Contracting Parties should take the necessary measures as soon as possible to maintain a register of all high seas fishing vessels greater than 24 meters in length and provide ICCAT with this information annually. ICCAT encourages non-Contracting parties to do the same. In 1999, ICCAT published a list of around 340 longline tuna fishing vessels claimed to be involved in IUU fishing and flagged to countries operating open registers.
The ICCAT Resolution Concerning the Unreported and Unregulated Catches of Tunas by Large-Scale Longline Vessels in the Convention Area adopted at the 11th Special Meeting in Spain, 1998 requires the Commission to request the Contracting Parties, Cooperating Parties, entities or fishing entities which import or land frozen tuna and tuna-like products to submit specified information on an annual basis. The Compliance Committee and Permanent Working Group for the Improvement of ICCAT Statistics must then identify those whose vessels diminish the effectiveness of management measures. ICCAT may then request the revocation of their vessel registration or fishing licenses.
Addressing Specific Issues
ICCAT has a scheme for port inspection as well as a Compliance Committee. ICCAT also has a Permanent Working Group on ICCAT Statistics and Conservation Measures, and the Standing Committee on Research and Statistics (SCRS). The SCRS has a subcommittee on the Environment, which studies the effects on the environment.
Two special Working Groups have been established in the Commission: Working Group on Allocation Criteria and Working Group to Develop Integrated Monitoring Measures. ICCAT has established an ad hoc working group on the precautionary approach.
Established by the Convention on Future Multilateral Cooperation in the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries, concluded at Ottawa, Canada, on 24 October 1978 and entered into force on 1 January 1979.
Area of Competence
The area of competence of NAFO “the Convention Area” is defined as “the waters of the Northwest Atlantic Ocean north of 35°N latitude and west of a line extending due north from 35°N latitude and 42°W longitude to 59°N latitude, thence due west to 44°W longitude, and thence due north to the coast of Greenland, and the waters of the Gulf of St. Lawrence, Davis Strait and Baffin Bay south of 78°10’N latitude”. This area coincides exactly with FAO Statistical Area 21 (Map 7). The Convention provides for the establishment of “Regulatory Area” which is that part of the Convention Area lying beyond the areas under the fisheries jurisdiction of Coastal States.
Species Covered
NAFO covers all fishery resources with the following exceptions: salmon, tunas and marlins, cetacean stocks managed by the International Whaling Commission or any successor organization, and sedentary species of the continental shelf.
Map 7 - FAO Statistical Area 21 - Corresponds to the NAFO Regulatory Area
Membership
The Convention is open for accession by other States. The membership of the Fisheries Commission is reviewed annually by the Organization’s General Council and should consist of (a) Contracting Parties which participate in the Fisheries of the Regulatory Area, and (b) Contracting Parties which provide satisfactory evidence to the General Council of its expected participation in the fisheries of the Regulatory Area during the year of that annual meeting or during the following calendar year. The present Contracting Parties are: Bulgaria, Canada, Cuba, Denmark (in respect of the Faroe Islands & Greenland), Estonia, European Community, Iceland, Japan, Korea, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, Poland, Romania, Russia, and the USA.
Main Objectives and Activities
The main objective of the Convention as set out in its Preamble is to promote the conservation and optimum utilization of the fishery resources of the Northwest Atlantic area within a framework appropriate to the regime of extended coastal States jurisdiction over fisheries, and accordingly to encourage international cooperation and consultation with respect to these resources. The Fisheries Commission is responsible for the management and conservation of the fishery resources of the Regulatory Area. The Fisheries Commission, within the Regulatory Area, may adopt proposals for international measures of control and enforcement within the Regulatory Area for the purpose of ensuring the application of the Convention and execution of the main functions of NAFO. The Commission resolves on the allocations of the catches in the Regulatory Area to the Contracting Parties and maintains a scheme of joint international inspection for providing surveillance and inspection of international fisheries in the Regulatory Area. The proposals of the Fisheries Commission are subject to the objection procedure. The Convention provides that the Contracting Parties may invite the attention of any State not a Party to this Convention to any matter relating to the fishing activities in the Regulatory Area of the nationals or vessels of that State which appear to affect adversely the attainment of the objectives of this Convention.
