Annex I. Examples of International Conventions, Agreements and Arrangements Having a Bearing on Fishing Operations
Annex II. The Standard Specifications for the Marking and Identification of Fishing Vessels
Annex III. Proposed System for the Marking of Fishing Gear
Annex IV. Proposals for the Application of a Standard System of Lights and Shapes for the Identification and Location of Fishing Gear
Annex V. Guidelines and Standards for the Removal of Offshore Installations and Structures on the Continental Shelf and in the Exclusive Economic Zone
Annex VI. Procedures for the Development and Management of Harbours and Landing Places for Fishing Vessels
A. At the United Nations
B. At the International Maritime Organization
C. At the International Labour Organization
D. International Fisheries Agreements
Preparation of this Annex
This annex contains examples of international conventions, agreements and arrangements that have a bearing on fishing operations. These examples cover various aspects of fisheries management, prevention of pollution from the operation of ships, safety at sea and conditions of work and service in the fishing industry. It is recommended that the competent authority or authorities obtain further information on the status of these instruments and a list of addresses is supplied.
Background documents related to the preparation of this document include the instruments so listed and the Annual Reviews of the Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea. The FAO data base on fishery agreements, FARISIS was also consulted.
1. Convention on the Continental Shelf, 1958. In force.
To define and delimit the rights of States to explore and exploit the natural resources of the continental shelf.2. Convention on Fishing and Conservation of the Living Resources of the High Seas, 1958. In force.
Through international cooperation, to solve the problems involved in the conservation of the living resources of the high seas, considering that through the development of modern techniques some of these resources are in danger of being over-exploited.3. Convention on the High Seas, 1958. In force.
To codify the rules of international law relating to the high seas.4. United Nations Convention on Conditions for Registration of Ships, 1977. Not in force. (UNCTAD)
For the purpose of ensuring or, as the case may be, strengthening the genuine link between a State and ships flying its flag, and in order to exercise effectively its jurisdiction and control over such ships with regard to identification and accountability of shipowners and operators as well as with regard to administrative, technical, economic and social matters, a flag State shall apply the provisions contained in this convention.5. United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea, 1982. In force.
To set up a comprehensive new legal regime for the sea and oceans and, as far as environmental provisions are concerned, to establish material rules concerning environmental standards as well as enforcement provisions dealing with pollution of the marine environment.6. Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, 1987. In force. (UNEP)
To protect the ozone layer by taking precautionary measures to control equitably total global emissions of substances that deplete it, with the ultimate objective of their elimination on the basis of developments in scientific knowledge, taking into account technical and economic considerations.7. International Convention on Maritime Liens and Mortgages, 1993. Not in force. (IMO/UNCTAD)
To improve conditions for the financing of ships and the development of national fleets.
8. Convention on Facilitation of International Marine Traffic (FAL), 1965. In force.
To facilitate maritime transport by simplifying and minimizing the formalities, documentary requirements and procedures associated with the arrival, stay and departure of ships engaged in international voyages.9. International Convention on Load Lines, 1966 and the Protocol of 1988. In force.
To establish uniform principles and rules with respect to the limits to which ships on international voyages may be loaded having regard to the need for safeguarding life and property at sea.10. International Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships, 1969. In force.
To establish uniform principles and rules with respect to the tonnage of ships engaged on international voyages.11. Convention on International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972. In force.1
To establish principles and rules concerning lights and shapes to be displayed by ships.12. Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and other Matter (London Convention/LC-formerly London Dumping Convention/LDC), 1972. In force.
To control pollution of the sea by dumping, and to encourage regional agreements supplementary to the Convention.13. International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships 1973, as modified by its Protocol of 1978, MARPOL 73/78.2 In force.
To preserve the marine environment by achieving the complete elimination of pollution by oil and other harmful substances and the minimization of accidental discharge of such substances.14. Protocol Relating to Intervention on the High Seas in Cases of Marine Pollution by Substances other than Oil, 1973. In force.
To enable States to take action on the high seas in cases of maritime casualties resulting in grave and imminent danger of pollution to their coastline or related interests by substances other than oil.15. International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), 1974, its Amendments and Protocols.3 In force.
To promote safety at sea by establishing a common agreement, uniform principles and rules. The first version was brought out in 1914 the second entered into force in 1933 and the third in 1952. The fourth version of SOLAS entered into force in 1965 and the current SOLAS was adopted in 1974.16. Convention on Limitation of Liability for Marine Claims, 1976. In force.
To establish uniform rules related to the limitation of liability for marine claims including claims subject to limitation and claims excepted from limitation.17. Torremolinos International Convention on the Safety of Fishing Vessels, 1977, and the Torremolinos Protocol of 1993 relating thereto. Not in force.
To provide uniform principles and rules concerning construction, equipment, stability, radiocommunications and other safety aspects of fishing vessels.18. International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978 as amended in 1995. In force.
To promote safety of life and property at sea and the protection of the marine environment by establishing, in common agreement, international standards of training, certification and watchkeeping for seafarers.19. International Convention on Maritime Search and Rescue, 1979. In force.
To establish an international maritime search and rescue (SAR) plan covering the needs for ship reporting systems, SAR services and the rescue of persons in distress at sea.20. Convention on the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Maritime Navigation, 1988. In force.
To improve security and reduce the risk to passengers and crews on board ships.21. International Convention on Salvage, 1989. Not in force.
To establish uniform rules regarding salvage operations.22. International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Fishing Vessel Personnel (1995). Not in Force.
To promote safety of life and property at sea and the protection of the marine environment by establishing in common agreement international standards of training, certification and watchkeeping for fishing vessel personnel.
23. Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No.29).
To establish the principle that the use of forced or compulsory labour in all its forms should be brought to an end.24. Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize Convention, 1946 (No.87) and associated Conventions No.98 and No.135. In force.
To establish the principle of freedom of association for all workers and the right to organize and to promote voluntary collective bargaining between them.25. Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957, (No.105)
To prohibit the use of any form of forced or compulsory labour in particular circumstances.26. Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958, (No.111)
To establish the principle that there should be no discrimination in any employment or occupation on certain grounds.27. Medical Examination (Fishermen) Convention, 1959 (No.113)
To provide standards for the medical examination of fishermen taking into account the age of the fisherman and the work to be undertaken.28. Fishermens Articles of Agreement Convention, 1959 (No.114)
To establish a system of articles of agreement for fishermen to be signed by the owner of a fishing vessel, or the owners representative, in which their conditions of employment are clearly set out.29. Fishermens Competency Certificate Convention, 1966 (No.125)
To set subjects to be included in curricula such as general nautical subjects, knowledge of international regulations, practical navigation, safe working practices, the operation of engines and other equipment, fishing techniques as appropriate, and the amount of theoretical and practical training to be undergone.30. Accommodation of Crews (Fishermen) Convention, 1966 (No.126)
To ensure adequate security, including emergency escapes, protection from the weather, ventilation of sleeping quarters, provision of sanitary and cooking areas as well as the provision of medicine chests and sick bays.31 Repatriation of Seafarers Convention (Revised),1987, (No.166). In Force.
To set conditions for the repatriation of seafarers leaving a ship.
32. Convention for the International Council for The Exploration of the Sea (as amended). In force.
To provide a new constitution for the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea established in Copenhagen in 1902.33. Convention for the Establishment of an Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission. In force.
To maintain populations of yellowfin and skipjack tuna in the eastern Pacific Ocean to permit maximum sustained catches year after year.34. International Convention for the High Seas Fisheries of the North Pacific (as amended). In force.
To ensure maximum sustained productivity of the fishery resources of the Pacific Ocean. To coordinate research and conservation measures to this end.35. North-East Atlantic Fisheries Convention (27/6/63)
Superseded by the Convention on Future Multi-lateral Cooperation in the North East Atlantic Fisheries. In force.
To ensure the conservation and rational exploitation of the fish stocks of the north east Atlantic Ocean and adjacent waters.36. Agreement Concerning Cooperation in Marine Fishing. In force.
To foster cooperation in the development of marine fishing, fishing techniques, fish processing technology and scientific research into the condition of living marine resources.37. International Convention for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas. In force. (FAO)
To maintain populations of tuna and tuna-like fish in the Atlantic Ocean at levels permitting the maximum sustainable catch for food and other purposes.38. Convention on the Future Multi-lateral Cooperation in the North West Atlantic Fisheries. In force.
