Previous Page Table of Contents Next Page


28. Two model case studies were presented in the Workshop to demonstrate how countries should elaborate a NPOA-IUU[1]. One case study reflected the situation of a small island developing State, the Alpha Islands, while the other case study related to a continental coastal State, the Republic of Galactia. The names of the countries in the case studies were fictitious though the respective fisheries profiles were based on real data and information.

29. Mr Paul Nichols, Special Adviser to the Minister, Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources, Windhoek, Namibia, presented the fisheries profile and the NPOA-IUU for the Alpha Islands. The fisheries profile addressed the fishing industry, fishery management, the Fisheries Act, research and training, development assistance and international and regional law and relations. The NPOA-IUU for the Alpha Islands closely followed the suggested outline for a NPOA-IUU in the Technical Guideline supporting the implementation of the IPOA-IUU.

30. Mr Aubrey Harris presented the fisheries profile and the NPOA-IUU for the Republic of Galactia. The subject matter covered in this presentation was similar in nature and scope to the information presented for the Alpha Islands.

31. With respect to the incidence of IUU fishing in subsistence/small-scale fisheries, the Workshop noted that over the last decade, community management has been introduced in several inland fisheries. The results achieved had been variable and some participants pointed out that the more extensive introduction and implementation of community-based management posed a challenge for some governments. It was also noted that in one instance the rate of implementation of community-based management had been hampered by the concurrent commercialization of fisheries. Some participants indicated that effective inland fisheries management required a mix of management measures: a co-management approach whereby both government and stakeholders (rather than fishing communities alone) participated in the management process.

32. In discussions relating to vessel registration and the maintenance of records of fishing vessels, it was apparent that only a small number of countries in the region had registration procedures and records in place for semi-industrial and industrial vessels. Some participants advised the Workshop that these countries were reviewing registration procedures and updating records of fishing vessels. It was stressed that such procedures and records were necessary to combat IUU fishing and that all countries with semi-industrial and industrial vessels operating in their fisheries should seek to institute a registration system and maintain up to date records of all registered fishing vessels.

33. The Workshop acknowledged that transshipment of catches at sea in marine fisheries created loopholes for fisheries management and could encourage and support IUU fishing. It was noted that in other regions, transshipment is banned and that this action has had a positive impact on fisheries management. It was stressed that transshipment at sea served to undermine efforts to manage fisheries in a sustainable manner.

34. Participants pointed out that transshipment on the fishing grounds also took place in inland fisheries and it had caused similar problems to those evident in marine fisheries. In particular, it was noted that transshipment in inland fisheries distorted data upon which stock assessment and management decisions were based and, in some instances, led to illegal transfers of fish, often with a loss of revenue to governments. The Workshop agreed that the transshipment of fish on the fishing grounds in inland fisheries was a source of major concern for countries and that it should be addressed through bilateral arrangements and multilateral mechanisms.

35. The Workshop addressed economic incentives at some length. It was pointed out that there were "good" and "bad" incentives and that the latter category could promote fleet overcapacity leading, in turn, to IUU fishing. In the southern and east African region, it was agreed that a distinction should be made between incentives provided to industrial fleets and incentives provided to artisanal fishers (e.g., fuel subsidies). The Workshop expressed the view that a justification could be made for the payment of certain incentives that supported artisanal fishing and the capture of fish for food. It was agreed that the consideration of the issue of economic incentives in small-scale fisheries should be deferred by countries until after FAO had completed its work on economic incentives in fisheries.

36. The Workshop noted that the IPOA-IUU encouraged a review of sanctions to ensure that they were of sufficient severity to deter IUU fishing. It was agreed that countries should ensure that sanctions for IUU fishing offences should be commensurate with the gravity of the offence. Moreover, participants noted that a clear distinction should be made between offences that were of serious nature (e.g., illegally fishing within an EEZ) and those of a less serious, administrative nature (e.g., failure to provide a daily report).

37. The issue of catch documentation schemes and traceability of fish was discussed by the Workshop. It was stated that some of the schemes have sizeable loopholes and that they were open to manipulation. As a general rule, it was noted that the longer the chain of "custody" from the point of capture to the consumer, the greater the difficulties in attempting to ensure that fish maintained its traceability.

38. Some participants reiterated that inland fisheries production was extremely important in the region and in some cases exceeded marine production where countries had both marine and inland sectors. These participants expressed concern about a lack of a strong inland fisheries "voice" in international fora. It was noted that at the FAO Committee on Fisheries (COFI), countries with important inland fisheries should ensure that national and regional interests and priorities for inland fisheries should be well articulated.

[1] Swan, Judith. 2003. National Plans of Action to Combat Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing: Models for Coastal and Small Island Developing States. FAO/FishCode Review N° 6. 71p.

Previous Page Top of Page Next Page