Established by the Convention for the Conservation of Salmon in the North Atlantic Ocean, signed in Reykjavik, Iceland, on 2 March 1982 and entered into force on 1 October 1983.
Area of Competence
The Convention applies to the salmon stocks which migrate beyond areas of fisheries jurisdiction of coastal States of the Atlantic Ocean north of 36°N latitude throughout their migratory range. The area of competence of NASCO coincides with FAO Statistical Area 27 and part of Area 21 (See Map 2). This area is subdivided into three regions serviced by three different commissions: (1) The North American Commission covers all maritime waters within areas of fisheries jurisdiction of coastal States off the east coast of North America; (2) the West Greenland Commission covers all maritime waters within the area of fisheries jurisdiction off the coast of West Greenland west of a line drawn along 44°W longitude south to 59°N latitude, thence due east to 42°W longitude and thence due south; and (3) the North East Atlantic Commission covers all maritime waters east of the line mentioned above.
Species Covered
Salmon.
Membership
The Convention is open for accession by any State that exercises fisheries jurisdiction in the North Atlantic Ocean or is a State of origin for salmon stocks provided it is approved by the Council. The present members of NASCO are: Canada, Denmark (in respect of the Faroe Islands and Greenland), the European Union, Iceland, Norway, the Russian Federation, and the USA.[104]
Main Objectives and Activities
The objective of NASCO is to contribute to the conservation, restoration, enhancement and rational management of salmon stocks in the North Atlantic Ocean. Regulatory measures have been agreed by the regional Commissions of NASCO in most years since the Organization’s establishment. These measures, together with those introduced by NASCO’s Contracting Parties, have greatly reduced the harvest of Atlantic salmon. In contrast, there has been a dramatic increase in the production of farmed Atlantic salmon from less than 30,000 tonnes in 1984 to more than 600,000 tonnes in 2001. The Council of NASCO is increasingly concerned about genetic, disease and parasite and other impacts of cultured fish on the wild salmon stocks. In 1994, the Council adopted a Resolution containing measures to minimise the impacts of aquaculture on the wild stocks and a Liaison Group has been established with the salmon farming industry to provide a forum for cooperation on issues of mutual concern. The Liaison Group has developed Guidelines for Containment of Farm Salmon.
In response to concerns about the increased marine mortality of salmon NASCO has established an International Cooperative Salmon Research Board to oversee a research programme into the causes of marine mortality of salmon and the opportunities to counteract this mortality. The Board is also considering the issue of the possible bycatch of Atlantic salmon in pelagic fisheries in the north-east Atlantic.
NASCO has taken steps to improve the comparability of catch statistics and to minimise the level of unreported catches. Databases have been established of laws, regulations and programmes, of salmon rivers, and of the measures taken to minimise the impacts of aquaculture and of introductions and transfers.
Implementation of Post-UNCED Fishery Instruments
Regarding implementation of the 1993 FAO Compliance Agreement, fishing for salmon beyond areas of fisheries jurisdiction, and in most cases beyond 12 nautical miles, by NASCO’s Contracting Parties is prohibited under the Convention for the Conservation of Salmon in the North Atlantic Ocean. NASCO has taken action to eliminate fishing for salmon in international waters by non-Contracting Parties. The Compliance Agreement, when it enters into force, should be a helpful initiative complementary to NASCO’s actions.
NASCO has welcomed the adoption by consensus of the 1995 UN Fish Stocks Agreement and although the Agreement does not apply to Atlantic salmon, it contains provisions which can contribute to the international conservation and management of Atlantic salmon.