To promote the conservation and optimum utilisation of the fishery resources of the North West Atlantic area within a framework appropriate to the regime of extended coastal State jurisdiction over fisheries, and accordingly to encourage international cooperation and consultation with respect to these resources.39. South Pacific Forum Fisheries Agency Convention, 1979. In force. (FAO)
To ensure the conservation and optimum utilization of the living marine resources of the South Pacific Region in particular of highly migratory species as well as to promote regional cooperation and coordination of fisheries policies.40. Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources 1982. In force.
To elaborate measures to preserve the marine environment of the Antarctic to avoid collateral destruction of the living marine resources.41. Convention for the Conservation of Salmon in the North Atlantic Ocean 1982. In force.
To promote the conservation of salmon stocks in the North Atlantic Ocean through international cooperation.42. Convention of the Prohibition of Fishing with Long Driftnets in the South Pacific, 1989. In force.
To take measures consistent with international law to restrict drift net fishing activities within the Convention Area.43. Agreement to Promote Compliance with International Conservation and Management Measures by Fishing Vessels on the High Seas 1993. Not in force. (FAO)
To establish a system of authorization of vessels fishing the high seas and to deter flagging and reflagging as a means to avoid compliance with agreed conservation and management measures for high seas fishing.44. The Agreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10th December 1982 Relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks 1995. Not in force.
To ensure the long term conservation and sustainable use of straddling fish stock and highly migratory fish stocks through effective implementation of the relevant provisions of the Convention. The Agreement inter alia applies to the conservation and management of the relevant species within and beyond areas under national jurisdiction.The above examples of international conventions, agreements, arrangements or other legal instruments, having a bearing on those engaged in fishing and the design and construction of types of vessels addressed by the Code as well as their operations, are also supported by many resolutions and recommendations. Further information should be sought from the Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea or directly from the Organization concerned with respect to content and the current status of these instruments.
Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the
New York, N.Y. 10017,
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development
Palais des Nations
CH-1211 Geneva 10
United Nations Environment Programme
International Labour Organization
4, route des Morillons,
CH-1211 Geneva 22
International Maritime Organization
4 Albert Embankment
London, SE1 7SR,
International Telecommunications Union
Place des Nations
CH-1211 Geneva 20,
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Viale delle Terme di Caracalla,
Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Living Marine
25, Old Wharf,
Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
South Pacific Forum Fisheries Agency
PO Box 629,
Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission
Scripps Institute of Oceanography
A 003 La Jolla
International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic
Principe De Vergana,
International Council for the Exploration of the
North Atlantic Fisheries Organization
PO Box 638,
North Atlantic Salmon Conservation Commission
11, Rutland Square,
Edinburgh, EH1 2AS
1. General Provisions
2. Basic System and Application
3. Technical Specifications
4. Registration of Marks
5. International Allocation of Call Signs
Preparation of this Annex
This document contains the specifications of a standardized system for the marking and identification of fishing vessels as endorsed by the FAO Committee on Fisheries, Rome, April 1989.
Background documents relating to this subject are the Report of the Expert Consultation on Fishing Vessel Markings, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, 11-15 March 1985 (FAO Fisheries Report No.343), the Report of the World Conference on Fisheries. Management and Development, Rome, 16-20 June 1986 (FAO Fisheries Report No.367) and the Report of the Eighteenth Session of the FAO Committee on Fisheries, Rome, 10-14 April 1989 (FAO Fisheries Report No.416).
The need for an international standard system for the marking and identification of fishing vessels was included in the Strategy for Fisheries Management and Development approved by the 1984 FAO World Fisheries Conference. An Expert Consultation on the Marking of Fishing Vessels convened by the Government of Canada, in collaboration with FAO, in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, March 1985, elaborated the basis for a standard system.
A review of the report of this Expert Consultation by the Sixteenth Session of the FAO Committee on Fisheries resulted in a further Expert Consultation on the Technical Specifications for the Marking of Fishing Vessels convened in Rome, June 1986.
The Specifications contained herein were endorsed by the Eighteenth Session of the FAO Committee on Fisheries, Rome, April 1989, for adoption by States on a voluntary basis as a standard system to identify fishing vessels operating, or likely to operate, in waters of States other than those of the flag State. The Director General of FAO has informed the Secretary Generals of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) of the adoption of these Standard Specifications as an aid to fisheries management and safety at sea.
1.1 Purpose and scope
1.3 Basis for the Standard Specifications
1.1.1 As an aid to fisheries management and safety at sea, fishing vessels should be appropriately marked for their identification on the basis of the International Telecommunication Union Radio Call Signs (IRCS) system.
1.1.2 For the purpose of these Standard Specifications, the use of the word vessel refers to any vessel intending to fish or engaged in fishing or ancillary activities, operating, or likely to operate, in waters of States other than those of the flag State.
For the purpose of these Specifications:
a) the word vessel also includes a boat, skiff or craft (excluding aircraft) carried on board another vessel and required for fishing operations;
b) a deck is any surface lying in the horizontal plane, including the top of the wheelhouse;
c) a radio station is one that is assigned an International Telecommunication Union Radio Call Sign.
The basis for the Standard Specifications, the IRCS system, meets the following requirements:
a) the use of an established international system from which the identity and nationality of vessels can be readily determined, irrespective of size and tonnage, and for which a register is maintained;
b) it is without prejudice to international conventions, national or bilateral practices;
c) implementation and maintenance will be at minimum cost to governments and vessel owners; and,
d) it facilitates search and rescue operations.
2.1 Basic system
2.1.1 The Standard Specifications are based on:
a) the International Telecommunication Unions system for the allocation of signs to countries for ship stations; and,2.1.2 Vessels shall be marked with their International Telecommunication Union Radio Call Signs (IRCS).
b) generally accepted design standards for lettering and numbering.
2.1.3 Except as provided for in paragraph 2.2.6 below, vessels to which an IRCS has not been assigned shall be marked with the characters allocated by the, International Telecommunication Union (ITU) to the flag State and followed by, as appropriate, the licence or registration number assigned by the flag State. In such cases, a hyphen shall be placed between the nationality identification characters and the licence or registration number identifying the vessel.
2.1.4 In order to avoid confusion with the letters I and 0 it is recommended that numbers 1 and 0, which are specifically excluded from the ITU call signs, be avoided by national authorities when allocating licence or registration numbers.
2.1.5 Apart from the vessels name or identification mark and the port of registry required by international practice or national legislation, the marking system as specified shall, in order to avoid confusion, be the only other vessel identification mark consisting of letters and numbers to be painted on the hull or superstructure.
2.2.1 The markings shall be prominently displayed at all times:
a) on the vessels side or superstructure, port and starboard; fixtures inclined at an angle to the vessels side or superstructure would be considered as suitable provided that the angle of inclination would not prevent sighting of the sign from another vessel or from the air;2.2.2 Marks should be placed as high as possible above the waterline on both sides. Such parts of the hull as the flare of the bow and the stern shall be avoided.
b) on a deck, except as provided for in paragraph 2.2.4 below. Should an awning or other temporary cover be placed so as to obscure the mark on a deck, the awning or cover shall also be marked. These marks should be placed athwartships with the top of the numbers or letters towards the bow.
2.2.3 The marks shall:
a) be so placed that they are not obscured by the fishing gear whether it is stowed or in use;2.2.4 Undecked vessels shall not be required to display the markings on a horizontal surface. However, owners should be encouraged, where practical, to fit a board on which the markings may be clearly seen from the air.
b) be clear of flow from scuppers or overboard discharges including areas which might be prone to damage or discolouration from the catch of certain types of species; and,
c) not extend below the waterline.
2.2.5 Vessels fitted with sails may display the markings on the sail in addition to the hull.
2.2.6 Boats, skiffs and craft carried by the vessel for fishing operations shall bear the same mark as the vessel concerned.
2.2.7 Examples of the placement of marks are set out in pages 47 to 69 of the FAO publication The Standard Specifications for the Marking and Identification of Fishing Vessels.