NASCO has undertaken many activities to implement the 1995 FAO Code of Conduct, including Article 7 (Fisheries Management), Article 8 (Fishing Operations) and Article 12 (Fisheries Research). Among its activities in relation to fisheries management, it has taken measures to ensure the level of fishing is commensurate with the state of fisheries resources, to allow depleted stocks to recover and containing stock specific target reference points. It has also addressed the selectivity of fishing gear, prohibited destructive fishing methods and practices, addressed fishing capacity, the biodiversity of aquatic habitats and ecosystems, the interests of small scale fishers and the protection of endangered species. NASCO has provided for stakeholder participation in determining management decisions.
In relation to fishing operations under the Code of Conduct, NASCO has taken diplomatic action to eliminate fishing for salmon in international waters by non-contracting parties, and action to minimise illegal fishing and other sources of unreported catch. For fisheries research, models of fishery abundance have been developed for both North American and European stocks. Detailed information on stock status is derived from monitored rivers. Data is obtained from commercial fisheries, research vessel surveys and in-port sampling surveys.
The IPOA-IUU Fishing is the only IPOA applicable to NASCO. In that regard, there are two main issues being addressed by the Council of relevance to the IPOA-IUU Fishing. These are unreported catches (including those from illegal fishing) by the Contracting Parties and unregulated fishing by non-Contracting Parties in international waters in the North-East Atlantic Commission. In addition, the Council is concerned about the level of harvests of salmon at St. Pierre and Miquelon. Although this fishery is subject to domestic regulations and a bilateral agreement with Canada, the Council is taking action consistent with the IPOA-IUU Fishing.
Addressing Specific Issues
NASCO and its Contracting Parties have agreed to adopt and apply the precautionary approach to the conservation, management and exploitation of salmon in order to protect the resource and preserve the environments in which it lives. To assist in application of the precautionary approach the Council has developed:
a decision structure for management of salmon fisheries; and
a Plan of Action for Habitat Protection and Restoration.
As the next step, NASCO will be considering:
application of the precautionary approach to introductions and transfers, aquaculture and transgenics; and
how social and economic factors can be taken into account without undermining the effectiveness of the precautionary approach.
NASCO has developed agreements in relation to minimising impacts of introductions and transfers on wild salmon stocks. This is intended to address some consequences of the dramatic increase in production of farmed salmon in recent years, to more than 300 times the harvest of wild salmon. The concerns relate to genetic, disease, parasite and other impacts of cultured fish on the wild stocks in view of the increasing interest in the introductions and transfer of species, and increasing pressure to remove barriers to trade.
Ecosystem-based fisheries management is enhanced by the Organization’s adoption of its internally agreed Plan of Action for Habitat Protection and Restoration, which applies to the salmon’s freshwater environment.
NASCO has undertaken a range of activities in relation to IUU fishing in its area of competence. It has taken action to eliminate fishing for salmon in international waters in the North-East Atlantic by non-Contracting Parties, including the following.
The Council adopted a Protocol for States not Party to the Convention for the Conservation of Salmon in the North Atlantic Ocean, calling for each Party to the Protocol to prohibit fishing for salmon beyond areas of fisheries jurisdiction.
The Council’s Resolution Concerning St Pierre and Miquelon, adopted in 2000, urged France to set harvest levels at the lowest possible level consistent with the advice from ICES. It also requests France to inform NASCO of the measures it has taken to address NASCO’s concerns about harvest levels at St Pierre and Miquelon.
The Resolution on Fishing for Salmon on the High Seas adopted in 1992 contains agreed mechanisms for the exchange of information in relation to fishing for salmon in international waters, encouraging Contracting Parties to transmit to the Secretary information concerning sightings of fishing activities on the high seas of the North Atlantic which may undermine NASCO’s conservation measures. The Resolution also requests the Secretary to draw the attention of non-Contracting Parties to the activities of their vessels, and Diplomatic Notes have been sent in this regard.
NASCO has also taken steps to coordinate surveillance activities and enhance the flow of information from these activities.
The high level of unreported catch by NASCO member is also a concern (estimated at 31 - 45 percent of the reported catch), and while progress is being made in reducing the level of unreported catches, the Council has emphasized the need to take further measures.
Established by the Convention on Future Multilateral Cooperation in Northeast Atlantic Fisheries, opened for signature in London on 18 November 1980 and entered into force on 17 March 1982.
Area of Competence
The area of competence of the Commission (Map 8) is defined as the waters within those parts of the Atlantic and Arctic Oceans and their dependent seas which lie north of 36°N latitude and between 42°W longitude and 51°E longitude; within that part of the Atlantic Ocean north of 59°N latitude and between 44°W and 42°W longitude. The Baltic Sea and the belts and the Mediterranean Sea and its dependent seas are excluded from the Commission’s area of competence. This area of competence coincides with most of FAO Statistical Area 27.
Species Covered
The Commission covers fishery resources of the Northeast Atlantic with the exception of marine mammals, sedentary species and, insofar as they are dealt with by other international agreements, highly migratory species and anadromous stocks.
Membership
Membership of the Commission is open to the founding members (Article 20). Accession to the Convention by other States is subject to the approval of three quarters of the Contracting Parties. The present Members of the Commission are: Denmark (in respect of Faroe Island and Greenland, the European Community, Iceland, Norway, Poland and Russian Federation.
Main Objectives and Activities
The main objectives of the Commission are to provide a forum for Consultation and exchange of information on the state of fisheries resources in the Northeast Atlantic and on related management policies to ensure the conservation and optimum utilization of such resources, and to recommend conservation measures in waters outside national jurisdiction. The Commission is empowered to recommend measures applicable to the high seas concerning (i) the conduct of fisheries (ii) the control of fisheries and (iii) the collection of statistical information. In recent years, NEAFC has agreed on measures such as setting total allowable catches for certain species and establishing minimum fish sizes and mesh sizes. The recommendations formulated by NEAFC are subject to the objection procedure.
Map 8 - NEAFC Area of Competence
Implementation of Post-UNCED Fishery Instruments
The rapid development of NEAFC from 1996 and onwards came in response to developments in UNCED 1992, the entering into force of the 1982 Convention and the 1995 UN Fish Stocks Agreement, and general developments in international law of the oceans. An independent secretariat was established pursuant to a 1998 decision, and other significant decisions include Schemes for Control and Enforcement and to Promote Compliance by Non-Contracting Parties (1998), introduction of a satellite vessel monitoring system (1999) and recommendations on dispute settlement and transparency (2001). In addition, decisions have been taken since 1996 on TACs and allocations for oceanic redfish, Atlanto Scandian spring spawning herring and mackerel, a closed area has been agreed for trawl fishing to protect haddock and management of deepsea fisheries has been reviewed.
All four IPOAs are being addressed at the 21st Annual Meeting of the Commission in 2002, and the IPOA-IUU Fishing, addressed extensively at the 20th Annual Meeting, is a recurrent item on the Annual Meeting agenda.
Addressing Specific Issues
The precautionary approach is built into the scientific advice received from the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea.
NEAFC has added ecosystem concerns to its agenda and will be monitoring developments to include these in the management of the stocks in the NEAFC Regulatory Area.
NEAFC has made IUU fishing a permanent item on the agenda of the Commission to ensure that NEAFC practices conform with trends in international law.
Since 1997, NEAFC has brought 3 main fisheries under sustainable management in its Regulatory Area (pelagic redfish, Norwegian spring-spawning herring and mackerel). For blue whiting management plans have been agreed, but allocation is still outstanding. The next step will be to agree on management measures for deep-sea species in the Regulatory Area.
The NEAFC scheme established a control and enforcement system based on the NEAFC VMS automated database. Since its introduction in 2000 coverage by automatic position messages has reached almost 100 percent. Information in the database is automatically available to inspection services operating in the NEAFC Regulatory Area.