3.1 Specifications of letters and numbers
3.1.1 Block lettering and numbering shall be used throughout.
3.1.2 The width of the letters and numbers shall be in proportion to the height.
3.1.3 The height (h) of the letters and numbers shall be in proportion to the size of the vessel in accordance with the following:
a) for marks to be placed on the hull, superstructure and/or inclined surfaces:
Length of vessel overall (LOA) in meters
Height of letters and numbers in meters (m) to be not
25 m and over
20 m but less than 25 m
15 m but less than 20 m
12 m but less than 15 m
5 m but less than 12 m
Under 5 m
3.1.4 The length of the hyphen shall be half the height of the letters and numbers.
3.1.5 The width of the stroke for all letters, numbers and the hyphen shall be
a) the space between letters and/or numbers shall not exceed nor be less than
b) the space between adjacent letters having sloping sides shall not exceed
nor be less than
for example A V.
3.2.1 The marks shall be:
a) white on a black background; or,3.2.2 The background shall extend to provide a border around the mark of not less than
b) black on a white background.
3.2.3 Good quality marine paints to be used throughout.
3.2.4 The use of retro-reflective or heat-generating substances shall be accepted, provided that the mark meets the requirements of these Standard Specifications.
3.2.5 The marks and the background shall be maintained in good condition at all times.
4.1 The International Telecommunication Union maintains and updates a worldwide register of International Radio Call Signs that contains details of the nationality of the vessel and its name.
4.2 In addition to maintaining a separate register of its vessels., which IRCS have been assigned, the flag State shall also maintain a record of vessels to which it has given a nationality identifier (allocated by the ITU), followed by the hyphen and licence/registration number; such records should include details of the vessels and owners.
5.1 The International Telecommunication Union (ITU) Geneva allocates call signs to countries. These take the form of letters of the alphabet or number and letters, for example:
5.2 These signs allocated by the ITU clearly identify the flag State. The flag State adds further characters to the allocated call sign in order to identify the radio station (the vessel). A typical example being JNQK which is a Japanese vessel.
5.3 ITU should be contacted for an update of the List of Call Signs.
B. Proposed System for the Marking of Fishing Gear
Preparation of this Annex
This annex contains the specifications of a proposed standardized system for the marking of fishing gear in order to identify the owner.
Background documents relating to the subject are the Reports of the FAO Committee on Fisheries (FAO Fisheries Reports No. 387; 416; 459 and 488), the Report of the Expert Consultation on the Marking of Fishing Gear, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada, 14-19 July 1991 (FAO Fisheries Report No.485), the Agreement to Promote Compliance with International Conservation and Management Measures by Fishing Vessels on the High Seas, the Agreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 Relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks and the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries as adopted by the Conference of FAO on 31 October 1995.
1. Although the marking of fishing gear in order to identify the owner of the gear has been practised for centuries, there are still no common standards on how to mark fishing gear, what information should be carried by the mark or how the information should be stored and retrieved.
2. At the IMO, the lack of a common system made it difficult to deal with fishing gear in the development of MARPOL 73/784. In order to address the issue, a recommendation on the development of the technology for the marking of fishing gear is included in the IMO Guidelines for the Application of Annex V of MARPOL.
3. The FAO Committee on Fisheries (COFI), at its 18th session in April 1989, noted, that for the purpose of determining ownership, no international regulations, guidelines or common practices exist for the marking of fishing gear deployed outside national jurisdiction. Some delegations noted the problem as it related to the protection of living marine resources from entanglement in fishing nets and in the case of discarded fishing gear. It was noted that the elaboration of a standard for the marking of fishing gear would be of benefit to coastal States and recommended that further studies be undertaken.
4. Studies were carried out by the FAO with regard to systems used (past and present) as well as to identify available technology and, with the cooperation of the government of Canada, an Expert Consultation on the Marking of Fishing Gear was held in Victoria, British Colombia, Canada, 14-19 July 1991. It was found that whereas the systems varied in detail with the marks taking the form of tokens, multi-coloured twine, patent tags with a bar code to a vessels radio call sign being used, it was common to have a simple record of the persons to whom the mark had been allocated, irrespective of whether these were individuals, companies or even communities.
5. The report of the Expert Consultation on the Marking of Fishing Gear was submitted to COFI in 1993 at which time, the Committee considered that there would be a need for further study before finalizing the text of a Standard System for the Marking of Fishing Gear.
6. At the United Nations Conference on Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks5, which concluded its work in August 1995, it was agreed that there should be requirements for the marking of fishing vessels and fishing gear for identification in accordance with uniform and internationally recognizable marking systems, such as the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Standard Specifications for the Marking and Identification of Fishing Vessels.
7. The Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (the Code) makes provision for fishing gear to be marked in accordance with national legislation in order that the owner of the gear can be identified. It also provides for the authorization of fishing activities as well as the maintenance of records related to fishing vessels and that these records should include details of the vessels, their ownership and authorizations to fish. In this respect the Compliance Agreement6, which is an integral part of the Code, makes important provisions for the maintenance of records in relation to fishing vessels (including details of ownership), as well as the storage, retrieval, and dissemination of data.
8. These developments, since the 20th. Session of COFI in 1993, made it possible to address the concerns expressed by some COFI members at that time with regard to the apparent additional administrative burdens that might accrue from the adoption of a common system for the marking of fishing gear.
9. The proposed System for the Marking of Fishing Gear and guidelines for the implementation of the system, as set out in this Annex, take into account inter alia:
a) the contents of the report of the Expert Consultation on the Marking of Fishing Gear (FAO Fisheries Report No. 485);
b) comments received by FAO following the 20th. Session of COFI;
c) the negotiations at the U.N. Conference on Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks;
d) discussion on the marking of gear that took place during the elaboration of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries; and,
e) progress made in the preparation of data bases for the implementation of the Compliance Agreement.
1. General Provisions
2. A System for the Marking of Fishing Gear
3. Implementation of a Standard System
4. Recovery of Lost and Abandoned Fishing Gear
5. Salvage of Lost and Abandoned Fishing Gear
6. Fish Aggregating Devices
1.1 Except in cases of force majeure or circumstances involving the safety of a vessel or its crew, it should be an offence under national law for any person to deliberately discard or dump any fishing gear or piece thereof into the aquatic environment.
1.2 Fishing Gear should be marked in accordance with national legislation in order that the owner of the gear can be identified. Gear marking requirements should take into account uniform and internationally recognizable gear marking systems.
1.3 The gear marking system should apply to all types of fishing gear and fishing implements as well as to all fisheries.
1.4 The system should provide:
a) a simple, workable and enforceable means of identifying the ownership of fishing gear;
b) a system that can be universally adopted; and,
c) a mechanism as an aid to fisheries management.
2.1. The system of marking fishing gear should be set out in national legislation.
2.2. The marking of fishing gear should be a condition of an authorization to fish. Whereas such a condition may vary in detail and extent with regard to the different fisheries, the authorization to fish it should, in general, include a requirement for the following information to be given on:
a) name and address of person(s) authorized to fish and name of vessel (where relevant);2.3 The marking system should be designed, as and where appropriate, to reflect the special requirements of:
b) gear type;
c) expected area of use; and,
d) principal target species.
a) vessels fishing on the high seas;2.4. The actual method or device used to display or carry information set out in paragraph 2.2, hereinafter referred to as the mark or marks, should be:
b) vessels fishing in waters of States other than those of the flag State;
c) vessels of a coastal State fishing in waters under the jurisdiction of the same State; and,
d) owners of fishing gear and implements that are not associated with a fishing vessel.
a) simple;2.5 The mark should, as a minimum, give or hold sufficient information through which the name and address of the owner may be traced. FAO Fisheries Report 485 (Supp.) describes types of tags and of the means for the identification of ownership; it being understood that there should be a link in the information chain between the mark and the record of authorization to fish maintained by the State.
c) easily manufactured having regard to locally available materials;
d) easily read or deciphered;
e) able to stay attached;
f) durable; and,
g) designed so that they do not interfere with the operation and performance of the fishing gear and, in the case of tags, capable of accepting a variety of printed or embossed data.
2.6 The system should also provide for the:
a) reporting of fishing gear lost, abandoned or otherwise discarded;
b) reporting of fishing gear found;
c) recovery of lost or abandoned7 fishing gear; and,
d) the disposal of old and unwanted gear.