A proposal for amending the Convention to allow the fast settlement of disputes if the parties involved agree will be put before the Annual Meeting in November this year. Rules for other less demanding procedures have been agreed. If the amendment to the Convention is agreed, it is the intended to apply these provisionally, pending their entry into force.
Accommodation of new entrants is on the Commission’s agenda for the 21st Annual meeting in 2002. NEAFC is investigating procedures for port control, and it is anticipated that the issue of catch certification will arise in that context
The Convention on the Conservation and Management of Fishery Resources in the South East Atlantic Ocean was signed on 20 April 2001. It will enter into force 60 days after the date of deposit with the Depositary of the third instrument of ratification, accession, acceptance or approval at least one of which must be deposited by a coastal State.
Area of Competence
All waters beyond areas of national jurisdiction in the area bounded by a line joining the following points along parallels of latitude and meridians of longitude:
beginning at the outer limit of waters under national jurisdiction at a point 6° South, thence due west along the 6° South parallel to the meridian 10° West, thence due north along the 10° West meridian to the equator, thence due west along the equator to the meridian 20° West, thence due south along the 20° West meridian to a parallel 50° South, thence due east along the 50° South parallel to the meridian 30° East, thence due north along the 30° East meridian to the coast of the African continent.
This corresponds to FAO Area 47 (see Map 2).
Species Covered
All fishery resources within the area of competence.
Membership
The nine signatory members are: Republic of Angola, Republic of Namibia, Republic of South Africa, United Kingdom on behalf of St. Helena, European Community, Republic of Korea, The Kingdom of Norway, Republic of Iceland and the United States of America.
Main Objectives and Activities
The objective of the Convention is to ensure the long-term conservation and sustainable use of the fishery resources in the Convention Area through the effective implementation of the Convention.
Implementation of Post-UNCED Fishery Instruments
The SEAFO Convention takes cognition of the 1993 FAO Compliance Agreement, the 1995 Fish Stocks Agreement and the 1995 FAO Code of Conduct. Measures in the Agreements, the Code or the IPOAs cannot be put in place until the Convention comes into force and the Commission assumes its mandate. Certain provisions of the Convention require Contracting Parties to ensure compatibility and consistency with international conservation and management measures adopted for highly migratory fish stocks and straddling fish stocks.
Addressing Specific Issues
Because the SEAFO Convention has not entered into force at the time of writing, there are no activities to report in relation to specific issues.
The Convention for the Establishment of a Sub-Regional Commission on Fisheries was signed by Cape-Verde, the Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Mauritania, and Senegal in Dakar, Senegal, on 29 March 1985. Guinea became a member of the Commission in 1987. The Convention has not yet entered into force.
Area of Competence
The Convention does not define the precise area covered by the Commission but references are made to “Sub-Region” and the EEZs of the Contracting Parties.
Species Covered
The Convention covers all fishery resources within its area of competence.
Membership
The Membership of the Commission is as follows: Cape-Verde, the Gambia, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Mauritania and Senegal. The Convention is open for accession to other States in the sub-region.
Main Objectives and Activities
The main objective of the Commission is to harmonize the long-term policies of Member States in the preservation, conservation and exploitation of the fisheries resources for the benefit of their respective populations. The Commission consists of the Conference of Ministers, the Coordinating Committee, and the Permanent Secretariat. The Conakry Convention concerning determination of conditions for foreign access to exploitation of the living resources in off-shore areas of SRCF Member States was signed by the Commission’s Member States in 1989.
Established by Resolution 4/61 of the FAO Council at its Sixty-first Session held in Rome in November 1973 under Article VI (1) of the FAO Constitution. The Statutes of the Commission were amended by the FAO Council at its Seventy-fourth Session in December 1978.
Area of Competence
The Commission’s area of competence is defined as all marine waters of the Western Central Atlantic bounded by a line drawn as follows: from a point on the coast of South America at 10°S latitude in a northerly direction along this coast past the Atlantic entry to the Panama canal; thence continue along the coasts of central and north America to a point on this coast at 35°N latitude; thence due east along this parallel to 42°W longitude; thence due north along this meridian to 36°N latitude; thence due east along this parallel to 40°W longitude; thence due south along this meridian to 5°N latitude; thence due east along this parallel to 30°W longitude; thence due south along this meridian to the Equator; thence due east along the Equator to 20°W longitude; thence due south along this meridian to 10°S latitude; thence due west along this parallel to the original point at 10°S latitude on the coast of South America. This area coincides with FAO Statistical Area 31 and part of Area 41 (See Map 2).
Species Covered
The Commission has competence to deal with all living marine resources.
Membership
The membership of the WECAFC is open to all Member Nations and Associate Members of FAO which notify the Director-General of their desire to be considered as members. The present members of the Commission are: Antigua and Burbuda, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Brazil, Canada, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominica, European Community, France, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, Japan, Korea (Rep. of), Mexico, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Panama, Saint Christopher and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Spain, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago, United Kingdom, United States of America, Venezuela.
Main Objectives and Activities
The goal of the Commission is to promote international cooperation for the conservation, development and sustainable utilisation of the living marine resources of the WECAFC Area.
The main objectives of the Commission are to facilitate the coordination of research, to encourage education and training, to assist Member Governments in establishing rational policies and to promote the rational management of resources that are of interest for two or more countries. The Commission is not actively involved in fisheries management in the region. The responsibility for fisheries management is left to the member countries. WECAFC provides management advice or scientific information upon which management measures should be based. The Commission does not have any regulatory powers and can only perform advisory functions on management.
Implementation of Post-UNCED Fishery Instruments
WECAFC does not have any specific activities/programmes that address these issues individually. WECAFC’s work programme/activities are implemented through ad hoc working groups based on geography/ecosystem (e.g. WECAFC Working Group on Shrimp and Groundfish Fisheries in the Brazil-Guianas Shelf) or on species (e.g. WECAFC ad hoc working group on Caribbean Spiny Lobster) or on specific subjects (e.g. Anchored Fish Attracting Devices for small-scale fisheries) of interest to the member countries. These working groups have specific terms of reference and are time bound. All the issues in the post-UNCED fishery instruments are addressed at different levels by the working groups as they pertain to the specific geographic region (e.g. Brazil-Guiana Shelf) or fishery (e.g. Spiny Lobster). The goal is to achieve sustainable utilisation through effective fishery management and the participation of the resource users.
Most post UNCED fishery instruments address specific issues and not the fishery. However, WECAFC does provide a vehicle for the international cooperation among States for the conservation, management and utilisation of living aquatic resources, and have generated renewed interest in collaboration at the regional level.
Addressing Specific Issues
Specific issues are addressed in varying degrees by each ad hoc working group as it relates to the fishery that is being addressed. However, with respect to the future role of the Commission it was agreed at its Ninth Session in September 1999 that responsible fisheries management requires sub-regional and regional cooperation through working groups for the application of the precautionary approach to fisheries of the WECAFC region.
|
[98] This information is
unchanged from FIPL Circular 908. [99] This information is unchanged from FIPL Circular 908. [100] Nos. 95/2 and 95/4 [101] Ecosystem based Management of Fisheries, UNEP Regional Seas Reports and Studies, No 175 (UNEP 2001). [102] The 1984 Protocol concerned Article XIV of the Convention allowing the membership of the Commission by intergovernmental economic integration organization constituted by States that have transferred to its competence over the matters governed by the Convention. The 1992 Protocol concerned Article X of the Convention on financial contributions of Members. [103] This information is unchanged from FIPL Circular 908. [104] NASCO has taken steps to increase the transparency of its work and has 28 accredited non-government organizations. Inter-government organizations and the media may also attend meetings. [105] This information is unchanged from FIPL Circular 908. |
){kind=link}
){kind=link}