3.1 The marking of fishing gear should be a condition of the authorization to fish.
3.2 States individually or in cooperation with other States, either bilaterally or through subregional or regional fisheries bodies, should decide:
a) on a system to be adopted;3.3 An owner should be allocated a mark or code, that would only apply to all of the fishing gear and fishing implements so owned.
b) the fisheries to be targeted;
c) reporting procedures;
d) data storage, retrieval and information exchange; and,
3.4 The competent authority may authorize the use of a common mark to a company, organization of fishers or similar entity, if it can be demonstrated that the fishing gear to be marked can be used by more than one group of users or vessels on a rotational or common pool basis. In such cases, the owner(s), identified by the mark, should keep a log of the location of the gear.
3.5 In the case of a mothership operation, the fishing gear carried by the catcher vessels may carry the mark of the mothership.
3.6 All vessels fishing on the high seas, should use a commonly agreed system for the marking of fishing gear. Since the Compliance Agreement provides for a system for the marking of fishing vessel that would be on the basis of the International Telecommunications Union Radio Call Signs (IRCS) it would be appropriate to use this as the basis for the marking of the fishing gear. For those vessels to which an IRCS has not been assigned, the mark would display or hold information consisting of the characters allocated to a flag State by the ITU, and followed by a hyphen, and as appropriate, the number of registration of the vessel or the number on the authorization to fish. Benefits would also accrue from the adoption of such a system with regard to the maintenance of any records to be kept and the exchange of information that may be required.8
3.7 Likewise, for fishing vessels authorized to fish in the waters of States other than those of the flag State, the coastal States concerned should accept a marking system for fishing gear of such vessels as described for the high seas in paragraph 3.6 above.
3.8 States, regional and subregional fisheries bodies should ensure that control and enforcement of a system for the marking of fishing gear is an integral part of arrangements for the monitoring, control and surveillance of fisheries.
3.9 In the event of loss or abandonment of fishing gear, the owner should be required to report the fact to the competent authority.
3.10 Every effort should be made by the owner to retrieve lost gear or abandoned gear.
3.11 Where gear lost or abandoned, may be a danger to navigation, the owner of the gear concerned9 should immediately warn other mariners in the vicinity as well as the competent authority, giving details of the gear as well as its last known position. The competent authority should use the most effective local means to give a general warning to mariners.
3.12 The competent authority may impose appropriate penalties on an owner for non-compliance with the system for the marking of gear and fishing implements, including FADs, in particular, for:
a) deploying fishing gear without displaying the mark so required as a condition of an authorization to fish;
b) deliberate removal of a mark;
c) use of a mark allocated to another owner or to other gear; and,
d) providing false information on the use, loss, abandonment or disposal of fishing gear.
4.1 The competent authority should ensure that owners of fishing gear have adequate equipment available for the recovery of gear.
4.2 In the event of failure of the owner to recover lost and abandoned gear, the competent authority should make appropriate arrangements for its recovery, particularly if the gear:
a) presents a hazard to the navigation of surface and sub-surface vessels;4.3 The competent authority should encourage the re-use of recovered gear.
b) fouls reefs;
c) fouls spawning beds;
d) becomes an impediment to fishing; or,
e) would continue to ghost fish.
5.1 National legislation concerning salvage, should provide for fishing gear found or picked up at sea, whether marked or unmarked, to be delivered in the shortest possible time to the competent authority responsible for dealing with wrecks.
5.2 Owners, national or foreign, should be informed of gear recovered (where appropriately marked), any liens on the gear and arrangements for them to collect the gear.
5.3 The competent authority may levy a fee for each piece of gear returned to the owners and such income may be used to offset the cost of retrieval.
6.1 The authorization to fish should also include conditions in relation to the deployment of fish aggregating devices and, in addition to carrying a mark to identify ownership of a FAD, the authorization should relate to the:
a) type of FAD;6.2 The responsibility for recovery of drifting FADs should lie with the owner.
b) location of the allocated datum geographical position; and,
c) the fishing activities permitted at the FAD.
6.3 The loss of a FAD (drifting or anchored) should be treated in the same way as lost or abandoned fishing gear.
6.4 The competent authority, should take appropriate action in accordance with paragraph 5.2 above in the event of a lost or abandoned FAD considered to be a hazard to navigation.
B. A Standard System of Lights and Shapes for Fishing Gear and Fishing Implements
Preparation of this Annex
This annex contains the specifications of a proposed standard system for the identification of types of gear set, where the gear is set and in which direction as well for the location of gear that may be unattended.
Background documents relating to the subject are, the Report of the eighteenth session of the FAO Committee on Fisheries Rome, April 1989 (FAO Fisheries, Report No.416), the Report of the Expert Consultation on the Marking of Fishing Gear, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada, 14-19 July 1991, relevant Reports of the Maritime Safety Committee of the International Maritime Organization and the International Regulations for the Prevention of Collisions at Sea.
1. In its discussions on the marking of fishing gear at the Eighteenth session of the FAO Committee on Fisheries (COFI), most delegates agreed that there was a need for a review of lights and shapes displayed by vessels engaged in fishing and certain types of fishing gear. The Committee invited the Director-General of FAO to bring this matter to the attention of the International Maritime Organization (IMO), and noted that careful consideration must be given to the costs that any changes may imply.
2. The matter was brought to the attention of IMO where it was referred to its Sub-Committee on Navigation which requested its members to submit comments and proposals on the need to amend Rule 26 of the Collision Regulations. It also took note of the intention of FAO to convene an Expert Consultation on the Marking of Fishing Gear where the identification of ownership of lost, abandoned and unattended fishing gear was to be considered. Since this issue was seen to constitute a hazard to sea mammals and birds as well as to the safety of navigation, the Sub-Committee decided to give consideration to any recommendations resulting from the FAO consultation.
3. The IMO participated in the Expert Consultation for the Marking of Fishing Gear, Victoria, British Colombia, Canada, 14-19 July 1991. The Consultation agreed that in order to protect the fishers and their gear and to warn mariners of the presence of deployed fishing gear, a standard system of lights and shapes would be useful. It was also agreed that the technical specifications of such a system would need to be distributed to all mariners so that all would know and understand the marks, lights, use of radar reflectors and shapes that might be encountered at sea. Such information would need to be included in training programmes not only for fishers but other mariners as well.
4. The IMO reviewed the report of the Expert Consultation on the Marking of Fishing Gear as well as recommendations for amendments to the COLREGS. It agreed with FAO that the optional lights provided for in Section 2 of Annex II to the 1972 Collision Regulations should be mandatory for vessels of 20 metres or more in length when engaged in trawling, whether using demersal or pelagic gear, or when pair trawling. IMO could not agree with the proposal to allow the use of flashing yellow lights shown by purse seiners (described in Section 3 of Annex II of the Collision Regulations), by other vessels engaged in fishing operations when such fishing operations involve extensive alterations of course or speed, or both, and when the vessel concerned is hampered by its gear. It agreed, however, that the marking of fishing gear in order to identify its position in the sea, need not be included in the COLREGS.
5. This Annex has been prepared on the basis of the Report of the Expert Consultation for the Marking of Fishing Gear (FAO Fisheries Report No.485 and its Supplement), and the outcome of discussions at the International Maritime Organization. (IMO).
1. General Provisions
2. Technical Provisions
3. Application of a Standard System
4. Technical Specifications
1.1 In order to protect fishers and their gear and to warn other mariners of the presence of deployed fishing gear, States should make provisions in national legislation for the adoption of a standard system of lights and shapes for the identification of fishing gear and for marking its position in the water.
1.2 States should make provisions for the inclusion of the details of the system in training programmes for fishers and other mariners.
1.3 The need to comply with a system of lights and shapes related to fishing gear, fishing implements and fishing vessels should be a condition of the authorization to fish.
2.1 The system should take into account:
a) the provision of the International Regulations for the Prevention of Collisions at Sea (COLREGS);2.2 Where practicable, all position indicators attached to fishing gear should:
b) any local rules, including rules of navigation governing river, lake or coastal fisheries;
c) regulations pertaining to offshore structures; and,
d) systems for the marking of fishing gear for the identification of ownership.
a) be as conspicuous as possible in a clear daytime atmosphere from a distance of at least 2 nautical miles at sea level;2.3 Lights and shapes should also indicate the direction and extent of set and drifting gear.
b) carry radar reflectors;
c) carry lights with characteristics which do not conflict with those of navigational marks and which would be visible on a clear night at a distance of at least 2 nautical miles; and,
d) be fitted with a coloured flag or flags of fluorescent material, as an aid to daytime visibility.
2.4 Electronic devices, such as transponders and radio beacons which automatically and continuously indicate their position by means of signals may be used in addition to the lights and shapes. Such devices, however, must not operate at frequencies that would conflict with other devices used for navigation and search and rescue purposes.
3.1 An individual pot, trap, fyke net, stake net and other similar gear, should be marked with a buoy or other device at the surface to indicate its position. Gear set in series, such as a number of pots connected are on line, should be marked at each end with a buoy.
3.2 Anchored or drifting fishing gear with the upper continuous edge of the gear at a depth of more than 2 metres below the surface should be marked in the following manner:
a) fishing gear set below the level of the sea and extending from an anchor or parent vessel, should be marked at both extremities by a spar buoy and at intermediate positions. The distance between the intermediate marks, and between the intermediate marks closest to the extremities and the extremity markers should not exceed one kilometre. In the case of fishing gear attached to a vessel, the extremity of the gear nearest to the vessel need not carry a marker;3.3 Fishing gear set within the upper two metres of the water column, and therefore a hazard to small transiting vessels, should be marked in the following manner:
b) for recognition in daytime, the westernmost end spar buoy of such gear extending horizontally in the sea should be fitted with two flags one above the other or one flag and a radar reflector. The end spar buoy at the most easterly extremity should be fitted with one flag or a radar reflector; and,
c) for night time recognition, the most westerly end spar buoy should have two white lights one above the other; the most easterly end spar buoy to have one white light.
a) for day time recognition, the extremities of the gear should have spar buoys carrying top marks consisting of two spherical shapes, one above the other at no more than one metre apart; the diameter of the upper of the two spheres to be smaller but no less than one half the diameter of the lower one;3.4 The dhan-buoy used with active gear, such as anchor seining, fly dragging and purse seining, should comply with the provisions as set out in paragraph. 2.2.
b) for night time recognition, the spar buoys placed at the extremity of the gear should have two yellow lights, one above the other at no less than one metre apart and of different characteristics to lights fitted to intermediate buoys;
c) gear extending more than one kilometre should have intermediate buoys placed at distances of not more than one kilometre; intermediate spar buoys should have one spherical shape for day time recognition and one yellow light for night time;
d) gates should be provided for the free passage of surface vessels. Each side of the gate should be marked by spar buoys; the closest intermediate float should not be more than 10 meters from these spar buoys; and,
e) attended gear need not be marked at the extremity attached to a fishing vessel.
3.5 Fish aggregating devices should be marked in the same way as fishing gear and carry means to identify their position by day and by night. As a minimum requirement, they should comply with the provisions set out in paragraph 2.2. The requirements of paragraph 2.4 should apply to the use of electronic devices fitted to FADs.
4.1 A spar buoy should meet the following specifications:
a) the pole of a spar buoy extending above the floatation buoy should have a height of at least 2 metres; the height of the spar buoy may be less than 2 metres of an administration is satisfied that the fishing gear so marked would not be a hazard to navigation;
b) where radar reflectors are required, they should be fitted at the top of the pole;
c) the size of flags should not be less than 25 centimetres in height and 35 centimetres in width10; when two flags are required, the distance between them should not be less than 10 centimetres; flags should be made of waterproof material in fluorescent colours;
d) lights should be attached to the pole in such a way that they will not be obscured by a flag;
e) for shapes that give the appearance of being spherical when viewed from a distance, provided for in paragraph 3.3 c) above, the lower of the spherical shapes and the shape, if only one is fitted, should have a diameter of not less than 30 centimetres, the upper shape should be smaller in diameter but not less than half that of the lower shape; and when two shapes are required, they should not be less than 10 centimetres apart; and,
f) intermediate floats should have a diameter of not less than 50 centimetres.11
4.2 Radar reflectors should be:
a) as light as possible;4.3 Lights should be visible at a distance of at least 2 nautical miles; and preferably of a type that are fitted with sensors that automatically switch the light on at dusk and off at daylight.12
b) octahedral in shape; and,
c) of metal plate or wire mesh construction.
4.4 Radio Beacons may be of a type that can be attached to the pole of the spar buoy or FAD, if they are of the free floating type, they should be linked to the spar buoy.
Examples of Lights, Shapes and Acoustic Devices
Use flags for gear that drifts and is set below the upper 2m in the water column.
See Para 3.2 b)Use spherical shapes when drifting gear is set in the upper 2m of the water column.
See Para 3.3 a) and c)Dhan buoy as used with active gear such as anchor seining, dragging and purse seining.
Float free beacons should be tied to the spar buoy.
Spar buoy indicating fishing gear lying to the East of the buoy.
Fishing Gear Set Below the Upper 2m of the Water Column
Spar buoy indicating fishing gear lying to the West of the buoy
Fishing Gear Set Below the Upper 2m in the Water Column
Gate in Gear in Upper 2m of the Water Column
Gate in Fishing Gear Set in the Upper 2m of the Water Column
Aluminium plate or wire mesh is suitable. To provide a good target, the reflector should be a reasonable size; however if too large, the windage effect could cause the buoy to heel excessively
B. Resolution A.672(16)
C. Guidelines and Standards for the Removal of Offshore Installations and Structures on the Continental Shelf and in the Exclusive Economic Zone
Preparation of this Annex
This annex contains guidelines and standards for the complete and partial removal of offshore structures as adopted by the International Maritime Organization (IMO), 19 October 1989.
The basic document for reference is Resolution A 672 (16) of the Assembly of IMO and the Annex thereto.
In debate at the International Maritime Organization (IMO), representatives of the fishing industry expressed concern that their interests were not given sufficient mention in the decision process leading to the removal of redundant offshore structures and installations. They also argued that pipelines should be included in any removal scheme and, that accumulated debris should be removed. The actual guidelines and standards developed by IMO do not emphasize the interests of any particular user of the seas.
The Protocol for the Protection of the Mediterranean Sea against Pollution Resulting from Exploration and Exploitation of the Continental Shelf and the Seabed and its Subsoil requires an operator to remove any installation which is abandoned or disused, in order to ensure safety of navigation, taking into account the guidelines and standards adopted by the competent international organization. Such removal shall have due regard to other legitimate uses of the sea, in particular, fishing.
The Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries recognizes that the fisheries sector should be consulted prior to any decision being made on the abandonment of structures and other materials by the competent authorities.
For the information of the fisheries sector, this document contains the IMO Guidelines and Standards for the Removal of Offshore Installations and Structures on the Continental Shelf and in the Exclusive Economic Zone.
Adopted on 19 October 1989
Agenda item 10
GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS FOR THE REMOVAL OF OFFSHORE INSTALLATIONS AND STRUCTURES ON THE CONTINENTAL SHELF AND IN THE EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE
RECALLING Article 15(j) of the Convention on the international Maritime Organization concerning the functions of the Assembly in relation to regulations and guidelines concerning maritime safety and the prevention and control of marine pollution,
BEARING IN MIND article 60 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, 1982, which prescribes that any installations or structures which are abandoned or disused shall be removed to ensure safety of navigation, taking into account any generally accepted international standards established in this regard by the competent international organization, and that such removal shall also have due regard to fishing, protection of the marine environment and the rights and duties of other States,
BEARING IN MIND ALSO that the International Maritime Organization is the competent Organization to deal with this subject,
HAVING CONSIDERED the draft guidelines and standards approved by the Maritime Safety Committee at its fifty-seventh session which were developed in cooperation with the Marine Environment Protection Committee,
1. ADOPTS the Guidelines and Standards for the Removal of Offshore Installations and Structures on the Continental Shelf and in the Exclusive Economic Zone set out in the Annex to the present resolution;
2. RECOMMENDS that Member Governments take into account the aforesaid Guidelines and Standards when making decisions regarding the removal of abandoned or disused installations or structures.
1. General Removal Requirement
1.1 Abandoned or disused offshore installations or structures on any continental shelf or in any exclusive economic zone are required to be removed, except where non-removal or partial removal is consistent with the following guidelines and standards.
1.2 The coastal State having jurisdiction over the installation or structure should ensure that it is removed in whole or in part in conformity with these guidelines and standards once it is no longer serving the primary purpose for which it was originally designed and installed, or serving a subsequent new use, or where no other reasonable justification cited in these guidelines and standards exists for allowing the installation or structure or parts thereof to remain on the sea-bed. Such removal should be performed as soon as reasonably practicable after abandonment or permanent disuse of such installation or structure.
1.3 Notification of such non-removal or partial removal should be forwarded to the Organization.
1.4 Nothing in these guidelines and standards is intended to preclude a coastal State from imposing more stringent removal requirements for existing or future installations or structures on its continental shelf or in its exclusive economic zone.
2.1 The decision to allow an offshore installation, structure, or parts thereof, to remain on the sea-bed should be based, in particular, on a case-by-case evaluation, by the coastal State with jurisdiction over the installation or structure, of the following matters:
l. any potential effect on the safety of surface or subsurface navigation, or of other uses of the sea;2.2 The determination of any potential effect on safety of surface or subsurface navigation or of other uses of the sea should be based on: the number, type and draught of vessels expected to transit the area in the foreseeable future; the cargoes being carried in the area; the tide, current, general hydrographic conditions and potentially extreme climatic conditions; the proximity of designated or customary sea lanes and port access routes; the aids to navigation in the vicinity; the location of commercial fishing areas; the width of the available navigable fairway; and whether the area is an approach to or in straits used for international navigation or routes used for international navigation through archipelagic waters.
2. the rate of deterioration of the material and its present and possible future effect on the marine environment;
3. the potential effect on the marine environment, including living resources;
4. the risk that the material will shift from its position at some future time;
5. the costs, technical feasibility, and risks of injury to personnel associated with removal of the installation or structure; and
6. the determination of a new use or other reasonable justification for allowing the installation or structure or parts thereof to remain on the sea-bed.
2.3 The determination of any potential effect on the marine environment should be based upon scientific evidence taking into account: the effect on water quality; geological and hydrographic characteristics; the presence of endangered or threatened species; existing habitat types; local fishery resources; and the potential for pollution or contamination of the site by residual products from, or deterioration of, the offshore installation or structure.
2.4 The process for allowing an offshore installation or structure, or parts thereof, to remain on the sea-bed should also include the following actions by the coastal State with official authorization identifying the jurisdiction over the installation or structure: specs conditions under which an Installation or structure, or parts thereof, will be allowed to remain on the sea-bed; the drawing up of a specific plan, adopted by the coastal State, to monitor the accumulation and deterioration of material left on the sea-bed to ensure there is no subsequent adverse impact on navigation, other uses of the sea or the marine environment; advance notice to mariners as to the specific position, dimensions, surveyed depth and markings of any installations or structures not entirely removed from the seabed; and advance notice to appropriate hydrographic services to allow for timely revision of nautical charts.
The following standards should be taken into account when a decision is made regarding the removal of an offshore installation or structure.
3.1 All abandoned or disused installations or structures standing in less than 75 m of water and weighing less than 4,000 tonnes in air, excluding the deck and superstructure, should be entirely removed.
3.2 All abandoned or disused installations or structures emplaced on the sea-bed on or after 1 January 1998, standing in less than 100 m of water and weighing less than 4,000 tonnes in air, excluding the deck and superstructure, should be entirely removed.
3.3 Removal should be performed in such a way as to cause no significant adverse effects upon navigation or the marine environment. Installations should continue to be marked in accordance with IALA recommendations prior to the completion of any partial or complete removal that may be required. Details of the position and dimensions of any installations remaining after the removal operations should be promptly passed to the relevant national authorities and to one of the world charting hydrographic authorities. The means of removal or partial removal should not cause a significant adverse effect on living resources of the marine environment, especially threatened and endangered species.
3.4 The coastal State may determine that the installation or structure may be left wholly or partially in place where:
1. an existing installation or structure, including one referred to in paragraphs 3.1 or 3.2, or a part thereof, will serve a new use if permitted to remain wholly or partially in place on the sea-bed (such as enhancement of a living resource); or3.5 Notwithstanding the requirements of paragraphs 3.1 and 3.2, where entire removal is not technically feasible or would involve extreme cost, or an unacceptable risk to personnel or the marine environment, the coastal State may determine that it need not be entirely removed.
2. an existing installation or structure, other than one referred to in paragraphs 3.1 and 3.2, or part thereof, can be left there without causing unjustifiable interference with other uses of the sea.
3.6 Any abandoned or disused installation or structure, or part thereof, which projects above the surface of the sea should be adequately maintained to prevent structural failure. In cases of partial removal referred to in paragraphs 3.4.2 or 3.5, an unobstructed water column sufficient to ensure safety of navigation, but not less than 55 m, should be provided above any partially removed installation or structure which does not project above the surface of the sea.
3.7 Installations or structures which no longer serve the primary purpose for which they were originally designed or installed and are located in approaches to or in straits used for international navigation or routes used for international navigation through archipelagic waters, in customary deep-draught sea lanes, or in, or immediately adjacent to, routeing systems which have been adopted by the Organization should be entirely removed and should not be subject to any exceptions.
3.8 The coastal State should ensure that the position, surveyed depth and dimensions of material from any installation or structure which has not been entirely removed from the sea-bed are indicated on nautical charts and that any remains are, where necessary, properly marked with aids to navigation. The coastal State should also ensure that advance notice of at least 120 days is issued to advise mariners and appropriate hydrographic services of the change in the status of the installation or structure.
3.9 Prior to giving consent to the partial removal of any installation or structure, the coastal State should satisfy itself that any remaining materials will remain on location on the sea-bed and not move under the influence of waves, tides, currents, storms or other foreseeable natural causes so as to cause a hazard to navigation.
3.10 The coastal State should identify the party responsible* for maintaining the aids to navigation, if they are deemed necessary to mark the position of any obstruction to navigation, and for monitoring the condition of remaining material. The coastal State should also ensure that the responsible party* conducts periodic monitoring, as necessary, to ensure continued compliance with these guidelines and standards.
* The phrase party responsible refers to any juridical or physical person identified by the coastal State for a purpose mentioned in the above paragraph 220.127.116.11 The coastal State should ensure that legal title to installations and structures which have not been entirely removed from the sea-bed is unambiguous and that responsibility for maintenance and the financial ability to assume liability for future damages are clearly established.
3.12 Where living resources can be enhanced by the placement on the sea-bed of material from removed installations or structures (e.g. to create an artificial reef), such material should be located well away from customary traffic lanes, taking into account these guidelines and standards and other relevant standards for the maintenance of maritime safety.
3.13 On or after 1 January 1998, no installation or structure should be placed on any continental shelf or in any exclusive economic zone unless the design and construction of the installation or structure is such that entire removal upon abandonment or permanent disuse would be feasible.
3.14 Unless otherwise stated, these standards should be applied to existing as well as future installations or structures.
B. Standard Procedures
Preparation of this Document
This annex contains proposals for procedures to be followed with regard to the management, development and maintenance of harbours and landing places for fishing vessels. It also gives guidance on the conduct of environmental auditing with regard to proposals for new construction and the upgrading of existing facilities.
Background documents relating to the subject are the Report of the Regional Consultation on Cleaner Harbours, Penang, Malaysia, 9-11 December 1991, Protocol to the Barcelona Convention concerning exploration and exploitation of the continental shelf and the seabed and its subsoil, FAO project reports in relation to harbours in Cyprus, Kuwait, Iran, Pakistan and the Maldives, as well as IMO documentation with regard to MARPOL.
1. The increasing problems associated with the construction of new harbours and landing places for fishing vessels and in particular, their operation and maintenance, reached critical levels in some parts of the world. In many instances, the adverse effects of harbour pollution from the activities of fishing vessels as well as the those of vendors and processors was exacerbated by the almost total lack of reception facilities. Matters became more serious in the late 1980s with an ever increasing demand for assistance from developing countries to solve specific problems with existing harbours as well as for help in designing new installations.
2. In the Bay of Bengal sub-region, the matter gave great cause for concern and, with the cooperation of the International Maritime Organization (within its cleaner seas programme) the Bay of Bengal Programme (BOBP) commissioned a series of important studies. At the same time, FAO also embarked on the preparation of a manual in relation to harbours and landing places to give guidance on design, construction and maintenance of harbours and landing places. An important component of this manual dealt with the reduction of pollution.
3. In connection with the activities of the BOBP the Government of Malaysia hosted a subregional workshop at Penang, 9-11 December, 1991 at which the results of the studies carried out by the BOBP project were presented. The FAO secretariat reported on its activities in other regions and IMO highlighted developments with regard to MARPOL.13
4. At the UN Conference on the Environment and Development (UNCED), June 1992, in relation to the protection of the marine environment the need for a precautionary and anticipatory approach rather than a reactive approach was seen to be necessary to prevent degradation of the marine environment. UNCED recommended, inter-alia, the adoption of environmental impact assessment procedures.
5. In recent years, environmental auditing has become an accepted norm for development within coastal areas. It ensures that a State, in consultation with the promoter of a project proposal, can jointly make an assessment of a project and the effect of the planned activities with regard to any significant adverse impact upon the environment. The auditing mechanism also provides for a preliminary assessment or partial audit, on the basis of which a government can decide whether or not to go ahead with a proposal. It also provides the basis for a decision with regard to a full environmental audit. In addition, taking into consideration the size and cost of the project, as well as the practicality of the exercise, it can provide the terms of reference for the full audit.
6. Although it was apparent from the studies undertaken by the BOBP and FAO, that impact assessments with respect to coastal development seemed to be a matter of common sense, the reality of the matter indicated otherwise. Similarly, the level of co-operation between users of the coastal area often fell far short of what was needed.
7. Therefore, in the preparation of this Annex, account has been taken of the requirement for better systems of management identified by the BOBP workshop in Penang, recent developments in the implementation of MARPOL with regard to cleaner harbours (port reception facilities), Agenda 21 of UNCED and Articles 8 and 10 of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (the Code).
1. General Provisions
2. Scope And Objectives
4. Environmental Auditing Procedures
5. Environmental Assessments
6. Planned Changes
7. Anticipated Impact
8. Mitigating Measures
9. Design Criteria
10. Education and Training
1.1 Within the concepts of responsible fishing operations and the integration of fisheries into coastal area management, this Annex provides a technical framework for the implementation of procedures as an aid to the management and development of harbours and landing places for fishing vessels.
1.2 Provisions are made for the formulation and implementation of environmental audits for future fisheries related infrastructure projects.
1.3 Although forming a part of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, that is voluntary, some provisions of this annex may be or have already been given binding effect by means of legal instruments, such as UNCLOS 8214, the MONTREAL PROTOCOL15 and MARPOL 73/78.
2.1 The proposed procedures are global in scope, and directed towards all persons, whether in government or the private sector, involved in the planning, design, construction, maintenance and management of harbours, harbour infrastructure and landing places for fishing vessels.
2.2 The objective is to enhance the capacity of States to ensure the adoption of environmentally sound development, management and conservation practices through:
a) better standards of management in harbours and landing places for existing and future facilities;
b) the establishment of environmental auditing procedures and design criteria related to future fisheries infrastructure projects; and,
c) appropriate training and education in environmental awareness.
3.1 States should ensure that an appropriate legal and institutional framework is adopted to manage coastal zone development.
3.2 The fisheries sector should be an integral part of the coastal zone management arrangements in order to ensure that:
a) due account is taken of the rights of coastal fishing communities and their customary practices to the extent compatible with sustainable development; and,3.3 States should take measures to establish effective management bodies at the fish landing or harbour levels to ensure:
b) that the fisheries sector, together with fishing communities are consulted in the decision making process regarding fisheries related projects as well as providing for their inputs in non-fisheries activities related to coastal area management.
a) compliance with the laws, regulations and other legal rules governing the duties of a port State in relation to a fishing harbour or a fish landing facility;3.4 In establishing a management body, the competent authorities should ensure that such bodies:
b) compliance with environmental conservation and monitoring measures adopted by the competent authorities at the national level as well as measures adopted on a regional or subregional basis;16
c) integration with other users (as in the case of a non-exclusive facility for fishing vessels); and,
d) transparency in the decision making process.
a) are adequately funded to function as intended;3.5 At the village level, the management could be entrusted to a Community Fishery Centre (CFC) or similar organization of fisherfolk. Although the facilities and services within a particular village or area may be quite modest; there is still a need for an organized form of management.17
b) represent the whole spectrum of users of the facility;
c) allow for consultation between the various users;
d) are commensurate with the size of the facility and the duties of the body and the responsibilities assigned to it.
3.6 At the industrial level, the management should be implemented by a well defined body (Private, Autonomous, Municipal or State), with the members drawn from the various constituent users of the port as well as the community at large. An exception to the rule would be where the facilities are owned by a single company. Nevertheless, the company would remain accountable, within the overall management structure, for its operations.
4.1 States should ensure that development proposals are formulated in a precautionary rather than a reactive manner to minimise unwarranted degradation of the aquatic environment.
4.2 States should also establish procedures for the inclusion of future development proposals for harbours and landing places for fishing vessels into national development plans, and where applicable, fisheries or coastal zone management plans. These procedures should be sufficiently flexible to accommodate requests for proposals within a programming period which may arise, for instance, as a consequence of unforeseen changes in the fisheries sector, including natural disasters.
4.3 States should also ensure that all such proposals are supported by clearly defined justifications.
4.4 States should adopt environmental audits in support of all applications for construction or improvement of harbours or landing places for fishing vessels, whether in coastal zones or inland waters.18
4.5 The auditing procedures required for carrying out a full environmental audit in compliance with commonly accepted standards, should:
a) assess the existing environment, including the land-use characteristics and socio-cultural activities at the proposed site;4.6 In order to commence an auditing process, States should ensure that all applications submitted in respect of new constructions are accompanied by a detailed outline design of the proposal.
b) list the planned changes to be made to the environment by the proposed project;
c) estimate the anticipated impact of the planned project on the existing environment19;
d) propose mitigation measures to prevent (or mitigate) the anticipated impact on the existing environment; and,
e) establish a system of environmental monitoring in the vicinity of the project site.
4.7 A detailed outline design of the proposal should be a stand alone document. It should consist of a detailed description and layout of the project proposal in relation to its surroundings, the anticipated demand on the resources of the area both during construction and operation, together with mitigation and environmental monitoring proposals. The detail in the detailed outline design should be commensurate with the size of the proposed project; the larger the project the more detail required. This document should form part of the environmental audit up and until full planning or building permission has been issued by the competent authorities.
5.1 The existing environment around a project site should be assessed through:
a) onshore topographic and offshore bathymetric maps (down to the 20 metre contour) of the site, covering at least 1 km in each direction along the coast;
b) aerial imagery of the above mentioned area with a resolution not smaller than 1:2000 together with any satellite imagery available20;
c) details of existing or planned coastal structures within 5 km of the proposed site;
d) a morphological description of the coastal zone of the site, backed up by a geological description of important local features such as cliffs, sand dunes, beaches, reefs, terraces, rivers, dams on nearby rivers, river mouths;
e) wave, tide or lake level statistical characteristics including probability tables for extreme conditions;
f) seasonal variations in rainfall, river flows, water density, water temperature, nutrients concentration and microbial pollution levels;
g) geological, petrographic and sedimentological characteristics of the coastline and seabed, including source, volume and seasonal changes in littoral transport;
h) maps of onshore and offshore habitats in and around the project site (coral reefs, lagoon systems, mangroves, estuaries etc.);
i) maps of types of habitat in and around the project site (areas of refuge, feeding grounds, nursery and spawning);
j) lists of the species to be harvested, lists of protected or rare species and biological indicators as well as the methods of fishing;
k) layouts, size and capacity of resource networks, such as for water supplies, power supply and distribution, road and other communications and sewerage networks, etc.; and,
l) location maps of any type of activity discharging directly or indirectly effluent into the aquatic environment, including distant but connected water courses, such as sewer outfalls, onshore fish farms, slaughter houses, logging/saw mill concessions, wood pulp factories, mines and ore reduction plants and other industries.
6.1 Assessments should address the planned changes to the environment and should include:
a) a general description of the entire project, including location, type, size and typical cross-sections of the various components that together make up the project together with a description of the proposed stages of construction;
b) the additional demands which would be placed on the locally available resources, both during construction and operation of the project;
c) details of all the effluents and emissions arising from the project; and,
d) the changes in the landscape, including land use characteristics and socio-cultural activities envisaged in the project;
7.1 The estimation of the anticipated impact of the planned project on the existing environment should include:
a) topographic, bathymetric and oceanographic changes, including dredging and reclamation, during and after construction until stable conditions are resumed, together with their effect on habitats, flora, fauna and land use;7.2 In the valuation of the coastal resources the competent authorities should take into account all elements of value, not just those elements for which markets happen to exist. The fact that a resource is not traded in a market does not mean it is of no value (consider for instance the social benefits of a clean beach, the tourist potential of a coral reef, or the health implications of clean air).
b) changes in water quality (temperature, salinity, turbidity, dissolved oxygen, nutrients concentration and microbial pollution levels) during and after construction and their effect on habitats, flora, fauna and land use;
c) sources of pollution discharging effluent, emissions or solid wastes during and after construction until stable conditions are resumed and their effect on habitats, flora, fauna and land use; and,
d) the visual impact on the seascape and the landscape and general quality of life around the proposed project site.
8.1 The detailed outline design should list the proposed measures to prevent or reduce (mitigate) the negative effects upon the environment. The mitigation measures should be:
a) technical, i.e, oil reception facilities, waste re-cycling schemes, sewage treatment systems, CFC-free refrigeration equipment and by-pass dredging where applicable;8.2 The detailed outline design should also list the proposed monitoring measures to identify environmental degradation as early as possible.
b) managerial, i.e., a clearly defined harbour board, commensurate with the size of the proposed project and the responsibilities expected of it; and,
c) legal and administrative, i.e. frameworks formulated in conformity with national laws to provide for sanctions in respect of violations.
8.3 In the first instance such proposals should identify the appropriate indicators and secondly the institutional bodies with the capacity to carry out the monitoring process. These indicators could be:
a) physical parameters (i.e. changes in coastal morphology such as erosion or siltation);
b) biological parameters (i.e. edibility of certain shellfish);
c) chemical parameters (water quality); and,
d) socio-economic parameters (such as population density and income levels).
9.1 In general, States should adopt acceptable design criteria for the design and construction of harbours and landing places for fishing vessels to ensure against unwarranted degradation of the aquatic environment. Design criteria for both the detailed outline design and the final design should ensure, inter alia:
a) compliance with basic engineering principles regarding the morphological degradation of the coastal zone in respect of erosion and siltation (UNCED 92)21;9.2 The detailed outline design should enable the competent authorities to make a preliminary assessment of the project and the effect of the planned activities with regard to any significant adverse impact upon the existing environment.
b) compliance with all relevant conventions concerning pollution of the aquatic environment (MARPOL 73/78); and,
c) the provision of adequate monitoring of the effects of operations on the environment (UNCED 92).
9.3 The detailed outline design of a project proposal should be based on the following minimum technical requirements:
a) detailed current topographic and bathymetric maps, resolution not smaller than 1:1000;9.4 The competent authorities should ensure that:
b) wave, tide or lake level statistical hindcast studies, including probability tables for extreme conditions;
c) geological, petrographic and sedimentological characteristics of the coastline and seabed; and,
d) mathematical and/or physical hydraulic modelling of the anticipated changes in the shoreline (including erosion, and siltation) and conditions at sea (including wave reflections and circulation).
a) the resolution and accuracy of the maps are adequate and verifiable;9.5 Final design should only be submitted after the environmental audit has been approved by the competent authorities.
b) the wave statistical and hindcast studies are reliable;
c) the geological studies are adequate in extent and detail; and,
d) the hydraulic models are adequate in extent and calibration and the results reliable.
9.6 States should ensure that final design adheres strictly to the detailed outline design (and approved modifications) as approved by the competent authorities in the final version of the environmental audit.
9.7 The final design should comply with the relevant provisions of International Conventions to which the State is a party, such as:
a) UNCLOS 1982 - which establishes rules concerning environmental standards as well as enforcement provisions dealing with pollution of the marine environment;
b) MONTREAL PROTOCOL 1987 - which protects the ozone layer by taking measures to control equitably total global emissions of substances that deplete it;
c) MARPOL 73/78 - which protects the marine environment by eliminating completely pollution due to oil and other harmful substances; and,
d) LONDON CONVENTION 1972 - which controls pollution of the sea by dumping.
10.1 States should promote awareness of environmental issues related to fishing harbours and landing places. The target audience should include:
a) direct users;10.2 States should ensure that the provisions of the Code in relation to harbour and landing places are brought to the attention of those responsible for the training and certification of fishermen. Awareness programmes should ensure that these provisions are brought to the attention of all those employed directly in the fisheries industry, and their families.
b) other user groups;
c) those responsible for the management and operation of such facilities; and,
d) the general public.
10.3 Such training and awareness programmes should incorporate guidelines on personal hygiene, public health (sanitation) and on how to maintain harbours and landing places in a clean condition.
10.4 Other user groups may be served through community based arrangements supported by government extension services, such as:
a) Community Fishing Centres (CFCs)2210.5 States should ensure that their awareness programmes are supported by requiring those responsible for the management and operation of fishing harbours and landing places, to prominently display by-laws and regulations (billboards, posters and newspapers) for the benefit of all users.
b) Fishery Development Units23 (FDUs); and,
c) Vocational training programmes, which could include the general public.
10.6 The general public, and as appropriate, those still at school, could also be targeted by community wide awareness programmes or association of these issues with environmental studies.
1. FISHERY HARBOUR PLANNING - FAO Fisheries Technical Paper No 123, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome 1973.
2. COMMUNITY FISHERY CENTRES: GUIDELINES FOR ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATION - FAO Fisheries Technical Paper No 264, Ben-Yami M, Anderson A.M., Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome 1985.
3. CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF ARTISANAL FISHING HARBOURS AND VILLAGE LANDINGS - FAO Training Series No 25, Sciortino J.A., Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome 1995.
4. LINKING GOVERNMENT AGENTS AND LOCAL USERS: PARTICIPATORY URBAN APPRAISAL FOR ARTISANAL FISHING PORT DEVELOPMENT - Reusen R., Johnson J. International Institute for Environment and Development, Issue No 21, Nov. 1994.
5. GUIDELINES FOR CLEANER FISHERY HARBOURS, BOBP (Madras 1993)
2 Supersedes OILPOL 1954
3 Supersedes SOLAS 1960
4 MARPOL 73/78 the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978 relating thereto.
5 The Conference concluded its work in August 1995 with the adoption of the Agreement for the Implementation of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of December 1982 relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks.
6 Agreement to Promote Compliance with International Conservation and Management Measures by Fishing Vessels on the High Seas.
7 Abandoned gear as provided for under paragraph 1.1 above.
8 Gear marks carrying, as a minimum, the IRCS of a vessel would also enable other mariners to identify the flag State and the vessel concerned which would simplify the reporting of lost and abandoned gear.
9 The skipper of a vessel, or person in charge of the vessel, if different from the owner, should be considered to be acting for the owner. The report made on return to harbour should, if practical, be countersigned by the owner.
10 Flags should not be too large otherwise they could affect the ability of the spar buoy to remain as upright as possible in strong winds.
11 The competent authority should take into account locally available material for the construction of floats and whereas most fishers use a spherical shape, in some parts of the world it is common practice to use pieces of wood bound together; the underlying principle is that they should be visible from a distance.
12 The competent authority should take into consideration local practice since the type of lights available would dictate whether or not these could be attached to the pole of a spar buoy
13 International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978 relating thereto (MARPOL 73/78).
14 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December, 1982
15 Montreal Protocol to the Vienna Convention
16 The provisions or regional or subregional agreements to which the coastal State is a party would normally be incorporated in national legislation.
17 See FAO guidelines for the establishment and operation of Community Fishing Centres
18 Institutional bodies or private sector organizations with the capacity to carry out such audits should be identified.
19 See FAO paper on fishery harbour planning, reference 1
20 Satellite images are available for many parts of the world. The FAO remote sensing unit and its network of regional stations could provide appropriate reference points.
21 The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, 1992
22 FAO/IMO guidelines Ref. 3 and 5.
23 Fisheries Technical Paper 264 on guidelines for the establishment and operation on FDUs